Public Sector Sample Clauses

Public Sector. For transactions through Tenable Public Sector LLC, Company shall be solely responsible for compliance with all applicable federal, state, local or other procurement regulations, including but not limited to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clauses applicable to the subject contract (collectively, “Procurement Flow-Downs”). Tenable shall not comply with any Procurement Flow-Downs, including flow-downs identified as mandatory by the relevant Contracting Officer or equivalent, unless Tenable and Company agree separately, in a writing signed by authorized representatives of both parties, as to which of the Procurement Flow-Downs Tenable will accept. Company shall indemnify, defend, and hold Tenable harmless in any claim based on a Procurement Flow-Down that Tenable has not accepted separately in writing.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Public Sector. Innovation Licence means the licence of the same name (the term of which shall not exceed the Term) available on the Supplier Website and applicable to this Licence.
Public Sector. What do you see as the challenges to entry into the public sector market? What are the challenges faced when operating within the public sector? What is the breakdown of your own client base breakdown between the public and private sector? If applicable please provide some examples of any current public sector clients. Based on your current Public Sector Client base what is the typical contract term for Insurance brokerage and placement services? Answer:
Public Sector. Table 1: 2007 Sector Country Project Name Amount ($ million) CE Component ($millions) %CE Agriculture PAK Community Storage and Irrigated Agricultural Development Sector Project (energy efficient storage and pumping and water distribution system) 150 4.5 3% Energy AZE Renewable Energy Development (developing renewable energy resources) 40 40 100% Energy BAN Sustainable Power Sector Development Program (integrating supply and demand-side options in power development) 465 23.25 5% Energy FIJ The Western and Central Networks Reinforcement and Extension Project (formerly Renewable Power Sector Development) (energy efficiency in transmission and distribution system) 20 1 5% Energy IND MFF - Uttaranchal Power Sector Investment Program (hydropower development) 42 (Total MFF=300) 42 100% Energy IND MFF - Madhya Pradesh Power Sector Investment Program (energy efficiency 151 7.55 5% Sector Country Project Name Amount ($ million) CE Component ($millions) %CE fund for transmission and distribution) (Total MFF=620) Energy IND MFF - National Power Grid Development Investment Program (energy efficiency t hr oug h upg r ad i ng of transmission system) 150 (Total MFF=800) 7.5 5% Energy INO Energy Efficiency Project (demand side management) 250 250 100% Energy NEP Rural Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Sector Development Program (development of renewable energy resources) 96 19.2 20% Energy NEP Rural Electrification and Renewable Energy (increasing access to electricity derived from renewable energy sources) 30 15 50% Energy PAK Power Transmission Enhancement (energy efficiency in transmission system) 300 15 5% Energy PAK Power Distribution Enhancement (reduction of power losses in power distribution) 250 12.5 5% Energy PRC MFF-Gansu Heihe Rural Hydropower Development Investment Program (increasing investment in renewable energy) 28 (Total MFF=50) 28 100% Energy XXX Xxxxx Sector Expansion Program (expansion of power generation through inclusion of hydropower resources) 40 40 100% Energy UZB Rural Renewable Energy Development (increasing access to renewable energy in rural areas) 25 25 100% Energy VIE O Mon Gas Pipeline Project (increasing access to clean fuel) 550 100 100% Transport/urban INO Urban Air Quality Improvement SDP 150 7.5 5% Sector Country Project Name Amount ($ million) CE Component ($millions) %CE (combining Clean Vehicle Fuel for Blue Skies) Total 2,757 639 MFF = Multitranche Financing Facility, SDP = Sector Development Program, TA = technical assistance. So...
Public Sector. 5.4.1 LICENSEE (itself or through a permitted sublicensee) will use Commercially Reasonable Efforts (without regard to profitability of the Licensed Product to LICENSEE or any permitted sublicensee) to perform the outreach activities described in the plan attached as Schedule 5.4.1 hereto (“Outreach Plan”). As part of the Outreach Plan, Licensee will publicly announce a reduced price program for underrepresented communities to the extent not already described in the press release described in Section 11.2.
