Independence and Objectivity Clause Samples

The Independence and Objectivity clause establishes that parties, typically professionals or consultants, must perform their duties without undue influence or bias. In practice, this means individuals are required to avoid conflicts of interest, refrain from accepting gifts or incentives that could compromise their judgment, and disclose any relationships that might affect their impartiality. The core function of this clause is to ensure that decisions and actions are made based on merit and factual analysis, thereby maintaining trust and credibility in the professional relationship.
Independence and Objectivity. The IRO must perform the IRO Reviews in a professionally independent and objective fashion, as defined in the most recent Government Auditing Standards issued by the United States Government Accountability Office.
View SourceView Similar (8)
Independence and Objectivity. Members shall use reasonable care and judgment to achieve and maintain independence and objectivity in making investment recommendations or taking investment action.
View Source
Independence and Objectivity. The Compliance Expert must perform each component of the Compliance Expert Reviews in a professionally independent and objective fashion, as defined in the most recent Government Auditing Standards issued by the U.S. Government Accountability Office. In addition, the Compliance Expert must perform its responsibilities in an ethical and professional manner in accordance with applicable Rules of Professional Conduct and have an appropriate process to assess conflicts of interest between (i) the Compliance Expert (and its employer and firm, if any) and (ii) McKinsey or current or prospective clients of McKinsey for whom ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ may perform Life Sciences and Healthcare Sector Engagements.
View Source
Independence and Objectivity. This section relates to Allegation 2. The Respondents were exposed to threats to their independence and objectivity and failed to guard against them. First, the Respondents failed to guard against the self-interest threat created by the substantial fees they generated in providing non-audit services to the Taveta Group: 34.1 In 2014, the Taveta Group paid PwC £355,000 in audit fees and £2,859,778 in non-audit fees. PwC’s report to ▇▇▇▇▇▇’s audit committee suggests that the figure was even higher, at £3,303,000. The value of non-audit services that PwC sold to the Taveta Group therefore exceeded the value of the audit services that it sold to the Taveta Group by a factor of eight. In 2012 and 2013 the factor was three and in 2015 the factor was five. 34.2 In addition, the Respondents charged ▇▇▇▇▇▇ a contingency fee in relation to a pensions incentive exercise. Ethical Standard 4 warned that contingent fee arrangements for non-audit work provided by a client’s auditor “can create significant self-interest threats to the auditor’s objectivity and independence as the auditor may have, or may appear to have, an interest in the outcome of the non-audit service”. 34.3 The fees generated from this non-audit work risked inappropriately influencing the Respondents’ judgment or behaviour. The Ethical Standards warn against this. Ethical Standard 5 (the standard relating specifically to “non-audit services provided to audited entities”) stated: “Where substantial fees are regularly generated from the provision of non-audit services and the fees for non-audit services are greater than the annual audit fees, the audit engagement partner has regard to the possibility that there may be perceived to be a loss of independence resulting from the expected or actual level of fees for non-audit services.” Second, the Respondents failed to guard against the familiarity threat created by the non-audit work they performed for the Taveta Group: 35.1 As noted above, the Respondents performed a substantial amount of non-audit work for the Taveta Group. ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, A and B were involved in performing this non-audit work. PwC was also appointed as liquidator of a number of dormant subsidiaries in the Taveta Group. ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ was the single point of contact at PwC for ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ and had a central role in the provision of non-audit services generally. ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ had a long or close business association with the client. In describing his role in 2013, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ said th...
View Source
Independence and Objectivity. The IRO must perform the Drawdown Review in a professionally independent and objective fashion, as defined in the most recent Government Auditing Standards issued by the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The Compliance Expert must perform the Compliance Program Review in a professionally independent and objective fashion, as defined in the most recent Government Auditing Standards issued by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
View Source

Related to Independence and Objectivity

  • IRO Independence and Objectivity The IRO must perform the Claims Review in a professionally independent and objective fashion, as defined in the most recent Government Auditing Standards issued by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

  • Independence and Objectivity Certification Prior to performing the first Quarterly Claims Review, and annually thereafter, the IRO shall submit to Practitioner a certification that the IRO has (a) evaluated its professional independence and objectivity with respect to the reviews required under this Section III.C and (b) concluded that it is, in fact, independent and objective, in accordance with the requirements specified in Appendix A to this IA. The IRO’s certification shall include a summary of all current and prior engagements between Practitioner and the IRO.

