PROGRAMME EVALUATION Sample Clauses

PROGRAMME EVALUATION. ‌ Evaluations shall take place in compliance with Article 141 of the IPA Implementing Regulation. The evaluation shall aim to improve the quality, effectiveness and consistency of the assistance from the EU funds and the strategy and implementation of cross-border programmes while taking account the objective of sustainable development and the relevant EU legislation concerning environmental impact. An ex-ante evaluation of this programme has not been carried out in line with the provisions of Article 141 in the light of the proportionality principle. During the implementation, participating OSs and/or the European Commission shall carry out evaluations linked to the monitoring of the cross-border programme in particular where that monitoring reveals a significant departure from the goals initially set or where proposals are made for the revision of cross-border programme. The results shall be sent to the JMC and to the Commission. Evaluations shall be carried out by experts or bodies, internal or external. The results shall be published according to the applicable rules on access to documents. Evaluation shall be financed from the technical assistance budget of the programme.
Sample 1Sample 2See All (4)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
PROGRAMME EVALUATION. Service Provider You must participate in an evaluation of the Nanny Programme if requested to do so by us or a service provider engaged by us to conduct the evaluation. No later than November 2016
Sample 1Sample 2
PROGRAMME EVALUATION. Families You must arrange for a Nanny or Xxxxxxx who provide services to participate in an evaluation of the Nanny Programme if requested to do so by us, or by an Authorised Person engaged by us to conduct the evaluation. No later than November 2016 Item 4 - Ad hoc reports You must provide ad-hoc reports as required by us from time to time, within the timeframe and in the manner required by us.
Sample 1Sample 2
PROGRAMME EVALUATION. The aim of the programme evaluation is to improve the quality, ef- fectiveness and consistency of the use of assistance, the strategy as well as the implementation of the Programme. Evaluation shall be Godišnje izvješće o provedbi U skladu s člankom 112. Provedbenog propisa potrebno je pripremiti godišnja izvješća i zaključno izvješće o provedbi. Godišnja izvješća načinit će Zajedničko tehničko tajništvo, a ovjerit će ga Upravljačko tijelo i odobriti Zajednički nadzorni odbor prije podnošenja Komisiji. Praćenje na projektnoj razini Svrha nadziranja projekta praćenje je kako projekt napreduje u smi- slu izdataka, korištenja resursa, provedbe aktivnosti i isporuke rezul- tata te upravljanja rizikom. Aktivnost praćenja projekta pretpostavlja sustavno i kontinuirano prikupljanje informacija, učitavanje podata- ka u Sustav za praćenje i informiranje, analizu indikatora definira- nih u projektu u cilju podrške učinkovitom odlučivanju. Zajedničko tehničko tajništvo periodički ocjenjuje napredak i izvedbu projekta putem praćenja indikatora i donosi nužne odluke i ispravke kako bi očuvalo stabilnost projekta. Sustav za praćenje Programa i informiranje Upravljačko tijelo odgovorno je za uspostavljanje sustava za priku- pljanje pouzdanih financijskih i statističkih informacija o proved- bi za praćenje indikatora i za procjenu. Također je odgovorno za prosljeđivanje ovih podataka u skladu s dogovorima između država sudionica i Komisije koristeći informatičke sustave koji dopuštaju razmjenu podataka. Sustav osigurava nadležnim tijelima (Upravljačkom tijelu, Tijelu za ovjeru, Revizijskom tijelu, Zajedničkom nadzornom odboru, Zajed- ničkom tehničkom tajništvu, Informacijskoj točki i Jedinici prijenosa financijskih sredstava) praktične alate za obavljanje zadanih zadata- ka, a također treba poticati komunikaciju i protok informacija izme- đu dviju država sudionica podržavanjem obaju projektnih ciklusa i provedbe programa, kroz: • odabir projekata (registraciju prijava i rezultata procjene), • upravljanje projektom (od ugovaranja do zaključenja, podaci na partnerskoj razini također su uključeni), • upravljanje financijama (upravljanje sredstvima IPA-e, plaćanje vodećem partneru, pripremu zahtjeva za plaćanjem koji se pod- nose EK-u), • praćenje na razini programa, • upravljanje projektima tehničke pomoći, • pohranjivanje podataka o nepravilnostima, • funkcije izvješćivanja. Početak rada sustava predviđen je za treće tromjesečje 2008. Razvoj i primjena sustava za praćenje p...
Sample 1
PROGRAMME EVALUATION. ‌ The Agency will be involved in the ex-post evaluation of FP7 to be completed by 31 December 2015 as well as any other assessments related to the activities delegated to the Agency. SIGNATURES FOR PARTS I AND II(A) OF THE MOU‌ Done at Brussels, on …./……./…. For the parent DGs, Xx Xxxxxx-Xxx SMITS, Director-General, DG RTD [signed in ARES] Xx Xxxxxxx XXXXXXXXX, Director-General, DG EAC [signed in ARES] Xx Xxxxxxx XXXXX, Director-General, DG CNECT [signed in ARES] Xx Xxxxx Xxxxxx PLEWA, Director-General, DG AGRI [signed in ARES] Xx Xxxxx XXXXX, Director-General, DG GROW [signed in ARES] Xx Xxxxxxxx XXXXX, Director-General, DG HOME [signed in ARES] For the Agency, Xx Xxxxxxx XXXXXXX, Director, Research Executive Agency [signed in ARES] Memorandum of Understanding between the Research Executive Agency and DG Research and Innovation, DG Education and Culture, DG Enterprise and Industry, DG Communication Networks, Content and Technology, DG Agriculture and Rural Development - Modalities and Procedures of Interaction Page 34 / 34 Document Final Version dated 30/11/2015
Sample 1
PROGRAMME EVALUATION. In addition to evaluations and reviews that have already taken place, there have been two “Technical visits” carried out by Partner National Societies. The first focused on reviewing the Health and Water and Sanitation Programmes (Report on PNS visit to Myanmar for Sectoral Review of Response to Cyclone Nargis by Xxx Handby and Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxx-Landiech, Sept 2008). The second comprised a preliminary review of the Recovery and Accountability Framework across the Shelter and Livelihoods programmes (2 to 14 November 2009). A mid-term review of the first phase is currently scheduled for January/February 2010. The monitoring and evaluation framework will document the more detailed activities of this aspect. It is envisaged that there will be an external evaluation at the end of the programme and internal evaluations are conducted annually on its progress.
Sample 1

