Summary Assessment. Within thirty (30) Days of Agency’s request, highlight significant accomplishments and problems. Identify recommendations and/or plans to improve services.
Summary Assessment. Contractor shall provide a summary assessment of the 14 overall materials handling systems from Contractor's perspective relative to financial 15 and physical status of the Shoreway Center. Contractor shall assess how well the 16 program is operating in terms of efficiency, economy and effectiveness relative to 17 meeting all the goals and objectives of this Agreement. Contractor shall provide 18 recommendations and plans to improve operations, which highlight significant 19 accomplishments and problems. Contractor shall document changes on a monthly 20 basis and include monthly documentation in the quarterly reporting.
Summary Assessment. Highlight significant accomplishments and problems. Identify recommendations and/or plans to improve services.
Summary Assessment. Provide a summary assessment of the programs performed under this Agreement from Contractor's perspective relative to the financial and physical status of the program. The physical status assessment shall reflect how well the program is operating in terms of efficiency, economy, and effectiveness in meeting all the goals and objectives of this Agreement, particularly the Contractor’s Diversion goals. Provide recommendations and plans to improve, and highlight significant accomplishments and problems. Results shall be compared to other similar size communities served by the Contactor in the State.
Summary Assessment. Within thirty (30) Days of Agency’s request, highlight 3611 significant accomplishments and problems. Identify recommendations and/or plans 3612 to improve services. 3613 X. Xxxxxxxxx Waste Records. A summary or copy of the Hazardous Waste records 3614 required under Section 8.07.D. 3615 D. GPS Route Reports. Contractor shall provide GPS reports as reasonably requested 3616 by Agency or SBWMA. 3617 E. Other. The Agency reserves the right to request additional reports from the 3618 Contractor, and the Contractor shall deliver such reports within twenty-five (25) 3619 Business Days of such request provided that such information is similar in nature to 3620 the required elements of the monthly, quarterly, or annual reporting requirements 3621 described in Sections 9.05, 9.06, and 9.07. If the information requested by the 3622 Agency is not typically part of the Contractor’s reporting requirements described in 3623 Sections 9.05, 9.06, and 9.07, Contractor shall provide such information if the 3624 Contractor is required to maintain the information under the record-keeping 3625 requirements described in Sections 9.01, 9.02, and 9.03. 3626 Contractor acknowledges that the Agency has to submit information to State and local 3627 agencies related to the Act, AB 341, AB 1826, and SB 1383 and may require 3628 additional reporting from the Contractor. If Agency needs additional information to 3629 complete its reports, Contractor shall provide additional information to the extent 3630 Contractor has maintained records on the information requested. The Parties 3631 acknowledge that Contractor shall provide reports to the Agency, and shall not submit 3632 reports to State or local agencies on the behalf of the Agency. 3633
Summary Assessment. Contractor shall provide a summary assessment of the 1594 overall materials handling systems from Contractor's perspective relative to financial 1595 and physical status of the SEC. Contractor shall assess how well the program is 1596 operating in terms of efficiency, economy, and effectiveness relative to meeting all the 1597 goals and objectives of this Agreement. Contractor shall provide recommendations 1598 and plans to improve operations, which highlight significant accomplishments and 1599 problems. Contractor shall document changes on a monthly basis and include monthly 1600 documentation in the quarterly reporting.
Summary Assessment. This section discusses strengths and weaknesses so as to allow an evaluation of data and interpretations and assess the knowledge acquired. A major issue it tries to deal with is an understanding of what we can ultimately do with the results of the relevant projects.
Summary Assessment. Strengths: site inventory and map visualisation; consideration of the environment’s role in the choice of site location. Weaknesses: problems with site definition as some are of low confidence (1 vase and the name of a nearby village), not full scale study of relationships between man-environment. Evaluation of data and Interpretation: not all data-sites have the same strength; however, the environmental – interpretative approach followed is very interesting, even if we need to take into account socio-ideological relationships between sites as well. Knowledge acquired: suggestions on site interrelationships and development, spatial and man- environment relationships. Integrability: medium-high Publication: completed This study was certainly an innovative contribution to archaeological theory and the study of Xxxxxx Xxxxx. It provided raw data of good enough quality within its spatial context, to be used even in later research in the form of maps of the archaeology of the area. Xxxxxxx tried to establish a picture of the relationships between sites and environment in Minoan times and understand the reasons behind the difference in archaeological wealth among different areas. She also looks into the spatial relationships between some sites in relation to environmental potential and exploitation. The importance of geography and topography for archaeology and their link to cultural expression including economic and political situations were acknowledged early in the Human Geography tradition and characterises the work of modern landscape archaeology. Current studies, seeking to understand past human cultures via exploration of spatial, and man-environment relationships, prove that Xxxxxxx’x approach was indeed advanced. Environment plays, without a doubt, an important role for human culture, not least as it pretty much defines potential and variability of economic development, but it also affects political and social interactions. However, interpretative issues are only touched upon, spatial relationships are not fully explored and neither are man-environment interrelationships for the full spectrum of Minoan activity in the landscape. Even though she admits that continuation of habitation in some settlements may be explained more in terms of cultural reasons rather than environmental, it’s only through geography that she explains the establishment of Minoan ‘palaces’. Regarding the integration of sites discussed we should be cautious, because the site invento...