  • Scope and Objectives 1. This Chapter shall apply, in accordance with the Parties’ respective international obligations and domestic customs law, to customs procedures applied to goods traded between the Parties and to the movement of means of transport between the Parties. 2. The objectives of this Chapter are to: (a) simplify and harmonise customs procedures of the Parties; (b) ensure predictability, consistency and transparency in the application of customs laws and administrative procedures of the Parties; (c) ensure the efficient and expeditious clearance of goods and means of transport; (d) facilitate trade between the Parties; and (e) promote cooperation between the customs administrations, within the scope of this Chapter.

  • BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES The partnership proposed by the Cooperator was selected due to merit review evaluations from the 2017 Notice of Funding Opportunity P17AS00037. The Cooperator demonstrated expertise in disciplines and subject areas of relevance to cooperative research and training. The Cooperator met the program interests of NPS with expertise, facilities, experience, diversity of programs, and history of collaborative research projects. The Cooperator helps the NPS-CESU to meet its objectives to:  Provide research, technical assistance and education to NPS for land management, and research;  Develop a program of research, technical assistance and education that involves the biological, physical, social, and cultural sciences needed to address resources issues and interdisciplinary problem-solving at multiple scales and in an ecosystem context at the local, regional, and national level; and  Place special emphasis on the working collaboration among NPS, universities, and their related partner institutions. The CESU network seeks to provide scientifically-based information on the nature and status of selected biological, physical, and cultural resources occurring within the parks in a form that increases its utility for making management decisions, conducting scientific research, educating the public, developing effective monitoring programs, and developing management strategies for resource protection. Studying the resources present in NPS parks benefits the Cooperator’s goal of advancing knowledge through scientific discovery, integration, application, and teaching, which lead toward a holistic understanding of our environmental and natural resources. The Cooperator is a public research university, sharing research, educational, and technological strengths with other institutions. Through inter-institutional collaboration, combined with the unique contributions of each constituent institution, the Cooperator strives to contribute substantially to the cultural, economic, environmental, scientific, social and technological advancement of the nation. The NPS expects there to be substantial involvement between itself and the Cooperator in carrying out the activities contemplated in this Agreement. The primary purpose of this study is not the acquisition of property or services for the direct benefit or use by the Federal Government, but rather to accomplish a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized the Legislative Authorities in ARTICLE II. This agreement fulfills the Public Purpose of support and economic stimulation for the following reasons:  Projects will engage recipients, partners, communities, and/or visitors in shared environmental stewardship.  Projects will promote greater public and private participation in historic preservation programs and activities. The project builds resource stewardship ethics in its participants.  The information, products and/or services identified or developed by projects will be shared through a variety of strategies to increase public awareness, knowledge and support for historic preservation and stewardship of the nation’s cultural and historical heritage.  Projects will support the Government’s objective to provide opportunities for youth to learn about the environment by spending time working on projects in National Parks. The NPS receives the indirect benefit of completing conservation projects.  Projects will motivate youth participants to become involved in the natural, cultural and /or historical resource protection of their communities and beyond.  Students gain “real world” or hands-on experience outside of the classroom of natural, cultural and/or historical resource projects.  The scientific community and/or researchers external to NPS gains by new knowledge provided through research and related results dissemination of natural, cultural and/or historical resource information.  Projects assist in the creation, promotion, facilitation, and/or improvement of the public’s understanding of natural, cultural, historic, recreational and other aspects of areas such as ecological conservation areas, and state and local parks. For performance under this cooperative agreement, the regulations set forth in 2 CFR, Part 200, supersedes OMB Circulars A–21 (2 CFR 220), A–87 (2 CFR 225), A–110, and A–122 (2 CFR 230); Circulars A–89, A–102, and A–133; and the guidance in Circular A–50 on Single Audit Act follow–up apply. The Cooperator shall adhere to 2 CFR, Part 200 in its entirety in addition to any terms and conditions of the master agreement not superseded by 2 CFR 200, as well as the terms and conditions set forth in this agreement. In the event of a conflict between the original terms of the master agreement and 2 CFR, Part 200, relating to this task agreement, 2 CFR, Part 200 shall take precedence.

  • Aims and Objectives 8.1 The aims and objectives of the Agreement are to: • Improve the productivity, efficiency and effectiveness of the operational areas of the SAMFS. • Provide for continuous service improvement. • Ensure ongoing co-operation between the parties. • Provide for wage increases in accordance with Clause 14 of the Agreement. • Provide for the implementation of ongoing reform initiatives.