Adjudication Data Sample Clauses

Adjudication Data for administrative adjudication reviews and hearings: the date, time, office location, and disposition.
View Source
Adjudication Data. During the current audit, there were still a few areas of significantly incomplete, missing, or incorrectly categorized data. The IMT expects that OPD should be able to attain compliance with Task 40.2 soon, but had to find it not yet compliant. “By June 28, 2005, OPD must develop a policy for the use of PAS, including supervising and auditing the performance of specific members, employees, supervisors, managers and OPD units, as well as OPD as a whole. The Settlement Agreement sets forth extensive requirements regarding how PIMS must be used.” • Subcommittee on the Personnel Information Management System • Chief of Police Memorandum, Personnel Information Management System (May 15, 2003) • Revised Departmental General Order M-5, Case Evaluation and Report Review Notice • Report Writing Manual Insert E-3 • Department General Order D-17, PAS Purpose • Case Evaluation and Report Review Notice form See Task 40. The integrated data system required under Task 40 supports an administrative process, set out under Task 41, whereby OPD members and employees who demonstrate certain at-risk behavior are subject to identification, review, monitoring or intervention by their supervisors and commanders. Certain subtasks found compliant in the November 2008 IMT audit of Task 41 were not reassessed for the current audit since the IMT found no indication that their compliance status has changed. Also, during the period under review, according to OPD, no members under PAS jurisdiction were transferred for making unsatisfactory progress. Accordingly, as during the last audit, Tasks 41.28, 41.28.1 and 41.28.2 were not applicable during this audit. The IMT found OPD in compliance with all but two of Task 41’s thirty-plus provisions. Given the high level of compliance with most of the task, the IMT would have found OPD in conditional compliance with Task 41, except that one of the two non-compliant tasks, Task 41.21, showed troubling signs of mendacity.
View Source

Related to Adjudication Data

  • Adjudicator 49.1 The Procuring Entity proposes the person named in the TDS to be appointed as adjudicator or under the Contract, at an hourly fee specified in the TDS, plus reimbursable expenses. If the Tenderer disagrees with this Tender, the Tenderer should so state in the Tender. If, in the Form of Acceptance, the Procuring Entity has not agreed on the appointment of the Adjudicator, the Adjudicator shall be appointed by the Appointing Authority designated in the Special Conditions of Contract at the request of either party.

  • Adjudication Where operational requirements permit, the Council will grant leave with pay to an employee who is: (a) a party to an adjudication, or (b) the representative of an employee who is a party to an adjudication, or (c) a witness called by an employee who is party to an adjudication.

  • Appellate Court Orders to Vacate, Reverse, or Materially Modify Judgment If the reviewing Court vacates, reverses, or modifies the Judgment in a manner that requires a material modification of this Agreement (including, but not limited to, the scope of release to be granted by Class Members), this Agreement shall be null and void. The Parties shall nevertheless expeditiously work together in good faith to address the appellate court’s concerns and to obtain Final Approval and entry of Judgment, sharing, on a 50-50 basis, any additional Administration Expenses reasonably incurred after remittitur. An appellate decision to vacate, reverse, or modify the Court’s award of the Class Representative Service Payment or any payments to Class Counsel shall not constitute a material modification of the Judgment within the meaning of this paragraph, as long as the Gross Settlement Amount remains unchanged.

  • Litigation; Government Proceedings No action, suit or proceeding by or before any court or governmental agency, authority or body or any arbitrator involving the Company, or to the Company’s knowledge, the Sponsor, or any executive officer or director of the Company, or its or their property is pending or, to the knowledge of the Company, threatened that (i) would reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on the performance of this Agreement or the consummation of any of the transactions contemplated hereby or (ii) would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, except as set forth in or contemplated in the Statutory Prospectus and the Prospectus (exclusive of any supplement thereto).

  • Governing Law; Government Code Claim Compliance This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. In addition to any and all contract requirements pertaining to notices of and requests for compensation or payment for extra work, disputed work, claims and/or changed conditions, Consultant must comply with the claim procedures set forth in Government Code Sections 900 et seq. prior to filing any lawsuit against the City. Such Government Code claims and any subsequent lawsuit based upon the Government Code claims shall be limited to those matters that remain unresolved after all procedures pertaining to extra work, disputed work, claims, and/or changed conditions have been followed by Consultant. If no such Government Code claim is submitted, or if any prerequisite contractual requirements are not otherwise satisfied as specified herein, Consultant shall be barred from bringing and maintaining a valid lawsuit against the City.