Requirements Validation Clause Samples

The Requirements Validation clause establishes a process for confirming that the specifications or requirements for a project or deliverable are accurate, complete, and agreed upon by all parties. Typically, this involves a review period during which the client examines the documented requirements and provides feedback or formal approval, ensuring that any misunderstandings or omissions are addressed before work proceeds. By implementing this clause, the agreement helps prevent disputes or costly rework later in the project by ensuring that both parties have a clear, shared understanding of what is to be delivered.
Requirements Validation. The Contractor will validate the functional and technical requirements identified and provided in
View SourceView Similar (2)
Requirements Validation. Period of Performance:
View Source
Requirements Validation. This activity validates that the functional requirements identified for the development of the ISP demonstrators are correct, complete and consistent with the use cases.
View Source
Requirements Validation. The Contractor will review the functional and nonfunctional requirements attached as Attachment 2-1. Validate the Contractor’s understanding of the Requirements and submit a Requirements Traceability Matrix. The Contractor shall be responsible for the following Requirements analysis and/or validation activities and work products: • Review related background documentation • Meet with business and technical stakeholders to understand business objectives, activities taken to date, progress efforts, and other relevant information • Understand target datasets and the future- state solution • Provide a Requirements Traceability Matrix – Contractor shall review the functional and non-functional requirements defined in Attachment 2-1 to validate the Contractor’s understanding of the requirements to meet Requirements Traceability Matrix – A Requirements Traceability Matrix based on Attachment 2-1 that may include any design considerations, gaps, issues, or risks that need to be addressed throughout the project and should be maintained over time to track the status of each requirement. stakeholders’ in-scope expectations, if any, and identify areas for discussion. • Conduct sessions with OCA and appropriate stakeholders for each individual subsequent implementation to validate understanding of the Requirements Traceability Matrix
View Source
Requirements Validation. ‌ The process of verification and validation (V&V) of business requirements aims at confirming that the requirements specification is functional to absolve the objectives identified in the previous steps of the RE Framework by means of completeness and correctness of the 5 ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇/en/projet-horizon2020-types-action determined requirements (Hull et al. 2005). Thus, interesting from the validation point of view is the feedback mechanism within this process. V&V can occur at the end of the project or at any time a new requirement is deployed in order to guarantee a continuous monitoring and lessons learnt feedback from the implemented actions. The project outcomes are evaluated through a comparison with the requirements specification in order to guarantee the deployed solution to be in line with the desired objectives and expected business impacts. Therefore, the RE Framework involves the different stakeholders in the review of the requirements during validation. In general, Verification ensures that the project outcome satisfies and respects the requirements and the design specifications, while Validation investigates the ability of the reached project outcome to meet the stakeholders’ needs and to fulfil its intended functions. In order to carefully run the validation of requirements, V&V methods/measures need to be selected. This is pertinent as the adoption of metrics and tools allows to understand whether a requirement is satisfied or not. Important to avoid bias and bugs in the V&V is data triangulation that validates data and research outcome by cross verifying the same information. This triangulation of data strengthens the credibility and validity of data. The triangulation of data occurs when multiple theories, materials or methods are used. Among different common approaches to data triangulation, in MIDIH project the focus will be on the following: • Data source triangulation. Use of evidence from different types of data sources (i.e. interviews, documents, public records, photographs and observations, etc.);
