№ lp_1_2_27121
File format: docx
Character count: 23708
File size: 314 KB
This document provides recommendations for the use of COVID-19 vaccines in Australia, detailing the criteria for different population groups and the evidence supporting these recommendations, based on evolving clinical and epidemiological data.
Year:
2023
Region / city:
Australia
Topic:
COVID-19 vaccines
Document type:
Clinical guidance
Organization / institution:
Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI)
Author:
Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI)
Target audience:
Healthcare professionals, general public
Period of validity:
Ongoing
Approval date:
October 2023
Date of changes:
Multiple updates since February 2021
Price: 8 / 10 USD
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
Don’t have cryptocurrency yet?
You can still complete your purchase in a few minutes:- Buy Crypto in a trusted app (Coinbase, Kraken, Cash App or any similar service).
- In the app, tap Send.
- Select network, paste our wallet address.
- Send the exact amount shown above.
The final amount may vary slightly depending on the payment method.
The file will be sent to the email address provided at checkout within 24 hours.
The product description is provided for reference. Actual content and formatting may differ slightly.
Year:
2025
Region / city:
Global
Topic:
Vaccine Policy, Maternal Health, Group B Streptococcus
Document type:
WHO Guidance
Institution:
World Health Organization (WHO)
Author:
WHO ECVP
Target audience:
Policymakers, Vaccine Developers, Public Health Authorities
Period of validity:
Ongoing
Approval date:
March 11, 2025
Date of changes:
Not specified
Year:
2024
Region / city:
Global
Topic:
COVID-19 Vaccines
Document type:
Report
Author:
World Health Organization (WHO)
Target audience:
Health professionals, regulatory authorities
Approval date:
16 January 2024
Modification date:
N/A
Contextual description:
A report listing COVID-19 vaccines evaluated under the WHO EUL/PQ process, including details on manufacturers, vaccine types, shelf lives, and approval dates.
Year:
2026
Jurisdiction:
Victoria, Australia
Document type:
Report form
Subject:
Vaccine cold chain breach reporting
Issuing authority:
Department of Health, Victorian Government
Program:
Immunisation Program
Applicable vaccines:
Government funded vaccines and immunisation products
Target users:
Immunisation providers
Scope:
Cold chain breach events excluding delivery incidents
Temperature range reference:
+2°C to +8°C
Reporting method:
Email submission to Immunisation Program
Publication date:
January 2026
Publisher:
State of Victoria, Australia
Copyright holder:
Department of Health, Victoria
Note:
Year
Region / City:
Alabama
Theme:
Vaccine management, immunization program
Document Type:
Vaccine management plan
Organization / Institution:
Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH)
Author:
Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH)
Target Audience:
VFC providers, immunization staff
Effective Period:
Ongoing
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Victoria, Australia
Topic:
Immunisation
Document Type:
Official Information
Author:
Department of Health, State of Victoria
Target Audience:
Healthcare professionals, parents, and individuals requiring immunisation information
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
August 2024
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Massachusetts
Topic:
Meningococcal disease, Vaccination requirements
Document type:
Health advisory
Institution:
Massachusetts Department of Public Health
Author:
Massachusetts Department of Public Health
Target audience:
College and residential school students, Parents and legal guardians
Period of validity:
Ongoing
Approval date:
Not specified
Amendment date:
Not specified
Year:
2025
Region / city:
Victoria, Australia
Subject:
Immunisation, Vaccines
Document type:
Health guideline
Organ / institution:
Department of Health and Human Services, Victorian Government
Author:
Victorian Government
Target audience:
Healthcare professionals, general public, parents, caregivers
Period of validity:
Until 2025
Approval date:
July 2025
Date of amendments:
Not specified
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Northern Ireland
Topic:
COVID-19 vaccination, mRNA vaccines
Document Type:
Protocol
Organization / Institution:
Strategic Planning and Performance Group (SPPG), Public Health Agency (PHA)
Author:
Dr. Louise Herron, Mrs. Deirdre Ward, Mrs. Kathryn Turner
Target Audience:
Healthcare professionals administering COVID-19 mRNA vaccines
Period of Validity:
3 April 2025 to 30 June 2025
Approval Date:
3 April 2025
Note:
Change History
Version 1.0:
New national protocol for COVID-19 vaccines (adults) - 5 April 2024
Version 2.0:
Updated to reflect change in vaccine antigenic content - 16 September 2024
Version 3.0:
Updated eligibility criteria for Spring 2025 - 6 March 2025
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Wisconsin
Theme:
Public Health, Vaccination Programs
Document Type:
Provider Agreement
Organization:
Department of Health Services, Division of Public Health
Author:
Department of Health Services
Target Audience:
Health Care Providers, Medical Directors
Period of Validity:
Annual Enrollment
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Amendments:
Not specified
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Europe
Topic:
Access to medicines, hormones, healthcare for trans and gender-diverse people
Document Type:
Analytical study
Organ / Institution:
