Multi-tiered Review Sample Clauses

Multi-tiered Review. The Planner, with the approval of the AO, may establish a solicitation and review system with two or more tiers. The AO may request potential applicants to submit an executive summary or concept paper. The AO may also request corresponding budget information at their discretion. After reviewing these submissions, the Selection Committee selects the best submissions and conducts a second level solicitation and review with the selected applicants and uses more specific merit review criteria. The AO may conduct additional levels of solicitation and review only if the second level does not adequately identify applicants for the activities to be funded. Section C or Section E of the NOFO must explain the intended multi-tiered review/eligibility process so that potential applicants know what to expect at each phase of the review process.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (6)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Multi-tiered Review. The Planner, with the approval of the AO, may establish a solicitation and review system with two or more tiers. The AO may request potential applicants to submit an executive summary or concept paper. The AO may also request corresponding budget information at their discretion. After reviewing these submissions, the Selection Committee selects the best submissions and conducts a second level solicitation and review with the selected applicants and uses more specific merit review criteria. The AO may conduct additional levels of solicitation and review only if the second level does not adequately identify applicants for the activities to be funded. Section C or Section E of the NOFO must explain the intended multi-tiered review/eligibility process so that potential applicants know what to expect at each phase of the review process.‌ 303.3.6.2 Merit Review Criteria‌‌ Effective Date: 01/19/2021 a. The Planner must develop the merit review criteria. The criteria must include the programmatic factors or priorities that affect eligibility for selection. The number of criteria should be limited to three or four factors. The review criteria in an announcement must provide as much information as practical to allow potential‌ applicants to judge whether it is in their best interest to incur costs to apply for the award. The criteria must address the importance of the programmatic and administrative elements, but must not be unduly restrictive. It is not necessary to quantify the relative weight of the criteria, but the announcement must identify the relative importance of the criteria. The Planner must obtain the AO’s approval of the criteria before the AO publishes the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO.‌‌
Sample 1Sample 2
Multi-tiered Review. The Planner, with the approval of the AO, may establish a solicitation and review system with two or more tiers. The AO may request potential applicants to submit an executive summary or concept paper. The AO may also request corresponding budget information at their discretion. After reviewing these submissions, the Merit Review Committee (MRC) selects the best submissions and conducts a second level solicitation and review with the selected applicants and uses more specific merit review criteria (see section 303.3.6.3). The AO may conduct additional levels of solicitation and review only if the second level does not adequately identify applicants for the activities to be funded. Section C or Section E of the NOFO must explain the intended multi- tiered review/eligibility process so that potential applicants know what to expect at each phase of the review process.‌ 303.3.6.2 Merit Review Criteria‌‌ Effective Date: 12/29/2022
Sample 1Sample 2

Related to Multi-tiered Review

  • Log Reviews All systems processing and/or storing PHI COUNTY discloses to 11 CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of COUNTY 12 must have a routine procedure in place to review system logs for unauthorized access.

  • Utilization Review We review health services to determine whether the services are or were Medically Necessary or experimental or investigational ("Medically Necessary"). This process is called Utilization Review. Utilization Review includes all review activities, whether they take place prior to the service being performed (Preauthorization); when the service is being performed (concurrent); or after the service is performed (retrospective). If You have any questions about the Utilization Review process, please call the number on Your ID card. The toll-free telephone number is available at least 40 hours a week with an after-hours answering machine. All determinations that services are not Medically Necessary will be made by: 1) licensed Physicians; or 2) licensed, certified, registered or credentialed health care professionals who are in the same profession and same or similar specialty as the Provider who typically manages Your medical condition or disease or provides the health care service under review. We do not compensate or provide financial incentives to Our employees or reviewers for determining that services are not Medically Necessary. We have developed guidelines and protocols to assist Us in this process. Specific guidelines and protocols are available for Your review upon request. For more information, call the number on Your ID card or visit Our website at xxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.

  • Program Review The Contracting Officer or other authorized government representative may hold semi- annual program review meetings. Such meetings will be held via telecom or video teleconferencing. However, the Government reserves the right to request a meeting in person. The meetings will include all BPA holders, representatives from prospective customer agencies, a combination of current and prospective customer agencies, or individual BPA holders. Some Federal Government Agencies and any approved State, Local and Tribal agencies may establish a central program management function. Such users may require their primary suppliers to participate in agency program review meetings on a periodic basis, at no additional cost to the Government.

  • Periodic Reviews During January of each year during the term hereof, the Board of Directors of the Company shall review Executive's Annual Salary, bonus, stock options, and additional benefits then being provided to Executive. Following each such review, the Company may in its discretion increase the Annual Salary, bonus, stock options, and benefits; however, the Company shall not decrease such items during the period Executive serves as an employee of the Company. Prior to November 30th of each year during the term hereof, the Board of Directors of the Company shall communicate in writing the results of such review to Executive.

  • Periodic Review The General Counsel shall periodically review the Procurement Integrity Procedures with OSC personnel in order to ascertain potential areas of exposure to improper influence and to adopt desirable revisions for more effective avoidance of improper influences.

  • Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.

  • Peer Review Dental Group, after consultation with the Joint ----------- Operations Committee, shall implement, regularly review, modify as necessary or appropriate and obtain the commitment of Providers to actively participate in peer review procedures for Providers. Dental Group shall assist Manager in the production of periodic reports describing the results of such procedures. Dental Group shall provide Manager with prompt notice of any information that raises a reasonable risk to the health and safety of Group Patients or Beneficiaries. In any event, after consultation with the Joint Operations Committee, Dental Group shall take such action as may be reasonably warranted under the facts and circumstances.

  • Midterm Review The Recipient shall:

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances

  • Design Review Consumer shall provide Holy Cross an electrical one-line diagram and a relaying and metering one-line diagram prior to completion of detailed designs, unless the Consumer is installing a packaged system that is pre-certified to IEEE 1547.1 and UL 1741 standards. Packaged systems pre-certified under IEEE Standard 1547.1 and UL Standard 1741 will not require a relaying and metering one-line diagram. The submitted application and diagrams will be processed, reviewed, and acted upon in accordance with the Holy Cross Interconnection Policy.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.