Ranking Process Clause Samples

The Ranking Process clause establishes the method by which proposals, bids, or candidates are evaluated and ordered according to predetermined criteria. Typically, this involves assigning scores or rankings based on factors such as price, quality, or compliance with requirements, and may include steps like shortlisting or tie-breaking procedures. Its core practical function is to ensure a transparent and systematic approach to selection, reducing ambiguity and potential disputes by clearly outlining how decisions are made.
Ranking Process. A. The ranking process will be conducted by NRCS in coordination with FWS or NMFS, to determine eligibility of the proposed enrollment area and develop the preliminary restoration plan.
View SourceView Similar (4)
Ranking Process. A. The ranking process will be conducted as part of the onsite field investigations completed by NRCS (with the landowner and FWS, when available). NRCS may provide an opportunity for input from the State wildlife agency and the Conservation District (CD), to determine eligibility of the proposed enrollment area and develop the preliminary restoration plan and preliminary WRPO. B. Once the field evaluations are completed, the field office staff or the Wetland Implementation Team will submit the following information to the State office (see subpart J of this manual for a sample application checklist for submittal to State office): (1) Application for participation in the Wetlands Reserve Program (see subpart J of this manual, section 514.92) (2) Copies of the landowner, and land eligibility information (see subpart B of this manual, sections 514.12 and 514.14) (3) Completed ranking form signed by an NRCS representative, including the landowner’s signature when available and input from FWS, CD, and State Wildlife Agency representative, if provided (4) The amount of any voluntary landowner offer to accept a reduced per acre easement value, documented in writing and signed by the landowner (5) Completed “Hazardous Substance Checklist” (see exhibit 514.95) (6) Preliminary Certificate of Inspection and Possession assessing the potential presence of offsite and onsite conditions that would prevent successful restoration or pose a unacceptable risk to NRCS holding an easement interest (see exhibit 514.97) (7) A completed “Landowner Disclosure Worksheet” (optional but recommended) (see exhibit 514.92D). (8) National Environmental Policy Act documentation (Environmental Evaluation Worksheet, Form NRCS-CPA-52). (9) Other items specified on state application checklists, such as documentation of water rights. (10) Partnership pledges to provide financial assistance. (11) Plat map showing location of land. (12) Preliminary Wetlands Reserve Plan of Operations (WRPO), including— (i) A clear objective and understanding about desired outcome of restoration activities. (ii) An aerial plan map showing boundaries of offered acres, access right-of-way, existing land use, conservation practices, the location of planned restoration practices, planned habitats, and planned land use. (iii) List of planned conservation practices, measures and activities, estimated quantities, and estimated costs. (iv) Soils map.
View SourceView Similar (4)
Ranking Process. A. The professional leave committee shall rank all applications for sabbatical leave based on the following three criteria: 1. Whether the faculty are available to fulfill the applicant‘s duties during their requested period of absence. 2. Whether, and to what extent, the applicant‘s proposal promotes individual improvement, professional growth and/or the interest of the College. The following may be considered (but should not be determined exclusive) in determining merit under this criterion: a. Value of project or plan in relationship to applicant‘s instructional responsibilities; b. Value of project or plan in relationship to goals and mission of the College; c. Ability of applicant to achieve goals of project or plan based on past experience and academic background; d. Applicant‘s need for new or additional knowledge in subject field to be studied; e. Applicant‘s need for new or additional knowledge/skills in pedagogy and/or instructional technology; f. Whether the proposal consists of work toward an advanced degree; g. Evidence of support from other organizations, institutions or foundations (or persons associated with the proposed project or plan). 3. Length of time since applicant‘s last sabbatical leave (or enhancement leave under the previous contract). B. If an application for sabbatical leave proposed two or three quarters, the Professional Leave Committee shall rank each quarter of the request so that a request for multiple quarters of sabbaticals may be approved in whole or in part.
View SourceView Similar (4)
Ranking Process. A. The sabbatical leave committee shall rank all applications for sabbatical leave based on the following three criteria in the following order of importance: a. Length of time since applicant’s last sabbatical leave. b. Whether, and to what extent, the applicant’s proposal promotes individual improvement, professional growth and/or the interest of the College. The following may be considered (but should not be determined exclusive) in determining merit under the criterion: i. Value of project or plan in relationship to applicant’s instructional responsibilities; ii. Value of project or plan in relationship to goals and mission of the College; iii. Ability of applicant to achieve goals of project or plan based on past experience and academic background; iv. Applicant’s need for new or additional knowledge in subject field to be studied; v. Applicant’s need for new or additional knowledge/skills in pedagogy and/or instructional technology. vi. Whether the proposal consists of work toward an advanced degree; vii. Evidence of support from other organizations, institutions or foundations (or persons associated with the proposed project plan); B. If an application for sabbatical leave proposed two or three quarters, the Sabbatical Leave Committee shall rank each quarter of the request so that a request for multiple quarters of sabbaticals may be approved in whole or in part.
View SourceView Similar (2)
Ranking Process. The professional leave committee shall rank all applications for sabbatical leave based on the following three criteria: Whether the faculty are available to fulfill the applicant’s duties during their requested period of absence. Whether, and to what extent, the applicant’s proposal promotes individual improvement, professional growth and/or the interest of the College. The following may be considered (but should not be determined exclusive) in determining merit under this criterion: Value of project or plan in relationship to applicant’s instructional responsibilities; Value of project or plan in relationship to goals and mission of the College; Ability of applicant to achieve goals of project or plan based on past experience and academic background; Applicant’s need for new or additional knowledge in subject field to be studied; Applicant’s need for new or additional knowledge/skills in pedagogy and/or instructional technology; Whether the proposal consists of work toward an advanced degree; Evidence of support from other organizations, institutions or foundations (or persons associated with the proposed project or plan). Length of time since applicant’s last sabbatical leave (or enhancement leave under the previous contract). If an application for sabbatical leave proposed two or three quarters, the Professional Leave Committee shall rank each quarter of the request so that a request for multiple quarters of sabbaticals may be approved in whole or in part.
View Source