Related to PROGRAMME EVALUATION

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • JOC EVALUATION If any materials being utilized for a project cannot be found in the RS Means Price Book, this question is what is the markup percentage on those materials? When answering this question please insert the number that represents your percentage of proposed markup. Example: if you are proposing a 30 percent markup, please insert the number "30". Remember that this is a ceiling markup. You may markup a lesser percentage to the TIPS Member customer when pricing the project, but not a greater percentage. EXAMPLE: You need special materials that are not in the RS Means Unit Price Book for a project. You would buy the materials and xxxx them up to the TIPS Member customer by the percentage you propose in this question. If the materials cost you, the contractor, $100 and you proposed a markup on this question for the material of 30 percent, then you would charge the TIPS Member customer $130 for the materials. No response TIPS/ESC Region 8 is required by Texas Government Code § 791 to be compensated for its work and thus, failure to agree shall render your response void and it will not be considered. Yes - No Vendor agrees to remit to TIPS the required administration fee or, if resellers are named, guarantee the fee remittance by or for the reseller named by the vendor?

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order.

  • Re-evaluation a) When a job has moved to a higher group as a result of re-evaluation, the resulting rate shall be retroactive from the date that Management or the employee has applied to the Plant Job Review Committee for re-evaluation.

  • Focused Evaluation The Focused Evaluation is used when a teacher is not evaluated using the Comprehensive Evaluation process, and will include evaluation of one of the eight state criteria (student growth impact required). If a non-provisional teacher has scored at Proficient or higher the previous year, they may be moved to Focused Evaluation. The teacher may remain on the Focused Evaluation for five (5) years before returning to the Comprehensive Evaluation. The teacher or the evaluator can initiate a move from the Focused to the Comprehensive Evaluation. A decision to move a teacher from a Focused to a Comprehensive Evaluation must occur by December 15.

