Program Evaluations a. In order to monitor the performance of services and compliance with the provisions of this Provider Agreement by the PROVIDER, employees of the DEPARTMENT or State and Federal agencies which have provided funds under this Provider Agreement, or their duly authorized representatives, shall be allowed to visit without interference or delay the offices and service locations of the PROVIDER to examine the PROVIDER’S operations and records. Client records shall be reviewed in accordance with the ARTICLE 16
Program Evaluations. States, State agencies, institutions, facilities and contractors must cooperate in studies and evaluations conducted by or on be- half of the Department, related to pro- grams authorized under the Xxxxxxx X. Xxxxxxx National School Lunch Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966.
Program Evaluations. The job share participants, the principal, appropriate instructional staff, parents and students (optional) will evaluate the effectiveness of the program annually in writing.
Program Evaluations. ARC shall develop and implement an annual evaluation plan of Child Care Programs by Advisory Councils, DPR staff, and participant parents and guardians through customer satisfaction surveys in a manner consistent with the requirements and procedures of the Master Services Agreement.
Program Evaluations. The Charter School must submit a proposed draft of a formalized program evaluation plan prior to the first school day of the 2014-2015 school year. The Charter School must work with the District to finalize the program evaluation plan by December 1, 2019.
Program Evaluations. (a) Primary Investigators of program evaluation studies conducted by Westat that impact the daily activities of students, parents, or staff, or require use of data from same individuals must submit a Research Request to the SBBC’s Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) for review and approval prior to the initiation of any study-related activities. SBBC’s IRB and Research Review Process reviews the design, procedures, and potential impact on school and district operations to ensure the following:
Program Evaluations. (a) Primary Investigators of program evaluation studies conducted by Digital Promise that impact the daily activities of students, parents, or staff, or require use of data from same individuals must submit a Research Request to the SBBC’s Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) for review and approval prior to the initiation of any study-related activities. SBBC’s IRB and Research Review Process reviews the design, procedures, and potential impact on school and district operations to ensure the following:
Program Evaluations. By signing the Agreement, the Alberta Applicant agrees to participate in Program evaluations that may be undertaken by Alberta Innovates from time to time at the Alberta Applicant’s cost, both during the Project and after the Project Completion Date.
Program Evaluations. The Department of Ecology has led an effort involving several other states and EPA to establish a set of Principals by which state programs would be evaluated. The EPA agreed upon evaluation principals and the 4 states in Region 10 and are based upon and pursuant to, the Compliance Principals included above in item I. of this Section. The Department of Ecology and EPA have concurred on evaluations involving the Air Program and specific areas of the Water and Waste Program. Ecology and EPA are developing schedules for completing these evaluations consistent with agreed upon Evaluation Principals.
Program Evaluations. An additional set of principles has been developed by the Department of Ecology, the other Region 10 states, and EPA Region 10 to further clarify expectations for program evaluations – “Compliance Assurance Program Evaluation Principles - 1998.” These principles address (1) Program Evaluation Goals and Objectives, (2) Frequency of Evaluations, (3) Evaluation Areas, (4) Information Sources, (5) Communications and (6) Process Management. These principles were applied to NPDES and RCRA focused program evaluations conducted in 1999. An additional broader evaluation of the Air Quality Program (Contextual Review) was piloted in 1999. Ecology and EPA are committed to implement agreed upon corrective measures as a result of these evaluation findings, recognizing that adjustments to work plans and resource allocations may be necessary. Plans for additional focused program evaluations in accordance with these principles are identified in the respective media program workplans.