Related to Ranking Process

  • Bumping Procedure In the application of this Article, permanent part-time employees cannot displace permanent full-time employees or vice versa provided that permanent full-time employees who have exhausted their bumping rights hereunder and are to be laid off from work shall have the right to displace a permanent part-time employee with lesser GO seniority, within their section. Such bumping within the section may only be in a downward or lateral direction provided they are qualified, willing and able to do the work (refer to Schedule “E-I” and “E-I OFPT”). Downward shall be defined as lesser pay per hour and/or lesser hours per week (permanent full-time vs. permanent part-time). Lateral shall be defined as same pay per hour. In the application of this Article, permanent part-time employees cannot displace permanent full-time employees or vice versa provided that permanent full-time employees who have exhausted their bumping rights hereunder and are to be laid off from work, shall have the right to displace any permanent part-time employee with lesser GO Transit seniority, within their section provided they are able, willing and qualified. Due to the nature of the bumping procedure and the unpredictability of the direction and results of that bumping, the layoff must take precedent over all other normal movement of employees (i.e., standing applications). During layoffs an employee may choose to accept an open position for which he/she is qualified rather than bumping within their classification or section and should he/she elect this option, they shall retain recall rights to the original classification without loss of seniority. Where an OFPT employee who has been notified or is on layoff and currently possesses the qualifications and skills of a position they have held previously, then the employee may bump laterally or downward within their section or another section where the previously held position is identified. At the time of layoff the employee must satisfy the criteria identified in the current job description, and the employee must have satisfied the performance standards of that classification. Should the parties agree that the bumping procedure will likely cause significant movement within a classification or section, then the parties may agree to have a “master” sign-up take place which will be the sole responsibility of the Union to administer.

  • Hearing Procedures The hearing shall be held at the earliest convenient date, taking into consideration the established schedule of the Board or hearing officer and the availability of the CSEA representative, counsel and witnesses. The parties shall be notified of the time and place of the hearing after ensuring availability of all necessary parties. The employee shall be entitled to appear personally, produce evidence, and have CSEA representation. The employee shall be entitled to a public hearing if he/she demands it when the Board is hearing the appeal. 18.12.1 The complainant may also be represented by counsel. The procedure entitled "Administrative Adjudication" commencing with Government Code 11500 shall not apply to any such hearing before the Board or a hearing officer. Neither the Board nor a hearing officer shall be bound by rules of evidence used in California courts. Informality in any such hearing shall not invalidate any order or decision made or approved by the hearing officer or the Board. 18.12.2 All hearings shall be heard by a hearing officer (who shall be an attorney licensed in the State of California) except in those cases where the Board determines to hear the appeal itself. In any case in which the Board hears the appeal, the Board may use the services of its counsel or a hearing officer in ruling upon procedural questions, objections to evidence, and issues of law. However, the Board must employ separate counsel from the one presenting the case for the complainant. 18.12.3 If the appeal is heard by the Board, the Board shall affirm, modify or revoke the recommended personnel action. 18.12.4 If the appeal is heard by a hearing officer, he/she shall prepare a proposed decision in a form that may be adopted by the Board as the decision in the case. A copy of the proposed decision shall be received and filed by the Board and furnished to each party within ten days after the proposed decision is filed by the Board. After furnishing the proposed decision to each party, the Board may: 18.1.4.1 Adopt the proposed decision in its entirety. 18.1.4.2 Reduce the personnel action set forth in the proposed decision and adopt the balance of the proposed decision. 18.1.4.3 Reject a proposed reduction in personnel action, approve the disciplinary action sought by the complainant or any lesser penalty, and adopt the balance of the proposed decision. 18.1.4.4 Reject the proposed decision in its entirety. 18.12.5 If the Board rejects the proposed decision in its entirety, each party shall be notified of such action and the Board may decide the case upon the record including the transcript, with or without the taking of additional evidence, or may refer the case to the same or another hearing officer to take additional evidence. If the case is so assigned to a hearing officer, he/she shall prepare a proposed decision, as provided in item Section 18.12.4 above, upon the additional evidence and the transcript and other papers which are part of the record of the prior hearing. A copy of this proposed decision shall be furnished to each party within 10 days after the proposed decision is filed by the Board. 18.12.6 In arriving at a decision or a proposed decision on the propriety of the proposed disciplinary action, the Board or the hearing officer may consider the records of any prior disciplinary action proceedings against the employee in which a disciplinary action was ultimately sustained and any records that were contained in the employee's personnel files and introduced into evidence at the hearing.