  • Job Evaluation The work of the provincial job evaluation steering committee (the JE Committee) will continue during the term of this Framework Agreement. The objectives of the JE Committee are as follows: • Review the results of the phase one and phase two pilots and outcomes of the committee work. Address any anomalies identified with the JE tool, process, or benchmarks. • Rate the provincial benchmarks and create a job hierarchy for the provincial benchmarks. • Gather data from all school districts and match existing job descriptions to the provincial benchmarks. • Identify the job hierarchy for local job descriptions for all school districts. • Compare the local job hierarchy to the benchmark-matched hierarchy. • Develop a methodology to convert points to pay bands - The confirmed method must be supported by current compensation best practices. • Identify training requirements to support implementation of the JE plan and develop training resources as required. Once the objectives outlined above are completed, the JE Committee will mutually determine whether a local, regional or provincial approach to the steps outlined above is appropriate. It is recognized that the work of the committee is technical, complicated, lengthy and onerous. To accomplish the objectives, the parties agree that existing JE funds can be accessed by the JE committee to engage consultant(s) to complete this work. It is further recognized that this process does not impact the established management right of employers to determine local job requirements and job descriptions nor does this process alter any existing collective agreement rights or established practices. When the JE plan is ready to be implemented, and if an amendment to an existing collective agreement is required, the JE Committee will work with the local School District and Local Union to make recommendations for implementation. Any recommendations will also be provided to the Provincial Labour Management Committee (PLMC). As mutually agreed by the provincial parties and the JE Committee, the disbursement of available JE funds shall be retroactive to January 2, 2020. The committee will utilize available funds to provide 50% of the wage differential for the position falling the furthest below the wage rate established by the provincial JE process and will continue this process until all JE fund monies at the time have been disbursed. The committee will follow compensation best practices to avoid problems such as inversion. The committee will report out to the provincial parties regularly during the term of the Framework Agreement. Should any concerns arise during the work of the committee they will be referred to the PLMC. Create a maintenance program to support ongoing implementation of the JE plan at a local, regional or provincial level. The maintenance program will include a process for addressing the wage rates of incumbents in positions which are impacted by implementation of the JE plan. The provincial parties confirm that $4,419,859 of ongoing annual funds will be used to implement the Job Evaluation Plan. Effective July 1, 2022, there will be a one-time pause of the annual $4,419,859 JE funding. This amount has been allocated to the local table bargaining money. The annual funding will recommence July 1, 2023.

  • BID EVALUATION The Commissioner reserves the right to accept or reject any and all Bids, or separable portions of Bids, and waive technicalities, irregularities, and omissions if the Commissioner determines the best interests of the State will be served. The Commissioner, in his/her sole discretion, may accept or reject illegible, incomplete or vague Bids and his/her decision shall be final. A conditional or revocable Bid which clearly communicates the terms or limitations of acceptance may be considered, and Contract award may be made in compliance with the Bidder’s conditional or revocable terms in the Bid.

  • PROGRESS EVALUATION Engineer shall, from time to time during the progress of the Engineering Services, confer with County at County’s election. Engineer shall prepare and present such information as may be pertinent and necessary, or as may be reasonably requested by County, in order for County to evaluate features of the Engineering Services. At the request of County or Engineer, conferences shall be provided at Engineer's office, the offices of County, or at other locations designated by County. When requested by County, such conferences shall also include evaluation of the Engineering Services. County may, from time to time, require Engineer to appear and provide information to the Xxxxxxxxxx County Commissioners Court. Should County determine that the progress in Engineering Services does not satisfy an applicable Work Authorization or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto, then County shall review same with Engineer to determine corrective action required. Engineer shall promptly advise County in writing of events which have or may have a significant impact upon the progress of the Engineering Services, including but not limited to the following:

  • Final Evaluation IC must submit a final report and a project evaluation to the Arts Commission within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Services. Any and all unexpended funds from IC must be returned to City no later than sixty (60) days after the completion of the Services.

  • Self-Evaluation Each regular faculty member shall provide a self-evaluation. It shall address, among other items, the faculty member's fulfillment of professional responsibilities as referenced in Section 18.2.3 and an assessment of his or her own performance. The faculty member will share the self-evaluation with the Faculty Evaluation Committee and the first-level manager or designee. The self-evaluation will become part of the evaluation report.

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