Evaluation of Services. 13.1. ACC has the right to evaluate any Service under this Contract, so that we can check compliance with organisational and Service quality requirements.
Evaluation of Services. The planning council may choose to evaluate how well services funded by RWHAP Part A are meeting identified community needs, or it can pay someone else to do such an evaluation. The Part A recipient’s CQM program can provide information on clinical outcomes that informs the planning council about the impact of services. The recipient may include planning council members on its CQM committee. In addition, most planning councils regularly review EMA/TGA performance along the HIV care continuum. The planning council uses evaluation findings in considering ways to improve the system of care, including changing service priorities and allocations and developing directives. To carry out the array of planning tasks described above the planning council meets regularly throughout the year, as a whole and in committees. See Appendix II for a sample calendar describing the approximate timing of various planning council activities by months of the year.
Evaluation of Services. 2.1 HCC shall have the right to determine, in its sole discretion, whether the Services rendered by the Contractor under this Contract are satisfactory and meet the standards expected by HCC. In the event that HCC is not satisfied that the Contractor has performed the Services in an acceptable manner and/or that such Services do not meet the standards required by HCC for the Project and/or that the Work Product (as hereinafter defined) does not meet the expectations of HCC, HCC shall have the right to reject such Services or such Work Product, in which case, either of the following shall occur: (a) the Contractor shall re-perform any unsatisfactory or non- conforming Services or redesign or reconstruct such Work Product at no cost to HCC; or (b) HCC shall terminate the Contract and shall not be obligated to pay any Fees (as hereinafter defined) attributable to the unsatisfactory or non-conforming Services or Work Product.
Evaluation of Services. 2.4.1 BSQUARE understands and agrees that it is obligated under this Agreement to provide MICROSOFT with high quality Work Product and Services at all times during the term of this Agreement. In addition, and as further detailed in Section 2.4.3 below, BSQUARE shall be responsible for initiating prompt and detailed communications with the appropriate MICROSOFT project leaders regarding any Errors discovered during the course of development of software code Deliverables. In the event that any such Errors are caused by a failure of BSQUARE to provide a high quality Work Product, then Microsoft shall be entitled (in addition to any other remedies it may have under this Agreement, at law or in equity) to an appropriate credit for Service time associated with such Error.
Evaluation of Services. A. PROGRAM RESPONSIBILITY The DISTRICT is responsible for the development, implementation, and evaluation of the program, including the standards and assessments agreed to in consultation that the DISTRICT and third-party contractor will use to measure the effectiveness of the Title I program.
Evaluation of Services. The District shall collect data, including use and attendance statistics, relating to the rental use of the Train Station. The District shall present an evaluation of this data to the City on an annual basis beginning twelve months from the execution of this agreement. The District’s data shall be used by the parties to jointly determine the need for modification to this Agreement.
Evaluation of Services. The planning council may choose to evaluate how well services funded by RWHAP Part A are meeting identified community needs, or it can pay someone else to do such an evaluation. The Part A recipient’s CQM program can provide information on clinical outcomes that informs the planning council about the impact of services. The recipient may include planning council members on its CQM committee. In addition, most planning councils regularly review EMA/TGA performance along the HIV care continuum. The planning council uses evaluation findings in considering ways to improve the system of care, including changing service priorities and allocations and developing directives. To carry out the array of planning tasks described above the planning council meets regularly throughout the year, as a whole and in committees. See Appendix II for a sample calendar describing the approximate timing of various planning council activities by months of the year. 6 Service Standards: Guidance for Xxxx Xxxxx HIV/AIDS Program Grantees/ Planning Bodies. 2014. Available at xxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx/xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx CEO and Recipient Duties
Evaluation of Services. A. PROGRAM RESPONSIBILITY The DISTRICT is responsible for the development, implementation, and evaluation of the program, including the standards and assessments (Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ III- COG) and the Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx Tests of Achievement (WJ III-ACH)) agreed to in consultation that the DISTRICT and third-party contractor will use to measure the effectiveness of the Title I program.
Evaluation of Services. The Parties are dedicated to their respective missions, levels of excellence and commitment to rural healthcare, and recognize the importance of maintaining their existing level of hospital and other health care services to the extent feasible under evolving standards of quality, cost, effectiveness and reimbursement. D-HH GO will support the continued availability of services necessary and appropriate for the communities served by CMC, HH and MCH and, with respect to HH and MCH, as both necessary to maintain CAH status and appropriate for a comparable rural hospital (collectively the “Core Services”), subject to the following evaluation process. The Regional Presidents, in consultation with the Member CEOs and their respective clinical leaders, will evaluate regularly the effectiveness and efficiency of clinical services provided by the Members in addressing the health needs of the communities they serve. The evaluation will include consideration of the following: (i) the synergies created by the Combination and the goals of the Parties stated in Article 1 above; (ii) quality; (iii) cost; (iv) reimbursement; (v) profitability; (vi) outcomes; (vii) access; (viii) provider retention and recruitment needs and challenges; and (ix) community needs. If the evaluation pertains to any clinical services or operations in Region II that are not consistent with Catholic moral teaching, the ERDs or Canon Law and Section 4.2.2(d) remains applicable, then the evaluation of such services or operations and the process under Section 5.3.3(b) below will be the responsibility of the D-HH GO Chief Clinical Officer or Chief Operating Officer. No Core Service will be terminated, however, for the sole reason that the Core Service is not profitable.
Evaluation of Services. The Board of Managers of Capital may periodically, but no less frequently than semi-annually, upon the request of any of its members, meet to evaluate the performance of Partners in presenting investment opportunities to Capital pursuant to this Agreement. If, in the opinion of any member of the Board of Managers, such performance is not satisfactory, the parties shall jointly develop and effect a plan to improve or augment the quality or number of such investment opportunities presented.