View Source
Requirements Validation. This service should be responsible for checking the compliance of safety margins, when orchestrating services to higher level services. For example, if a service is required to be in compliance with ASIL D, it cannot be based on another service, which can only provide ASIL B. According to its specification the requirements validation service could either prevent this orchestration, or even look for possible solutions, e.g. looking for a service with the same functionality, but ASIL D, or combining two of the ASIL B services. TL-REQ-WP01-039, TL-REQ-WP01-041, TL-REQ-WP01-045
View Source
Requirements Validation. As part of the test plan, validates through Requirements Traceability Matrix all mutually agreed‐upon requirements are satisfied • Finalized Taxonomy – Final approval of document groups and document types following validation during pilot operations • Finalized System Configuration – Confirmation by key stakeholders (following pilot operations and prototype review) that the prototype solution meets or exceeds all requirements prior to full scale production rollout • Finalized Training Materials – Final development of training materials to meet the needs of any additional training requirements uncovered during pilot operations • Project Monitoring and Controlling • Status Review Meetings • Written Status Reports • Phase Gate Review Code Description Responsible Party PLT1 Develop Test Plan to monitor the configuration, testing and implementation to ensure product quality and satisfaction of requirements Northwoods PLT2 Review and approve Test Plan County (IT & HSA) Code Description Responsible Party PLT3 Deploy scan stations, desktop scanners, signature pads, dual monitors (with dual VGA or USB adapters) ), label printers and numeric keypads for pilot operations County (IT) PLT4 Deploy client-side software to pilot team workstations County (IT) PLT5 According to approved Test Plan, perform initial testing of hardware and software systems Northwoods PLT6 Document and distribute test results Northwoods PLT7 Review test results County (IT) PLT8 Modify tested hardware and software systems as needed to prepare for pilot operations Northwoods PLT9 Prepare a plan to ensure there is minimal disruption of business continuity before, during and after system implementation ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ Review and approve Business Continuity Plan County (IT) PLT11 According to approved Training Plan, provide the appropriate training facilities for on□site pilot team training (available for set up one day in advance of any scheduled training ) County (HSA) PLT12 According to approved Training Plan, deliver training for a total of up to 40 pilot team members ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ Validate software configuration during Limited Production pilot operations County (HSA) PLT14 Provide in-unit rollout support during pilot operations Northwoods PLT15 As a result of pilot operations, update configuration of hardware and software systems to meet identified requirements ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ Hold prototype review with key stakeholders to demonstrate final configuration of hardware and software systems ▇▇...
View Source
Requirements Validation. In this task, the Contractor must lead and facilitate the process for reviewing and validating the detailed Functional and Non-Functional Requirements documentation. Throughout this task the Contractor must validate and use the high-level baseline requirements developed during the planning phase and outlined in the following documents: • Appendix I - Functional Requirements • Appendix I - Functional Requirements Approach • Appendix I - Non-Functional Requirements The Contractor is required to conduct a crosswalk of the high-level baseline requirements against the legacy system functionality to validate and identify any possible gaps in the requirements. The Contractor must also develop their approach for augmenting the existing requirements and crafting design level use cases and workflows to meet all Functional Requirements.
View Source
Requirements Validation. Produces a shared understanding of the project’s scope, including a gap analysis that identifies functionality already available in the proposed base solution and work yet-to- be-completed to fully meet DCF’s requirements.
View Source

