Monitoring and Evaluation a. The AGENCY shall expeditiously provide to the COUNTY upon request, all data needed for the purpose of monitoring, evaluating and/or auditing the program(s). This data shall include, but not be limited to, clients served, services provided, outcomes achieved, information on materials and services delivered, and any other data required, in the sole discretion of the COUNTY, that may be required to adequately monitor and evaluate the services provided under this Contract. Monitoring shall be performed in accordance with COUNTY’S established Noncompliance Standards, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference as Attachment “C”.
Monitoring and Evaluation. 14.1 The CGIAR’s M&E Framework is intended to support successful execution of the SRF and translate the CGIAR’s vision into tangible results.
Monitoring and Evaluation. 4.4.1 Grantee agrees that the City or its designee may carry out monitoring and evaluation activities to ensure adherence by the Grantee and Subgrantees to the Program Work Statement, Program Performance Measures, and Program Budget, as well as other provisions of this Agreement. Grantee shall fully cooperate in any monitoring or review by the City and further agrees to designate a staff member to coordinate monitoring and evaluation activities.
Monitoring and Evaluation. Contractor agrees to cooperate with City on the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of this Program and to comply with any and all reporting, data collection, and evaluation requirements established by City, including but not limited to; submission of reports as outlined in this Agreement.
Monitoring and Evaluation. The University of Brighton is undertaking a number of initiatives to evaluate the impact of WP activities, and additional funding will be allocated under both the outreach and retention strands of this agreement to develop and expand this work. Responsibility for monitoring and evaluation of the two strands of activity under the Access Agreement lies with two University committees; the Recruitment and Admissions Committee (RAC) for the admissions phase and the Student Retention and Improvement Team (SRIT) for the retention phase. The University’s Fees and Access Working Group (FAWG), chaired by the Deputy Vice- Chancellor, oversees the development of the Access Agreement itself. Membership of this Group includes a representative from the Students’ Union. Financial support monitoring and evaluation The University will be participating in the research project being carried out by the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics into the effectiveness of bursaries and their impact on student progression, achievement and success. In addition our own Student Finance Survey Group will be reviewing a range of possible initiatives in this area to better understand the impact of our bursaries and will collaborate with our Students’ Union as a source of further information. Widening Participation outreach monitoring and evaluation We have significantly developed our process for evaluating outreach activity. All activities are divided into four categories of varying intensity, with each category having a different level of evaluation. The highest intensity projects, such as Summer Schools or mentoring programmes, have pre-entry and exit questionnaires designed to assess changes in the participants’ attitude, motivation, understanding and – if appropriate – attainment. In addition to this participants in ABC and Compact Plus programmes will be asked to complete yearly questionnaires to monitor changes over the course of the programme. The Higher Education Access Tracker (HEAT), a collaborative database we participate in with 12 other HEIs, will allow us to attach evaluations for each activity to individual participants which should give us latitude to evaluate individual projects and across our schemes. We expect to analyse and assess the impact our activities are having on participants across the span of our new ABC and Compact Plus programmes. We hope to be able to use the qualitative and quantitative data we collect to monitor the effectiveness...
Monitoring and Evaluation. The City reserves the right to monitor and evaluate the progress and performance of Contractor to ensure that the terms of this Agreement are being satisfactorily met in accordance with the City’s and other applicable monitoring and evaluating criteria and standards. Contractor will cooperate with the City relating to such monitoring and evaluation.
Monitoring and Evaluation. Project implementation of this programme will be monitored through the Joint Monitoring Committee (JMC). It includes the NAO, the NAC and the Commission services. The JMC will meet at least once a year to review all Phare funded programmes in order to assess their progress towards meeting the objectives set out in Financing Memoranda and the Accession Partnership. The JMC may recommend a change of priorities and/or the re-allocation of Phare funds. Furthermore the JMC will review the progress of all pre-accession EU-funded assistance programmes once a year (PHARE, ISPA and SAPARD). For the PHARE programme, the JMC will be assisted by Sectoral Monitoring Sub-Committees (SMSC) which will include the NAC, the PAO of each Implementing Agency (and of the CFCU where applicable) and the Commission Services. The SMSC will review in detail the progress of each programme, including its components and contracts, assembled by the JMC into suitable monitoring sectors. Each sector will be supervised by one SMSC on the basis of regular monitoring reports produced by the Implementing Agency, and interim evaluations undertaken by independent evaluators. The SMSC will put forward recommendations on aspects of management and design, ensuring these are effected. The SMSC will report to the JMC, to which it will submit overall detailed opinions on all Phare financed programmes in its sector. The Commission services shall ensure that an ex-post evaluation is carried out after completion of the Programme.
Monitoring and Evaluation. The Grantee will monitor, evaluate and provide guidance to the Subrecipient in the performance of this Contract. Authorized representatives of the Grantee and HUD shall have the right of access to all activities and facilities operated by the Subrecipient under this Contract. Facilities include all files, records, and other documents related to the performance of this Contract. Activities include attendance at staff, board of directors, advisory committee and advisory board meetings, and observation of on-going program functions. The Subrecipient will ensure the cooperation of its staff and board members in such efforts. Grantee staff may conduct program progress reviews. These reviews will focus on the extent to which planned program has been implemented and measurable goals achieved, effectiveness of program management, and impact of the program.
Monitoring and Evaluation. 7.5 The Authority will supervise the progress of the Project throughout the grant funding period and reserves the right to: carry out Evaluation Visits at a time agreed with the Grantee and after giving reasonable notice; and/or to appoint an external evaluator.
Monitoring and Evaluation. The City shall have the right to monitor and evaluate the progress and performance of the Subrecipient to assure that the terms of this Agreement are being satisfactorily fulfilled in accordance with City’s and other applicable monitoring and evaluation criteria and standards. The City shall at least quarterly review the Subrecipient’s performance using on-site visits, progress reports required to be submitted by the Subrecipient, audit findings, disbursements transactions and contact with the Subrecipient as necessary. The Subrecipient shall furnish to the City quarterly program and financial reports of its activities in such form and manner as may be requested by the City. Subrecipients shall fully cooperate with City in relation to such monitoring and evaluation.