Remaining Challenges Sample Clauses

Remaining Challenges. ALS Resources our delivery of ALS. We still struggle with the availability of medic units, and our response times for first arriving paramedic on critical medical calls have not improved. Our senior leadership team has spent the last few months looking at this challenge. And we have concluded that we need more ALS resources. We already decided in early 2015 that we needed to hire more Firefighter Paramedics and over the last 18 months we hired 45. We have identified the need and will push to hire additional Firefighter Paramedics, with another two classes planned for this fiscal year. This is in addition to the 48 Firefighter EMTs and 36 cadets we have hired during the last two years and the additional classes (one each) of Firefighter EMTs and cadets planned for FY 2017. Ultimately, with today’s call volume and a climbing District population, we think we need 20 medic units and 21 PECs to begin to address our ALS needs into the future. Getting to this level of staffing will take time and budget dollars. But we think that with the additional Firefighter Paramedics who are either on board now or in the mentoring pipeline, soon we will convert three of our BLS units into medic units. We plan to do this as early as March 5, 2017. We will convert the basic ambulances at Engines 3, 10 and 25 into medic units. Working closely with our unions, we are also planning to pilot a different staffing model for these units, where the station houses will be responsible for staffing both the medic unit and the paramedic engine company using their own rosters, rather than the resources of detailed members. We are interested in seeing whether such a staffing model will yield efficiencies in staffing, managing supplies and medication, mentoring, training, teamwork and other areas. We look forward to your feedback on this as a concept and as a work in practice. But we know that we cannot hire our way out of our ALS resource challenges. We also need to make some significant changes in the way we operate, in order to make the best use of our existing ALS resources. First, our ALS providers should only be doing ALS work. Our ALS providers are a highly skilled and limited resource and we need to preserve their availability for our most critical patients. We have been monitoring this issue and talking to you about it for several months. After the launch of the AMR contract, we began to see a gradual decrease in the percentage of BLS transports by ALS providers, which we attributed ...
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Remaining Challenges. Much progress has been made in setting up the adaptive dynamics framework over the past five years. Nevertheless, many interesting directions for future research remain widely open. Three examples illustrate this assertion. Xxxxx Xxxxx, University of Helsinki, Finland, and Ge´za Mesze´na, Eo¨tvo¨ s University Budapest, Hungary, independently reported findings which demonstrate the importance of environmental dimensionality. The environment closes the feedback loop from the current phenotypic state to changes in this state. How many variables are necessary to characterize this feedback? How can its dimensionality be assessed empirically? Issues of this kind appear likely to become more important in our understanding of adaptive outcomes than they are today. Xxx Xxxxxxxx, University of Utrecht, and Xxxx Xxxxxx, Leiden University, both in the Netherlands, have analyzed the evolution of reproductive timing in xxxxxxx. Their model seems to show that adaptive dynamics’ invasion functions can not always be obtained from the growth rates of mutants when these are rare. Under which conditions can attention remain focused on initial invasion dynamics when predicting phenotypic substitutions? The invasion-oriented approach to phenotypic evolution already has succeeded in advancing our understanding substantially (Xxxxxxxx et al. 1996), but its limitations still have to be evaluated in more detail. Xxxx Xxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx and Xxxxx Xxxxxx, Leiden University, the Netherlands, are exploring the options of building a bifurcation theory of evolutionarily stable strategies. Similar to the bifurcation theory of ordinary differential equations, such a framework could enable qualitative predictions of evolutionary outcomes that are robust under small alterations in the underlying ecological settings. Although encouraging results for one-dimensional phenotypes already are available, a general account of evolutionary bifurcations is pending. With problems of this calibre unsolved but now tractable, adaptive dynamics research promises to remain a fertile ground for innovative ideas on evolution, coevolution and complex adaptation in the years to come. References : Evolutionarily unstable fitness max- ima and stable fitness minima of continuous traits. Evol. Ecol. 7, 465–487 (1993) : Evolutionary cycling of predator-prey interactions: population dynamics and the Red Queen J. theor. Biol. 176, 91–102 (1995) : The dynamical theory of coevolution: a derivation from stochastic ecolo...