Related to Requirements Validation

  • REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS/SAFETY Goods/Services supplied by Contractor shall meet all OSHA and other safety-related federal, state, local, and/or tribal regulatory requirements applicable to the Goods/Services.

  • Compliance with Regulatory Requirements Upon demand by Lender, Borrower shall reimburse Lender for Lender’s additional costs and/or reductions in the amount of principal or interest received or receivable by Lender if at any time after the date of this Agreement any law, treaty or regulation or any change in any law, treaty or regulation or the interpretation thereof by any Governmental Authority charged with the administration thereof or any other authority having jurisdiction over Lender or the Loans, whether or not having the force of law, shall impose, modify or deem applicable any reserve and/or special deposit requirement against or in respect of assets held by or deposits in or for the account of the Loans by Lender or impose on Lender any other condition with respect to this Agreement or the Loans, the result of which is to either increase the cost to Lender of making or maintaining the Loans or to reduce the amount of principal or interest received or receivable by Lender with respect to such Loans. Said additional costs and/or reductions will be those which directly result from the imposition of such requirement or condition on the making or maintaining of such Loans.

  • System Requirements Apple Software is supported only on Apple-branded hardware that meets specified system requirements as indicated by Apple.

  • Data Requirements ‌ • The data referred to in this document are encounter data – a record of health care services, health conditions and products delivered for Massachusetts Medicaid managed care beneficiaries. An encounter is defined as a visit with a unique set of services/procedures performed for an eligible recipient. Each service should be documented on a separate encounter claim detail line completed with all the data elements including date of service, revenue and/or procedure code and/or NDC number, units, and MCE payments/cost of care for a service or product. • All encounter claim information must be for the member identified on the claim by Medicaid ID. Claims must not be submitted with another member’s identification (e.g., ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ claims must not be submitted under the Mom’s ID). • All claims should reflect the final status of the claim on the date it is pulled from the MCE’s Data Warehouse. • For MassHealth, only the latest version of the claim line submitted to MassHealth is “active”. Previously submitted versions of claim lines get offset (no longer “active” with MassHealth) and payments are not netted. • An encounter is a fully adjudicated service (with all associated claim lines) where the MCE incurred the cost either through direct payment or sub-contracted payment. Generally, at least one line would be adjudicated as “paid”. All adjudicated claims must have a complete set of billing codes. There may also be fully adjudicated claims where the MCE did not incur a cost but would otherwise like to inform MassHealth of covered services provided to Enrollees/Members, such as for quality measure reporting (e.g., CPT category 2 codes for A1c lab tests and care/patient management). • All claim lines should be submitted for each Paid claim, including zero paid claim lines (e.g., bundled services paid at an encounter level and patient copays that exceeded the fee schedule). Denied lines should not be included in the Paid submission. Submit one encounter record/claim line for each service performed (i.e., if a claim consisted of five services or products, each service should have a separate encounter record). Pursuant to contract, an encounter record must be submitted for all covered services provided to all enrollees. Payment amounts must be greater than or equal to zero. There should not be negative payments, including on voided claim lines. • Records/services of the same encounter claim must be submitted with same claim number. There should not be more than one active claim number for the same encounter. All paid claim lines within an encounter must share the same active claim number. If there is a replacement claim with a new version of the claim number, all former claim lines must be replaced by the new claim number or be voided. The claim number, which creates the encounter, and all replacement encounters must retain the same billing provider ID or be completely voided. • Plans are expected to use current MassHealth MCE enrollment assignments to attribute Members to the MassHealth assigned MCE. The integrity of the family of claims should be maintained when submitting claims for multiple MCEs (ACOs/MCO). Entity PIDSL, New Member ID, and the claim number should be consistent across all lines of the same claim. • Data should conform to the Record Layout specified in Section 3.0 of this document. Any deviations from this format will result in claim line or file rejections. Each row in a submitted file should have a unique Claim Number + Suffix combination. • A feed should consist of new (Original) claims, Amendments, Replacements (a.k.a. Adjustments) and/or Voids. The replacements and voids should have a former claim number and former suffix to associate them with the claim + suffix they are voiding or replacing. See Section 2.0, Data Element Clarifications, for more information. • While processing a submission, MassHealth scans the files for the errors. Rejected records are sent back to the MCEs in error reports in a format of the input files with two additional columns to indicate an error code and the field with the error. • Unless otherwise directed or allowed by ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, all routine monthly encounter submissions must be successfully loaded to the MH DW on or before the last day of each month with corrected rejections successfully loaded within 5 business days of the subsequent month for that routine monthly encounter submission to be considered timely and included in downstream MassHealth processes. Routine monthly encounter submissions should contain claims with paid/transaction dates through the end of the previous month.

  • Specific Requirements compensation insurance with statutory limits required by South Dakota law. Coverage B-Employer’s Liability coverage of not less than $500,000 each accident, $500,000 disease-policy limit, and $500,000 disease-each employee.