Public Sector. One of the key responsibilities of the public sector organisations besides providing citizens with key services is to safeguard the integrity, confidentiality and availability of data, networks and systems. The entities responsible for protecting sensitive data face a changing regulatory landscape, ongoing budget challenges and a shortage of skilled workers, that is why the adoption of the appropriate and reliable cyber security technologies and solutions becomes crucial. With digitisation, the public sector is increasingly becoming data controller of important citizen information. Exposure to cyber risks has significant social and financial consequences. According to the Ponemon Institute16, public sector companies have the highest estimated probability of having a data breach, which could be attributed to the amount of confidential and sensitive information they collect and store. The increasing black market value of personal medical data makes the healthcare sector a primary target, with organisations being 340% more likely to be hit by an IT security incident than the average across all sectors. These organisations are also 200% more likely to experience data theft17. Educational organisations account for about 9% of disclosed data breaches18.The per capita cost of a data breach to the public sector is estimated to be around €170 per record, and annual costs of over € 8 million to the public sector. Recent data shows that there has been a considerable increase in the purchase of cybersecurity insurance and even more impressing, the vast majority of public sector organisations are - 92% - has adopted one or more risk-based cybersecurity frameworks such as ISO 27001 to help boost security capabilities. And more organizations are collaborating with others to share cybersecurity intelligence.19 Furthermore according to PWC20, public sector agencies are investing in a series of core safeguards to better defend their ecosystems against evolving threats: 16 xxxx://xxx.xxxxxxx.xxx/library/the-state-of-cybersecurity-in-local-state-and-federal-government. 17 xxxx://xxx.xxxxxxxxxx.xx/news/healthcare-next-big-cyber-security-target. 18 xxxx://xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx/magazines/features/2015/04/20/364390.htm. 19 xxxxx://xxx.xxx.xxx/gx/en/consulting-services/information-security-survey/assets/pwc-gsiss-2016-public-sector.pdf 20 xxxxx://xxx.xxx.xxx/gx/en/consulting-services/information-security-survey/assets/pwc-gsiss-2016-public-sector.pdf Figure 7 – Public sector in...
Public Sector. 36. What are the public services offered on-line to citizens and businesses?
Public Sector. Between the adoption in 1956 of the Industrial Policy Resolution and the introduction of economic reforms in 1991–2, public sector industrial enterprises expanded strongly in India, driven by the policy of self-reliance and import substitution, which constituted the core of India’s economic policy. As they were established generally without an examination of their commercial viability in an open economic environment, a large majority of them have been in financial trouble in recent years and dependent on public subsidies for survival. In addition to establishing uneconomic units, governments (both at the Centre and in the States) also took over in ‘public interest’, many sick units that had been abandoned by the private sector. These units have been an even greater financial burden on the governments. After the economic reforms there has been a major change in government policy in respect of the public sector industrial enterprises and the Central Government has moved strongly to privatise, restructure, or close the enterprises. It is not within the scope of this work to survey the general situation of public sector undertakings or the progress in implementation of the new policy. We look at only the implications of the obligations under the ASCM for the financial support of the public sector as government moves to restructure or privatise them. For illustrative purposes, we have selected the public sector enterprises (PSEs) of the Central Government in the Ministries of Heavy Industry and Steel. The Department of Heavy Industry is responsible for 48 of the 240 public sector enterprises of the Central Government. With the solitary exception of the Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, which is a successful undertaking, most others are in bad shape. According to the Fifth Report submitted by the Expenditure Reforms Commission on 20 September 2000, as many as 32 enterprises made large losses in 1998–9. The Report makes the following recommendation on the future policy to be adopted on these enterprises by the government: ‘A broad principle that may be adopted is to treat those companies whose current operations, relieved of the burden of old debts, are profitable as potential candidates for restructuring to make them viable. If the current operations are profitable and could be expected to continue to be profitable in future, such an enterprise should be made viable through financial restructuring by lifting the burden of debts piled up from loans extended by go...
Public Sector. NGO licenses can be installed on School, Academy, Sixth Form College, Further Education College (or equivalent), Higher Education and computers used within a Public Sector/NGO environment. Public Sector/NGO licenses must not be installed on computers belonging to a commercial organisation or institution without the express written permission of VSL.
Public Sector. Between the adoption in 1956 of the Industrial Policy Resolution and the introduction of economic reforms in 1991– 2, public sector industrial enterprises expanded strongly in India, driven by the policy of self-reliance and import substitution, which constituted the core of India's economic policy. As they were established generally without an examination of their commercial viability in an open economic environment, a large ma¡ority of them have been in financial trouble in recent years and dependent on public subsidies for survival. In addition to establishing uneconomic units, governments (both at the Centre and in the States) also took over in ‘public interest', many sick units that had been abandoned by the private sector. These units have been an even greater financial burden on the governments. After the economic reforms there has been a ma¡or change in government policy in respect of the public sector industrial enterprises and the Central Government has moved strongly to privatise, restructure, or close the enterprises. It is not within the scope of this work to survey the general situation of public sector undertakings or the progress in implementation of the new policy. We look at only the implications of the obligations under the ASCM for the financial support of the public sector as government moves to restructure or privatise them. For illustrative purposes, we have selected the public sector enterprises (PSEs) of the Central Government in the Ministries of Heavy Industry and Steel. The Department of Heavy Industry is responsible for 48 of the 240 public sector enterprises of the Central Government. With the solitary exception of the Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, which is a successful undertaking, most others are 42 GATT Document DS23/R, BISD 39S/206.