Faculty Review Board Sample Clauses

Faculty Review Board. Faculty disputes will be mediated by the Faculty Review Board (FRB). The faculty disputes that the FRB will mediate include: disputed workloads, disputed FAPs, denials of extension of probationary period, denials of tenure, and denials of promotion. Service on the FRB will constitute University service for the members’ FAPs, workloads, and workplans.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Faculty Review Board. If, after reconsideration, the Chief Academic Officer’s recommendation remains negative, the faculty member may file an appeal of the Chief Academic Officer’s negative recommendation with the Faculty Review Board (“FRB”). The function of the FRB shall be to determine whether the appropriate faculty body gave adequate consideration to the faculty member’s candidacy in reaching its decision and, if the FRB determines otherwise, to request reconsideration by that body or administrator. The FRB shall not substitute its judgment on the merits for that of the previous decision makers. Some examples of an “adequate consideration” review include the following procedural questions: • Was the decision conscientiously arrived at? • Was all evidence bearing on the relevant performance of the candidate considered? • Was there adequate deliberation by the department over the import of the evidence in the light of the relevant standards? • Were irrelevant and improper standards excluded from consideration? • Was the decision a good faith exercise of professional academic judgment?

Related to Faculty Review Board

  • Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.

  • Training Committee The parties to this Agreement may form a Training Committee. The Training Committee will be constituted by equal numbers of Employer nominees and ETU employee representatives and have a charter which clearly states its role and responsibilities. It shall monitor the clauses of this Agreement which relate to training and ensure all employees have equal access to training.

  • Review Committee A Student may ask that the decision of the Housing Director or designee to deny the cancellation be reviewed. The review will be conducted by a committee consisting of University officials.

  • Joint Review JADRC may, at the request of either party, review issues arising from the application of this Article.

  • Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.

  • Departmental Review If informal resolution of the problem through conciliation and negotiation cannot be effected, an aggrieved person may file a formal complaint with the departmental affirmative action coordinator or other designated official. Such a complaint must be filed on a form provided for this purpose and within five working days after the attempted resolution of the problem by the equal employment opportunity counselor or within twenty-five (25) working days after the date of the alleged discriminatory action, whichever shall first occur. The affirmative action coordinator will decide whether the complaint falls within the jurisdiction of the procedure and accept or reject it. Upon acceptance of the complaint, the affirmative action coordinator shall obtain the notes on the case from the equal employment opportunity counselor; may conduct a prompt, impartial investigation if he deems it necessary; shall explore the possibility of resolving the problem through negotiation or conciliation; shall present findings and recommendations on resolving the complaint to the agency/department head; and within forty-five (45) working days from the date the formal complaint was filed, shall present his written decision, as approved by the agency/department head, to the complainant, with a copy of the complaint and decision to be forwarded to the director of personnel.

  • Additional RO Review Criteria (1) In addition to the requirements in Subparagraph 34A, the RO must:

  • Program Review The Contracting Officer or other authorized government representative may hold semi- annual program review meetings. Such meetings will be held via telecom or video teleconferencing. However, the Government reserves the right to request a meeting in person. The meetings will include all BPA holders, representatives from prospective customer agencies, a combination of current and prospective customer agencies, or individual BPA holders. Some Federal Government Agencies and any approved State, Local and Tribal agencies may establish a central program management function. Such users may require their primary suppliers to participate in agency program review meetings on a periodic basis, at no additional cost to the Government.

  • Joint Labor/Management Committees Purpose and Membership. Joint Labor/Management Committees are established to provide a forum for communications and problem-solving between the two parties and to deal with matters of a general personnel Union/Employer concern, as well as professional practices within the hospital related to patient care and professional issues. The Committees will work toward the improvement of patient care and recommend ways and means to improve patient care; and will address problems and concerns related to staffing and workloads. The Committees’ function will be limited to an advisory capacity and shall not include any decision making or collective bargaining authority. Committee memberships:

  • Claims Review Findings a. Narrative Results.‌‌

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