Process Evaluation Sample Clauses

Process Evaluation. AMD shall evaluate the Wafers provided by FoundryCo in accordance with the AMD-Specific Qualification Plan or the Qualification Plan, as applicable. The parties will then assess in accordance with the procedures set forth in Exhibit G whether the applicable manufacturing process fulfills the necessary requirements to manufacture the applicable Products in commercial production quantities in accordance with all applicable Specifications and requirements.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (4)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Process Evaluation. The Contractor will administer a process to evaluate all SMM processes on a regular basis, at least annually, and more frequently for processes where targeted process metrics have not been reached. This includes identifying areas where the targeted metrics are not met, and holding regular benchmarks, audits, maturity assessments and reviews. Contractor shall facilitate and coordinate the appropriate involvement of Government and the Integrated Service Providers to review proposed improvements and solicit ongoing feedback. The Contractor shall maintain an ongoing process improvement plan to address the process improvement opportunities identified. Contractor shall regularly report to the Government and EITS Governance on process evaluation results and the accomplishment of process improvements in the delivery of the Integrated Services. The Contractor shall conduct an annual audit on the performance of core processes that identifies best practices and opportunities for improvement on all the Integrated Environment
Sample 1
Process Evaluation. The CityMove Project aims to contribute to a more sustainable urban freight transport by demonstration of effectiveness and efficiency of the CityMove urban freight vehicle concept to show that this solutions does help to tackle the problems cities are facing in terms of congestion, pollution, safety as well as freight transport efficiency. Proper evaluation is needed. Besides impact evaluation also process evaluation is important. Process evaluation tries to gain insight in the processes of planning and implementation and to assess the results and outcomes. Process evaluation aims to gain insight into the drivers and barriers during the preparation, implementation and operation of the proposed solution. It analyses the role of information communication and participation during these phases. It should contribute to the cross-site evaluation on Use Case level, and provide relevant input to the policy recommendations. Process evaluation consists of three building blocks: • process topics and issues; • the CityMove solution process evaluation (all prototypes). These objectives should be realised by collecting data on Use Case level. Techniques that can be used to collect data for process evaluation include: questionnaire surveys, focus groups, interviews. The proposed template for data collection (Process Evaluation Template) is provided in Annexes.
Sample 1
Process Evaluation. The city administration and Schenker are positive, helpful and enthusiastic so we don’t recognise any barriers. There are no political or economic constraints either. Next year, Uppsala’s city centre will become a green zone. This implies that there will be new regulations implemented which force Schenkers/UGSABs to have even more environmentally friendly trucks. UGSABs trucks will have to be replaced by newer trucks and the City Move’s electric truck would be perfect for future deliveries. However there is one constraint: the battery on the truck has to last at least 4 hours driving time.
Sample 1
Process Evaluation. The Mission has carried out a series of external evaluations linked to project performance and quality of data that have derived in a series of recommendations described in this report. One evaluation in the process of being appointed is that of training. The final reports of external evaluations will be published in 2015. Currently the Mission is developing a coverage evaluation of USAID|PrevenSida, using the PLACE methodology; which consists on surveys to conglomerates of key populations in prioritized municipalities according to their HIV incidence and where the USAID|PrevenSida grantee NGOs are implementing HIV prevention actions.
Sample 1
Process Evaluation. This study where the Eco statement and manufacturing results has been evaluated, has demonstrate the potential benefits of the ISC technology being developed. Thermoplastic resins special macromolecular structure involves significant advantages in terms of environmental sustainability, recyclability and mechanical properties. Figure 12: ISC benefits It has been seen that controlling temperature, time and velocity during the process can be achieved a perfect consolidation and stringers integration. The results obtained during the development of the entire project show full consolidation both within the laminates and between them and the stiffener structures as stringers showing material physical continuity. Even though it has been show some defects, above all in the transition tooling- thermoplastic areas, the non-destructive analysis have proved the in situ consolidation process reliability and repeatability. Next step is the process optimization, starting from the ancillary materials set up to the layup, this means achieving the industrialization way of the process. As regards of the reprocessing technology, from the test result obtained, the conclusions are: 1) the second pass can be an optimum process to repair no fully consolidated tow in the last ply positioned; 2) all the post-processing in oven conditions tested allows to repair porosity and delamination; 3) the post-processing in oven allows repairing structures with no total integration between xxxxxxxx and skin. This repair process could be applied to similar in-service damage with portable systems. In addition, has been stated that 400ºC and 10, 30 or 60 minutes cycles allow to recover between the 85 and 100% of the material properties.
Sample 1

Related to Process Evaluation

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • JOC EVALUATION If any materials being utilized for a project cannot be found in the RS Means Price Book, this question is what is the markup percentage on those materials? When answering this question please insert the number that represents your percentage of proposed markup. Example: if you are proposing a 30 percent markup, please insert the number "30". Remember that this is a ceiling markup. You may markup a lesser percentage to the TIPS Member customer when pricing the project, but not a greater percentage. EXAMPLE: You need special materials that are not in the RS Means Unit Price Book for a project. You would buy the materials and xxxx them up to the TIPS Member customer by the percentage you propose in this question. If the materials cost you, the contractor, $100 and you proposed a markup on this question for the material of 30 percent, then you would charge the TIPS Member customer $130 for the materials. No response TIPS/ESC Region 8 is required by Texas Government Code § 791 to be compensated for its work and thus, failure to agree shall render your response void and it will not be considered. Yes - No Vendor agrees to remit to TIPS the required administration fee or, if resellers are named, guarantee the fee remittance by or for the reseller named by the vendor?

  • Final Evaluation IC must submit a final report and a project evaluation to the Arts Commission within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Services. Any and all unexpended funds from IC must be returned to City no later than sixty (60) days after the completion of the Services.

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order.

  • Formal Evaluation All formal evaluations of personnel shall be conducted openly and with full knowledge of the employee concerned by an administrator or supervisor of the District.

  • Annual Evaluation The Partnership will be evaluated on an annual basis through the use of the Strategic Partnership Annual Evaluation Format as specified in Appendix C of OSHA Instruction CSP 00-00-000, OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health. The Choate Team will be responsible for gathering required participant data to evaluate and track the overall results and success of the Partnership. This data will be shared with OSHA. OSHA will be responsible for writing and submitting the annual evaluation.

  • Self-Evaluation Each regular faculty member shall provide a self-evaluation. It shall address, among other items, the faculty member's fulfillment of professional responsibilities as referenced in Section 18.2.3 and an assessment of his or her own performance. The faculty member will share the self-evaluation with the Faculty Evaluation Committee and the first-level manager or designee. The self-evaluation will become part of the evaluation report.

  • JOB EVALUATION The work of the provincial job evaluation steering committee (the JE Committee) will continue during the term of this Framework Agreement. The objectives of the JE Committee are as follows: • Review the results of the phase one and phase two pilots and outcomes of the committee work. Address any anomalies identified with the JE tool, process, or benchmarks. • Rate the provincial benchmarks and create a job hierarchy for the provincial benchmarks. • Gather data from all school districts and match existing job descriptions to the provincial benchmarks. • Identify the job hierarchy for local job descriptions for all school districts. • Compare the local job hierarchy to the benchmark-matched hierarchy. • Develop a methodology to convert points to pay bands - The confirmed method must be supported by current compensation best practices. • Identify training requirements to support implementation of the JE plan and develop training resources as required. Once the objectives outlined above are completed, the JE Committee will mutually determine whether a local, regional or provincial approach to the steps outlined above is appropriate. It is recognized that the work of the committee is technical, complicated, lengthy and onerous. To accomplish the objectives, the parties agree that existing JE funds can be accessed by the JE committee to engage consultant(s) to complete this work. It is further recognized that this process does not impact the established management right of employers to determine local job requirements and job descriptions nor does this process alter any existing collective agreement rights or established practices. When the JE plan is ready to be implemented, and if an amendment to an existing collective agreement is required, the JE Committee will work with the local School District and Local Union to make recommendations for implementation. Any recommendations will also be provided to the Provincial Labour Management Committee (PLMC). As mutually agreed by the provincial parties and the JE Committee, the disbursement of available JE funds shall be retroactive to January 2, 2020. The committee will utilize available funds to provide 50% of the wage differential for the position falling the furthest below the wage rate established by the provincial JE process and will continue this process until all JE fund monies at the time have been disbursed. The committee will follow compensation best practices to avoid problems such as inversion. The committee will report out to the provincial parties regularly during the term of the Framework Agreement. Should any concerns arise during the work of the committee they will be referred to the PLMC. Create a maintenance program to support ongoing implementation of the JE plan at a local, regional or provincial level. The maintenance program will include a process for addressing the wage rates of incumbents in positions which are impacted by implementation of the JE plan. The provincial parties confirm that $4,419,859 of ongoing annual funds will be used to implement the Job Evaluation Plan. Effective July 1, 2022, there will be a one-time pause of the annual $4,419,859 JE funding. This amount has been allocated to the local table bargaining money. The annual funding will recommence July 1, 2023.

  • BID EVALUATION The Commissioner reserves the right to accept or reject any and all Bids, or separable portions of Bids, and waive technicalities, irregularities, and omissions if the Commissioner determines the best interests of the State will be served. The Commissioner, in his/her sole discretion, may accept or reject illegible, incomplete or vague Bids and his/her decision shall be final. A conditional or revocable Bid which clearly communicates the terms or limitations of acceptance may be considered, and Contract award may be made in compliance with the Bidder’s conditional or revocable terms in the Bid.

  • TEACHER EVALUATION A. All monitoring or observation of the work performance of a teacher shall be conducted openly and with full knowledge of the teacher.

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