Project Reviews. Participate in peer and constructability reviews of projects.
Project Reviews. 12. ADB shall conduct periodic reviews of the progress of the Project as necessary and undertake any necessary midcourse corrections. In addition, ADB shall conduct special reviews as appropriate. The Borrower shall give all possible assistance for carrying out such reviews.
Project Reviews. Vendor will keep abreast of status. In weekly Project Reviews, the County’s and Vendor’s Project Managers as well as other interested stakeholders will review accomplishments from the past week, plans for the next week, any new roadblocks, and status of risks and issues to further understand the proposed resolutions. This forum will also include an update of the financials. These various governance forums work together in a well-executed governance structure. For example, the Auditor-Controller Steering Committee would provide guidance on strategy and policy decisions; the Project Reviews and other forums would communicate relevant information, issues and their resolutions, and escalations as needed. This two-way, transparent and collaborative governance structure will make certain that the ATS modernization project meets overall expectations for the desired outcome. Escalation Process The escalation process is a key component of Vendor’s communications and management strategies. The following core principles apply to Vendor’s escalation process: Vendor’s escalation process closely aligns with Vendor’s Governance model. All reasonable efforts are made to resolve issues at the lowest level within the project, thereby avoiding escalation where possible. Speed of escalation is based upon criticality and priority of the issue. Escalations support the collaborative working relationship between Vendor and the County. Escalations are fully transparent and treated as proactive communications that bolster Vendor’s “Always Accountable” posture on the ATS re-platform project.
Project Reviews. The granting authority may carry out reviews on the proper implementation of the action and compliance with the obligations under the Agreement (general project reviews or specific issues reviews). Such project reviews may be started during the implementation of the action and until the time-limit set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 6). They will be formally notified to the coordinator or beneficiary concerned and will be considered to start on the date of the notification. If needed, the granting authority may be assisted by independent, outside experts. If it uses outside experts, the coordinator or beneficiary concerned will be informed and have the right to object on grounds of commercial confidentiality or conflict of interest. The coordinator or beneficiary concerned must cooperate diligently and provide — within the deadline requested — any information and data in addition to deliverables and reports already submitted (including information on the use of resources). The granting authority may request beneficiaries to provide such information to it directly. Sensitive information and documents will be treated in accordance with Article 13. The coordinator or beneficiary concerned may be requested to participate in meetings, including with the outside experts. For on-the-spot visits, the beneficiary concerned must allow access to sites and premises (including to the outside experts) and must ensure that information requested is readily available. Information provided must be accurate, precise and complete and in the format requested, including electronic format. On the basis of the review findings, a project review report will be drawn up. The granting authority will formally notify the project review report to the coordinator or beneficiary concerned, which has 30 days from receiving notification to make observations. Project reviews (including project review reports) will be in the language of the Agreement.
Project Reviews. The Borrower/Recipient, the PPCs and the Fund shall jointly conduct the following reviews: two reviews of Project implementation and achievements, a comprehensive mid-term review during the third Project Year and a Project Completion Review. The Terms of Reference and time of the reviews shall be agreed by all parties.
Project Reviews. Scoping team field review Date 1/22/18 Scoping team field review attendance roster attached. District Program Manager Xxxxx XxXxxxx Date 2/14/20 Headquarters SHOPP Program Advisor Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx Date 2/7/20 District Maintenance Xxxxx Xxxxxxx Date 2/11/20 Headquarters Project Delivery Coordinator Xxxx Xxxxxxx Date 8/2020 Project Manager Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx Date 12/10/19 FHWA n/a Date District Safety Review Xxxxx Xxxxxxx Date 2/11/20 Constructability Review Date
Project Reviews. Monthly project reviews will be held throughout the development effort. Endwave shall hold these monthly to review progress of technical, cost, and schedule issues. A monthly report will also be delivered to Nokia via e-mail using an agreed to format.
Project Reviews. The Borrower shall (through MHCP in close coordination with DNP and DIAN) annually, by not later than May 30 of each year of Project implementation, starting on May 30, 2010 until the completion of the Project:
Project Reviews. The Port has advanced the Project design to 100 percent completion, developed a Baseline Cost Estimate and Schedule, and Preliminary Basis of Design Report. These Preliminary Design documents establish a clear scope of work and set forth a preliminary construction phasing plan to complete the roadway, utility, railroad, and site improvements required to successfully build the Project. Engineering studies completed to date have included preliminary utilities investigation, geotechnical studies, and environmental soil characterization. Early identification of potential utility conflicts and notification of utility owners has already begun. The Port will leverage its experience in transportation infrastructure planning and project delivery to ensure that the Project is completed in a timely manner and meets quality standards. In addition to in-house teams for technical planning and engineering, the Port hires outside consultants and contractors to assist with activities that require expert knowledge or experience. The Port has capably managed more than $1 billion in grant funding for individual transportation projects in the Port’s portfolio, representing almost 25 percent of the Port’s total capital program since 2002. Building upon experience gained over more than 100 years of capital investment, the Port has developed a comprehensive project delivery process, reference guides, and standards into a single web-based platform. The site allows for accessing, sharing, and updating information for effective delivery of the Port’s capital program. With direct, online access to program management, project controls, engineering design, and construction management resources, Port staff and consultants can assure consistency of approach and delivery from project planning through commissioning. The Project has completed the first phase - Preliminary Design - of the Port's established project delivery process, having completed feasibility studies, 30 percent design development and associated budget and schedule, preliminary risk assessment, and California environmental review (CEQA). The Board of Harbor Commissioners has approved the Project's Baseline Budget and Baseline Schedule to which Port managers are accountable. The Project is now in Final Design.
