Compliance Review During the Term, Developer agrees to permit the GLO, HUD, and/or a designated representative of the GLO or HUD to access the Property for the purpose of performing Compliance-Monitoring Procedures. In accordance with GLO Compliance-Monitoring Procedures, the GLO or HUD will periodically monitor and audit Developer’s compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, the CDBG-DR Regulations, the CDBG Multifamily Rental Housing Guidelines, and any and all other Governmental Requirements during the Term. In conducting any compliance reviews, the GLO or HUD will rely primarily on information obtained from Developer’s records and reports, on-site monitoring, and audit reports. The GLO or HUD may also consider other relevant information gained from other sources, including litigation and citizen complaints. Attachment G GLO Contract No. 19-097-041-B662 5.04 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: INDEMNIFICATION
Compliance Reviews The Department may conduct a compliance review of the Contractor’s security procedures before and during the Contract term to protect Confidential Information.
PCI-DSS Compliance Merchant shall be in full compliance with rules, regulations, guidelines and procedures adopted by any Card Association or Payment Network relating to the privacy and security of Cardholder and Card transaction data, including without limitation the most up-to-date version of the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI-DSS), as amended from time to time by the Payment Card Industry Security Standards Council. Detailed information pertaining to aforementioned requirements may be found at xxxxx://xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx. Additional information regarding security requirements may be found on the Card Association’s respective web sites.
Program Compliance The School Board shall be responsible for monitoring the program to provide technical assistance and to ensure program compliance.
Labor Compliance Program The City has its own Labor Compliance Program authorized in August 2011 by the DIR. The City will withhold contract payments when payroll records are delinquent or deemed inadequate by the City or other governmental entity, or it has been established after an investigation by the City or other governmental entity that underpayment(s) have occurred. For questions or assistance, please contact the City of San Diego’s Equal Opportunity Contracting Department at 000-000-0000.
ETHICS COMPLIANCE All Bidders/Contractors and their employees must comply with the requirements of Sections 73 and 74 of the Public Officers Law, other State codes, rules, regulations and executive orders establishing ethical standards for the conduct of business with New York State. In signing the Bid, Bidder certifies full compliance with those provisions for any present or future dealings, transactions, sales, contracts, services, offers, relationships, etc., involving New York State and/or its employees. Failure to comply with those provisions may result in disqualification from the Bidding process, termination of contract, and/or other civil or criminal proceedings as required by law.
Status Substantial Compliance Analysis The Compliance Officer found that PPB is in substantial compliance with Paragraph 80. See Sections IV and VII Report, p. 17. COCL carefully outlines the steps PPB has taken—and we, too, have observed—to do so. Id. We agree with the Compliance Officer’s assessment. In 2018, the Training Division provided an extensive, separate analysis of data concerning ECIT training. See Evaluation Report: 2018 Enhanced Crisis Intervention Training, Training usefulness, on-the-job applications, and reinforcing training objectives, February 2019. The Training Division assessed survey data showing broad officer support for the 2018 ECIT training. The survey data also showed a dramatic increase in the proportion of officers who strongly agree that their supervisors are very supportive of the ECIT program, reaching 64.3% in 2018, compared to only 14.3% in 2015: The Training Division analyzed the survey results of the police vehicle operator training and supervisory in-service training, as well. These analyses were helpful in understanding attendees’ impressions of training and its application to their jobs, though the analyses did not reach as far as the ECIT’s analysis of post-training on- the-job assessment. In all three training analyses, Training Division applied a feedback model to shape future training. This feedback loop was the intended purpose of Paragraph 80. PPB’s utilization of feedback shows PPB’s internalization of the remedy. We reviewed surveys of Advanced Academy attendees, as well. Attendees were overwhelmingly positive in response to the content of most classes. Though most respondents agreed on the positive aspects of keeping the selected course in the curriculum, a handful of attendees chose options like “redundant” and “slightly disagree,” indicating that the survey tools could be used for critical assessment and not merely PPB self-validation. We directly observed PPB training and evaluations since our last report. PPB provided training materials to the Compliance Officer and DOJ in advance of training. Where either identified issues, PPB worked through those issues and honed its materials. As Paragraph 80 requires, PPB’s training included competency-based evaluations, namely: knowledge checks (i.e., quizzes on directives), in-class responsive quizzes (using clickers to respond to questions presented to the group); knowledge tests (examinations via links PPB sent to each student’s Bureau-issued iPhone); demonstrated skills and oral examination (officers had to show proficiency in first aid skills, weapons use, and defensive tactics); and scenario evaluations (officers had to explain their reasoning for choices after acting through scenarios). These were the same sort of competency-based evaluations we commended in our last report. In this monitoring period, PPB applied the same type of evaluations to supervisory-level training as well as in-service training for all sworn members. PPB successfully has used the surveys, testing, and the training audit.
CONTRACT COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT The HUB requirement on this Contract is 0%. The student engagement requirement of this Contract is 0 hours. The Career Education requirement for this Contract is 0 hours. Failure to achieve these requirements may result in the application of some or all of the sanctions set forth in Administrative Policy 3.10, which is hereby incorporated by reference.
CEQA Compliance The District has complied with all assessment requirements imposed upon it by the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resource Code Section 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”) in connection with the Project, and no further environmental review of the Project is necessary pursuant to CEQA before the construction of the Project may commence.
Agreement Deviation/Compliance Does the vendor agree with the language in the Vendor Agreement?