Summary Assessment. Strengths: documentation of research undertaken in the area with a very good scale map. Weaknesses: occasionally not clear definitions (e.g. ancient), and no consistency in site definition. This varies from a certain settlement with architecture and pottery spread to the locus of removable items and a wider area with several loci of antiquities. Evaluation of data and Interpretation: Interpretation develops around the diachronic spread of human activity, site size fluctuations and population estimates. Excavation but also survey data are used. Often data say nothing more than the presence of material culture, which is expected in a heavily occupied and much researched area. Knowledge acquired: environmental background and human activity locations through time. Integrability: medium Publication: completed The sought-after and result of most archaeological work has been the location of antiquities covering a definable space and their chronological and functional character. In the case of Knossos, this is a task of great importance, given the situation of continuous landscape change and the plethora of findings. However, sites in the context of this work are basically loci of archaeological material, and can be principally used as information rather than as data for regional analysis and inter-regional comparisons. The need for visualisation in order to manage a plethora of archaeological findings is expressed via the labour-intensive construction of a map at a scale of 1:5000, which still remains the best archaeological map available for the area. Every site in the catalogue includes the history of research and the interpretations of previous researchers even if evidence has disappeared, sometimes with comments that support or create doubts over specific interpretations. Hood tries to provide an as clear and objective picture of the archaeology as possible, paying attention rather to detailed historical recording, than the construction of a regional history, although his synthesis of data attempts to provide a general picture of the settlement history with size differences and loci of distinctive functional character over time. Environmental work undertaken falls within a general trend of the time that serious archaeological research should encompass a study of the environment. The acknowledgement of the relationship between man and environment and the influential role of the latter was stressed by New Archaeology and even though the views of the new theoret...
Summary Assessment. Strengths: a multi-disciplinary framework and a variety of methodological tools in landscape analysis. Weaknesses: site-oriented survey, with no sampling and off-site collections. Evaluation of data and Interpretation: survey data is incomplete and fragmentary. Interpretation is also preliminary, and is based on almost self-evident relationships between evidence and explanation. No exploration of complex social issues and whys. Knowledge acquired: a picture of site types on the landscape and the intensity of human activity in the landscape. Better understanding of the site of Itanos. Integrability: medium Publication: not completed. Itanos project profits from an international collaboration and a multidisciplinary approach especially in relation to the use of IT. Its conceptual framework is traditional even though methodological tools are new and innovative. They offer us a good background of research in the area and place their work in relation to earlier research on site as well as other survey projects in the area. Reports follow a rather systematic structure and describe the work undertaken in all levels, the greatest part of which cover clearings of earlier excavations, new test pits and architectural mapping. Thus, each year they report on what they did, what they found and where, giving us information on the different construction phases of architectural complexes, their location and topography. However, presentation of sites found during survey is only brief and does not give numbers and a satisfactory accuracy of chronological and functional definitions. For the moment, we only have a preliminary description of some sites in a narrative form, and general reports on site types found. The project has been going on since 1994 and new methods are continuously applied, showing a flexible and innovative framework. However, variability in surface survey methodology, which in fact is not clearly presented and understood, creates doubts regarding the consistency of data acquisition and poses problems in data integration and analysis. In general, the landscape seems to have been walked in both a non-systematic and occasionally a systematic manner, with the aim of locating sites, which are defined in advance as the locations of architecture, usually in combination with pottery concentrations. The latest surface exploration involved a team which walked in space intervals holding a GPS, with the aim to find ‘sites’ and plot them on the map. Sites, in turn, are...
