EVALUATION OF PROGRESS Clause Samples

The 'Evaluation of Progress' clause establishes a process for regularly assessing the advancement of work or fulfillment of obligations under an agreement. Typically, this involves setting specific milestones, timelines, or performance indicators that are reviewed at predetermined intervals to ensure that the project or contractual duties are on track. By providing a structured mechanism for monitoring progress, this clause helps identify potential delays or issues early, enabling timely corrective actions and ensuring that both parties remain aligned with the contract's objectives.
EVALUATION OF PROGRESS. This section applies only if CONTRACTOR is an NPS. Each year the LEA shall evaluate whether pupils for whom an ISA with CONTRACTOR is in effect are making appropriate educational progress. To the extent reasonably possible the evaluation shall be conducted as part of the development and provision of an IEP and shall include: a) A review of the pupil’s educational progress (including all state assessment results pursuant to Ed. Code § 52052(b)); b) An evaluation of whether the pupil’s needs continue to be best met in an NPS and whether changes to the IEP are necessary; and c) If CONTRACTOR is owned, operated by, or associated with an LCI, a review of whether the NPS is in compliance with Education Code § 56366.9 (i.e., prohibition against requiring enrollment in a particular NPS as a condition of residential placement) and Health and Safety Code § 1501.1
View SourceView Similar (7)
EVALUATION OF PROGRESS. 4.1 The teacher evaluates his/her own effectiveness in terms of student performance. 4.2 The teacher assesses student performance. 4.3 The teacher communicates progress to students and parents.
View SourceView Similar (2)
EVALUATION OF PROGRESS. At the conclusion of the Fellows Program, the DASD(SCI) will review and evaluate the Fellow’s progress and forward a memorandum to the Fellow's parent organization, which remains responsible for formal feedback/performance assessment. CONCUR: TRAINEE NAME SIGNATURE/ DATE APPROVED: SUPERVISOR NAME SIGNATURE/ DATE ENDORSED: Service or Agency 4 SIGNATURE/ DATE Expectations: 1. Participate in all scheduled events (training and academic, orientation visits, executive level engagements, industry trips, and assignments) 2. Continuous feedback and engagement with home station 3. Readiness to take on new challenges, expand knowledge base and grow through leadership training feedback
View SourceView Similar (2)
EVALUATION OF PROGRESS. Students will be evaluated annually during the study period. Students will be required to produce a report at the end of the first (probationary) year which will be used in the preliminary evaluation, sometimes referred to as a candidacy exam, detailed below. Subsequently they will be evaluated by the supervisory committee at the end of their second year and if necessary, third year, and take a final examination, in the form of a viva voce, after submission of the thesis. Students will also be required to give a public presentation of their thesis. Both evaluations will be carried out jointly between BU and CATIE on their campus, whichever is most appropriate. They may be conducted with the aid of electronic communications systems available at BU and CATIE. Students will also be invited to submit comments in confidence to the ▇▇▇▇ at ▇▇▇▇▇ or the Academic Registrar at BU on aspects of their program including, inter alia:  Efficiency of the admissions procedures  Adequacy of resources  Quality and effectiveness of supervision  Quality and value of information produced for the joint program. During the first (probationary) year, each student is required to demonstrate a minimum level of competence in carrying out independent research. Assessment is made on the basis of the report written by the student (which must be presented and defended orally), which should include a research plan plus any results of research completed in the first year. Each student must also fulfill any other assessments as specified by the supervisory committee. Students who are unable to satisfy the supervisory committee in the first year assessment may either not be allowed to proceed to complete the PhD program or be transferred onto an MPhil program. The preliminary evaluation will be made by the supervisory committee, which will be report to the Doctoral Committee at CATIE and the Director of Postgraduate Studies, School of Environment, Natural Resources and Geography at BU. Students are also required to give a public presentation of their research project to the scientific and/or academic community. This presentation should take place during the first year of the doctoral program.
View Source
EVALUATION OF PROGRESS. At the conclusion of the Fellows Program, the DASD(SCI), DASD(MPP) and DASD (TP) will review and evaluate the Fellow’s progress and forward a memorandum to the Fellow's parent organization, which remains responsible for formal performance appraisals.
View Source

Related to EVALUATION OF PROGRESS

  • Evaluation of Proposals All proposals received shall be reviewed to determine whether they meet the format requirements and the standards specified in the request for sealed proposals. The district shall evaluate the qualifications of the proposers based solely upon the criteria and evaluation methodology set forth in the request for sealed proposals, and shall assign a best value score to each proposal. Once the evaluation is complete, all responsive proposals shall be ranked from the highest best value to the lowest best value to the district.

  • Evaluation of Students A teacher shall maintain the right and responsibility to determine grades and other evaluation of students within the grading policies of the District based upon professional judgment of available criteria pertinent to any given subject area or activity for which the teacher is responsible. No grade or evaluation shall be changed without consultation with the teacher.

  • EVALUATION OF PROJECT BENEFITS The goal of this task is to report the benefits resulting from this project.

  • 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.

  • Evaluations A. District management shall direct the evaluation of all permanent bargaining unit members no less than once every two years and probationary bargaining unit members no less than twice per year. Bargaining unit members who have been employed with VUSD for at least ten (10) years and whose previous evaluation rated the employee as meeting or exceeding standards, may be evaluated at least every five (5) years, if the administrative evaluator and certificated employee being evaluated agree. The certificated employee or the administrative evaluator may withdraw consent of this agreement at any time (EC 44664 (a) (3)). B. The written procedures for evaluations that are currently in effect shall be maintained by the District until the bargaining unit negotiates and ratifies new procedures. The present procedures are in Appendix A. They include: 1. The evaluator shall be an immediate supervisor or any other management or supervisory employee, who is designated by District management. 2. Bargaining unit members may utilize peer review in lieu of management evaluation with principal approval. 3. Those bargaining unit members who are regularly scheduled to be evaluated will be notified by the evaluator no later than October 1st of each school year. Such notice will contain a brief explanation as to the procedures for evaluations 4. One-half of the permanent staff will be formally evaluated each year. a. Pre-Conference Guidelines (for Temporary, Probationary and Permanent Bargaining Unit Members) 1. A pre-conference for bargaining unit members to be evaluated will be held by October 31. The purpose of the pre-conference is to review the Standards for Bargaining Unit Members assignment and to determine the evaluation focus. At that time the evaluator and the bargaining unit member may agree that some elements of the standards are not applicable (NA) to the employee’s assignment and may mark them NA at that time. 2. If there is disagreement about which of the elements is not applicable (NA), the parties may invite the Assistant Superintendent of Certificated Human Resources to assist in resolving the differences. The Assistant Superintendent shall recommend alternatives to the unit member and evaluator.