Conclusions and Recommendations The demonstration and evaluation process provided an opportunity to test community specific tools with a range of end users from the memory institution domain and to gain greater insight into both the current and future evolution of the SHAMAN prototypes for preservation, access and re-use. Xxxx et al. (2000) in their user evaluation study of the Alexandria Digital Library which incorporated the evaluation of a Web prototype by earth scientists, information specialists and educators raised four key questions in relation to their findings that SHAMAN may be well advised to consider, they are paraphrased here with our conclusions from the investigations. What have we learned about our target organizations and potential users? Memory institutions are most definitely not a homogenised group; their needs and requirements differ greatly across the domain. Representatives of the archives community are agreed on the benefits of SHAMAN‟s authenticity validation function. The representatives of government information services remained unconvinced as to the need or benefit of grid technologies or distributed ingest while librarians saw the value of grid access as an asset of the framework. What have we learned about the evaluation approach for digital preservation? Within the limits of the exercise, in terms of time-frame and resources, the approach adopted has generated useful information for the further development of demonstrators and for the development of the SHAMAN framework overall. What have we learned about the SHAMAN ISP1 demonstrator? Respondents to the evaluation questionnaires and the focus groups indicate that, overall, the presentation of the demonstrator worked effectively and that, in general, participants in the demonstration and evaluation events were able to understand the intentions of the demonstration and to apply the ideas presented to their own context. What have we learned about the applicability of the SHAMAN framework to memory institutions? Respondents to the questionnaires and participants in the focus groups readily identified the value of the SHAMAN framework to their own operations. The majority had not yet established a long-term digital preservation policy, but recognized the need. Generally, the concepts of distributed ingest and grid operations found favour. Virtually all practitioners in the focus groups, however, drew attention to need of a lower level demonstration that would be closer to their everyday preservation troubles, especially for digital preservation to be applied to non-textual materials, such as film, photographs and sound archives. In addition to the criteria suggested by Xxxx et al., we can add a further project-related question: What have we learned that has implications for the training and dissemination phase of the Project? It was not part of the remit of the demonstration and evaluation specifically to discover information of relevance to the training and dissemination function. However, a number of factors will affect the efficacy of any training programme in particular. o First, no common understanding of digital preservation can be assumed of the potential target audiences for training. Consequently, it is likely that self-paced learning materials will be most effective in presenting the SHAMAN framework. o Secondly, the aims of SHAMAN as a project must be conveyed clearly: specifically, that it is a kind of „proof-of-concept‟ project and is not intended to deliver a package of programs capable of being implemented by institutions. o Thirdly, it needs to be emphasised that the SHAMAN framework is not limited to text documents; it can be applied to materials of all kinds. However, the demonstrations relate to bodies of material that were actually available for use. o Fourthly, the existing presentation materials are capable of being adapted for use in training activities. o Finally, the target audiences will appreciate the possibility of online access to the demonstrator, which will need to have very great ease of access in order that people with diverse backgrounds are able to use it with equal facility. We believe that, overall, WP14 has met its aims and objectives in this demonstration and evaluation of ISP1. Valuable lessons have been learnt by all parties involved, which will be transferred to the evaluation of ISP2 in the coming months.
Conclusion and Recommendations D. Evaluations for Offenders without a sex offense conviction shall answer the following additional referral questions in the evaluations:
Representations and Recommendations Unless otherwise stated in writing, neither Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc, nor its brokers or licensees have made, on their own behalf, any representations or warranties, express or implied, with respect to any element of the Property including but not limited to, the legal sufficiency, legal effect, or tax consequences of this transaction. Any information furnished by either party should be independently verified before that party relies on such information. Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc. recommends that Buyer consult its attorneys and accountants before signing this Agreement regarding the terms and conditions herein and that Seller satisfy itself as to the financial ability of Buyer to perform.
Decisions The General Assembly shall be free to act on its own initiative to formulate proposals and take decisions in accordance with the procedures set out herein. In addition, all proposals made by the Executive Board shall also be considered and decided upon by the General Assembly. The following decisions shall be taken by the General Assembly: Content, finances and intellectual property rights - Proposals for changes to Annexes 1 and 2 of the Grant Agreement to be agreed by the Funding Authority - Changes to the Consortium Plan - Modifications to Attachment 1 (Background Included) - Additions to Attachment 3 (List of Third Parties for simplified transfer according to Section 8.2.2) - Additions to Attachment 4 (Identified Affiliated Entities)] Evolution of the consortium - Entry of a new Party to the consortium and approval of the settlement on the conditions of the accession of such a new Party - Withdrawal of a Party from the consortium and the approval of the settlement on the conditions of the withdrawal - Identification of a breach by a Party of its obligations under this Consortium Agreement or the Grant Agreement - Declaration of a Party to be a Defaulting Party The identification of the breach is a first step in accordance with the procedure in 4.2 before declaring a Party as a Defaulting Party. - Remedies to be performed by a Defaulting Party - Termination of a Defaulting Party’s participation in the consortium and measures relating thereto - Proposal to the Funding Authority for a change of the Coordinator - Proposal to the Funding Authority for suspension of all or part of the Project - Proposal to the Funding Authority for termination of the Project and the Consortium Agreement Appointments On the basis of the Grant Agreement, the appointment if necessary of: - Executive Board Members
Final Decisions The Contracting Officer will issue a final decision as required by 33.211 if—
Written Decisions Decisions rendered at Level One which are unsatisfactory to the aggrieved person and all decisions rendered at Levels Two and Three of the grievance procedure shall be in writing setting forth the decision and the reasons therefore, and shall be transmitted promptly to all parties in interest and to the Association.
Hiring Decisions Contractor shall make the final determination of whether an Economically Disadvantaged Individual referred by the System is "qualified" for the position.
Impartial Decisions The Design Professional is the interpreter of the conditions of the Construction Contract and the judge of its performance, in the first instance. The Design Professional shall side neither with the Owner nor with the Contractor, but shall use its powers to enforce performance by both.
PUBLIC RELATIONS AND PUBLICITY 43.1 The Provider must not by itself, its employees or agents and procure that its Sub-Contractors must:
Recommendations It is recommended that:
