Evaluation Findings Clause Samples

The Evaluation Findings clause outlines how the results or conclusions from an assessment, review, or analysis will be documented and communicated between parties. Typically, this clause specifies the format, timing, and responsible party for delivering the findings, and may address how disagreements or follow-up actions are handled. Its core function is to ensure that all parties have a clear, agreed-upon understanding of the outcomes of an evaluation, thereby promoting transparency and facilitating any necessary next steps.
Evaluation Findings. The Government will evaluate proposals by classifying findings as strengths, weaknesses, significant strengths, significant weaknesses, or deficiencies using the following: Weakness – a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance Significant Weakness – a proposal flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance Deficiency – a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level Strength (not in FAR/NFS) – a proposal area that enhances the potential for successful performance or contributes toward exceeding the contract requirements in a manner that provides additional value to the government (this could be associated with a process, technical approach, materials, facilities, etc.). Significant Strength (not in FAR/NFS) – a proposal area that greatly enhances the potential for successful performance or contributes significantly toward exceeding the contract requirements in a manner that provides additional value to the government.
View SourceView Similar (3)
Evaluation Findings. As a part of this pilot, the Injaz monitoring and evaluation team developed a bespoke pre- and post-test survey to gain a better sense of how the pilot affected children across the learning areas. The survey integrated questions or components designed to measure social and emotional skills among elementary school-aged children that have been validated among Arabic-speaking youth populations by organizations such as the Inter-agency Network for Education in Emergencies.3 Specifically, Injaz 2 drew on: • Social-Emotional Response and Information Scenarios (SERAIS), • ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Self-Esteem Scale, • Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale, • ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Resilience Scale (RISC-10), • My Learning Mind, and • Empathy Questionnaire for Children and Adolescents The children were interviewed utilizing the same questions prior to the start of the program and after its conclusion to understand if the program yielded changes in these learning areas. In total, 322 children were sampled at baseline and 302 at endline and we were able to match baseline and endline responses for 294 children, which still represents a sample for the population that is considered representative at a 95% confidence level with a margin of error less than 5%, in line with standard research practices. The results of the baseline survey found that self-esteem was higher among returnees and children with ISIS exposure, suggesting that adverse life experiences may increase self-esteem, at least among younger students. Other results suggested that all students could benefit from learning that increases “cognitive integrity”4 as well as creative problem-solving abilities, and that younger groups (ages 7-10), those who cannot read, girls, and participants with ISIS exposure may benefit the most. Peacebuilding: The clearest emergent trend in terms of peacebuilding was that the returnee cohort had below-average scores on 4/5 questions, suggesting that returnees can strongly benefit from peacebuilding programming. The fact that returnees, readers, and older groups reported overall high rates of resilience suggests that perhaps resilience is also developed through experiential learning and that general education or literacy programming may also increase resilience. There were clear differences by age group. Older students generally outperformed younger students in SEL, resilience, and critical thinking, suggesting that these skills increase with age and lived experiences. Separating age cohorts during trainin...
View Source
Evaluation Findings. Tasks Deliverables Due Date Task 4. Contractor Staff
View Source
Evaluation Findings. Programme level In this section, the programme-level findings are first outlined. The intervention logic and indicators are first presented. The evaluation results are then outlined drawing on feedback on programme management. A summary of the findings from the thematic research on security research and assessment of cross-cutting issues is then provided, followed by a comparative analysis of national security research programmes compared with ESRP. 3.1 Intervention logic – PASR and FP7 SEC
View Source
Evaluation Findings 
View Source

Related to Evaluation Findings

  • Evaluation 1. The purposes of evaluation provisions include providing employees with feedback, and employers and employees with the opportunity and responsibility to address concerns. Where a grievance proceeds to arbitration, the arbitrator must consider these purposes, and may relieve on just and reasonable terms against breaches of time limits or other procedural requirements.

  • Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan A) Every Educator has an Educator Plan that includes, but is not limited to, one goal related to the improvement of practice; one goal for the improvement of student learning. The Plan also outlines actions the Educator must take to attain the goals established in the Plan and benchmarks to assess progress. Goals may be developed by individual Educators, by the Evaluator, or by teams, departments, or groups of Educators who have the similar roles and/or responsibilities. See Sections 15-19 for more on Educator Plans. B) To determine the goals to be included in the Educator Plan, the Evaluator reviews the goals the Educator has proposed in the Self-Assessment, using evidence of Educator performance and impact on student learning, growth and achievement based on the Educator’s self-assessment and other sources that Evaluator shares with the Educator. The process for determining the Educator’s impact on student learning, growth and achievement will be determined after ESE issues guidance on this matter. See #22, below. C) Educator Plan Development Meetings shall be conducted as follows: i) Educators in the same school may meet with the Evaluator in teams and/or individually at the end of the previous evaluation cycle or by October 15th of the next academic year to develop their Educator Plan. Educators shall not be expected to meet during the summer hiatus. ii) For those Educators new to the school, the meeting with the Evaluator to establish the Educator Plan must occur by October 15th or within six weeks of the start of their assignment in that school iii) The Evaluator shall meet individually with Educators with PTS and ratings of needs improvement or unsatisfactory to develop professional practice goal(s) that must address specific standards and indicators identified for improvement. In addition, the goals may address shared grade level or subject matter goals. D) The Evaluator completes the Educator Plan by November 1st. The Educator shall sign the Educator Plan within 5 school days of its receipt and may include a written response. The Educator’s signature indicates that the Educator received the plan in a timely fashion. The signature does not indicate agreement or disagreement with its contents. The Evaluator retains final authority over the content of the Educator’s Plan.

  • EVALUATION AND MONITORING The ORGANIZATION agrees to maintain books, records and other documents and evidence, and to use accounting procedures and practices that sufficiently and properly support the complete performance of and the full compliance with this Agreement. The ORGANIZATION will retain these supporting books, records, documents and other materials for at least three (3) calendar years following the year in which the Agreement expires. The COUNTY and/or the State Auditor and any of their representatives shall have full and complete access to these books, records and other documents and evidence retained by the ORGANIZATION respecting all matters covered in and under this Agreement, and shall have the right to examine such during normal business hours as often as the COUNTY and/or the State Auditor may deem necessary. Such representatives shall be permitted to audit, examine and make excerpts or transcripts from such records, and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, and records of matters covered by this Agreement. These access and examination rights shall last for three calendar years following the year in which the Agreement expires. The COUNTY intends without guarantee for its agents to use reasonable security procedures and protections to assure that related records and documents provided by the ORGANIZATION are not erroneously disclosed to third parties. The COUNTY will, however, disclose or make this material available to those authorized by/in the above paragraph or permitted under the provisions of Chapter 42.56 RCW without notice to the ORGANIZATION. The ORGANIZATION shall cooperate with and freely participate in any other monitoring or evaluation activities pertinent to this Agreement that the COUNTY finds needing to be conducted.

  • Independent Evaluation Buyer is an experienced and knowledgeable investor in the oil and gas business. Buyer has been advised by and has relied solely on its own expertise and legal, tax, title, reservoir engineering, environmental and other professional counsel concerning this transaction, the Properties, the value thereof and title thereto.

  • 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.