Related to Remaining Challenges

  • Challenges The Experts may be challenged by either Party if circumstances exist that give rise to justifiable doubts as to any of their impartiality or independence. In such circumstances the challenge shall be brought by written notice to the ICC copied to the other Party within fourteen (14) calendar days of the appointment of the relevant Expert or within fourteen (14) calendar days of the challenging Party becoming aware of the circumstances giving rise to the challenge. Unless the challenged Expert withdraws. or whichever of the Parties that has not brought the challenge agrees to the challenge, within fourteen (14) calendar days of the challenge, the ICC shall decide the challenge and, if appropriate, shall appoint a replacement Expert in accordance with the criteria set out herein.

  • No Challenges Each Shareholder agrees not to commence, join in, facilitate, assist or encourage, and agrees to take all actions necessary to opt out of any class in any class action with respect to, any claim, derivative or otherwise, against Parent, Merger Sub, the Company or any of their respective successors or directors (a) challenging the validity of, or seeking to enjoin the operation of, any provision of this Agreement or the Merger Agreement or (b) alleging a breach of any fiduciary duty of any person in connection with the evaluation, negotiation or entry into the Merger Agreement.

  • Challenge If Executive violates or challenges the enforceability of any provisions of the Restrictive Covenants or this Release, no further payments, rights or benefits under Section 5 of the Agreement will be due to Executive (except where such provision would be prohibited by applicable law, rule or regulation).

  • No Challenge Stockholder agrees not to commence, join in, facilitate, assist or encourage, and agrees to take all actions necessary to opt out of any class in any class action with respect to, any claim, derivative or otherwise, against Parent, Merger Sub, the Company or any of their respective successors or directors (a) challenging the validity of, or seeking to enjoin the operation of, any provision of this Parent Support Agreement or (b) alleging a breach of any fiduciary duty of any Person in connection with the evaluation, negotiation or entry into the Merger Agreement.

  • Patent Challenge 6.5.1 Licensor may terminate this Agreement, effective immediately upon written notice to Licensee, upon the commencement by Licensee or any of its Affiliates of a Patent Challenge.

  • Outcome a desirable situation, condition, or circumstance in a member’s life that can be a result of the support provided by effective care management. Outcomes defined include:

  • Proceedings; Enforceability Borrower has taken all necessary action to authorize the execution, delivery and performance of the Loan Documents. The Loan Documents have been duly executed and delivered by Borrower and constitute legal, valid and binding obligations of Borrower enforceable against Borrower in accordance with their respective terms, subject to applicable bankruptcy, insolvency and similar laws affecting rights of creditors generally, and general principles of equity. The Loan Documents are not subject to, and Borrower has not asserted, any right of rescission, set-off, counterclaim or defense, including the defense of usury. No exercise of any of the terms of the Loan Documents, or any right thereunder, will render any Loan Document unenforceable.

  • Litigation; Adverse Effects Except as set forth in Schedule 7.1-I, as of the Closing Date, there is no action, suit, proceeding, Claim, investigation or arbitration before or by any Governmental Authority or private arbitrator pending or, to the knowledge of the Borrower, threatened against the Company, the Borrower, any Qualified Borrower or any of their respective Subsidiaries, or any Property of any of them (i) challenging the validity or the enforceability of any of the Loan Documents, (ii) which will or is reasonably likely to result in a loss in excess of $30,000,000, or (iii) under the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act or any similar federal or state statute where such Person is a defendant in a criminal indictment that provides for the forfeiture of assets to any Governmental Authority as a potential criminal penalty. There is no material loss contingency within the meaning of GAAP which has not been reflected in the consolidated financial statements of the Company and the Borrower. None of the Company, any General Partner, the Borrower, any Qualified Borrower or any Subsidiary of the Borrower is (A) in violation of any applicable Requirements of Law which violation will have or is reasonably likely to have a Material Adverse Effect, or (B) subject to or in default with respect to any final judgment, writ, injunction, restraining order or order of any nature, decree, rule or regulation of any court or Governmental Authority which will have or is reasonably likely to have a Material Adverse Effect.

  • No Adverse Litigation There shall not be pending or threatened any action or proceeding by or before any court or other governmental body which shall seek to restrain, prohibit, invalidate or collect damages arising out of the transactions contemplated hereby, and which, in the judgment of Purchaser, makes it inadvisable to proceed with the transactions contemplated hereby.

  • Challenge to Good Faith Determination Whenever the Board of Directors of the Company shall be required to make a determination in good faith of the fair value of any item under this Section 4, such determination may be challenged in good faith by the Holder, and any dispute shall be resolved by an investment banking firm of recognized national standing selected by the Holder and reasonably acceptable to the Company.

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