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
Author:
Transgender Europe (TGEU), ILGA-Europe
Target Audience:
Policymakers, Human Rights Advocates, Health Professionals
Period of validity:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of changes:
N/A
Year:
2023
Region / city:
Australia
Topic:
HPV vaccination recommendations
Document type:
Advisory report
Organization / institution:
Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI)
Author:
Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI)
Target audience:
Healthcare professionals, policy makers, the general public
Validity period:
Ongoing
Approval date:
30 January 2023
Amendment date:
30 January 2023
Year:
2020
Region / city:
Global
Topic:
COVID-19, Clinical Trials, Remote Monitoring, Data Verification
Document Type:
Guide/Playbook
Organization:
European Medicines Agency (EMA)
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Clinical Trial Monitors, Healthcare Professionals, Regulatory Agencies
Period of Action:
Ongoing during COVID-19 pandemic
Approval Date:
July 2020
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Live Attenuated Vaccines: Avoid Use In Those Who Are Clinically Immunosuppressed, Including Neonates
Year:
2016
Region / City:
Wales
Topic:
Vaccination, Immunosuppression
Document Type:
Medical/Health Advisory
Organization:
NHS Wales
Author:
Dr Chris Jones
Target Audience:
Healthcare professionals, General practitioners, Paediatricians, Oncologists, Rheumatologists, Immunologists, Nurses, Pharmacists, Medical Directors
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
4 May 2016
Modification Date:
Not specified
Contextual Description:
Medical advisory document warning healthcare professionals about the risks of live attenuated vaccines for immunosuppressed individuals, especially neonates and elderly patients.
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Global
Subject:
Procurement
Document Type:
Bidding Document
Organization:
The World Bank
Author:
The World Bank
Target Audience:
Bidders, Contractors, Procurement Officers
Period of Validity:
N/A
Approval Date:
June 2021
Date of Changes:
June 2021
Year:
2017
Sector:
Health
Goods covered:
Pharmaceuticals, Vaccines, Condoms
Document type:
Standard Procurement Document
Procurement stage:
Prequalification
Procurement method:
Request for Bids
Issuing organization:
World Bank
Applicable regulations:
Procurement Regulations for IPF Borrowers
Financing sources:
IBRD, IDA
Initial issue:
July 2016
Revision dates:
July 2016; January 2017; October 2017
Geographic applicability:
World Bank-financed projects
Legal framework reference:
Procurement Regulations for IPF Borrowers, July 2016 as amended
Intended users:
Borrowers and implementing agencies
Copyright status:
Copyrighted; non-commercial use only
) and join the S1NET. For guides with in depth examinations of performance measure definitions, go to:
https://www.milsuite.mil/book/docs/DOC-129783
Table of Contents (Hyperlinks to Sections):
Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ OER Narratives: Notes, Rules, and Instructions OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: Negative Comment Rules Referred OERs Narrative Comment Examples Block a. APFT and HT/WT Block b. Overall Performance Block c. Character (to include SHARP comments) Block d. Presence Block e. Intellect Block f. Leads Block g. Develops Block h. Achieves Senior Rater Potential Senior Rater Narrative Examples Senior Rater Narrative Comment Examples (for potential, promotion, school, etc.) Successive Assignments Other SR Comments (explanations of anything unusual about OER) Effective Words for Evaluations JUNIOR OFFICER PLATE (DA FORM 67-10-1) NOTE: 2LTs who have NOT completed BOLC, will not receive an OER until they complete BOLC (AC and ARNG; USAR officers can receive an OER before completing BOLC). The FROM date will be their commissioning date. All time until their BOLC graduation will be NONRATED on their first OER. OER PROFILING: OERs: Rater and Senior Rater Profiles are CONSTRAINED, meaning Officers are only allowed to grant 49% of each rank they rate with either an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). HOWEVER, if you have an immature profile, and have only just begun rating/senior rating Officers of a certain rank, you are allowed a ONE TIME option of giving one of the first two evaluations you make at a particular grade, an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). OER (OER SUPPORT FORM) PART III: Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ (blocks a., b., and c.): Refer to DA PAM 611-21 (https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/smartbookdapam611-21
) and DA PAM 600-3 (Commissioned Officer Professional Development and Career Management), to assist in the development of PART III, block d. As a minimum, the duty description will include pr:
- Number of personnel supervised, - Amount of resources under the rated officer’s control, - Scope of responsibilities. 3) Descriptions must be clear and concise with emphasis on specific functions required. 4) Note conditions unique to the assignment; e.g. RA officers assigned to FT support duties with RC units or USAR officers assigned to RA units OER NARRATIVES: Notes, Rules, and Instructions Rater and Senior Rater Narratives: - Requires candor and courage; frank and accurate assessment. - Quantify officer’s value relative to peers and do so in concert with rater/senior rater box check. - Are short; tell a simple story about the quality of officer being evaluated. - Are interesting and compelling. - Are looked at by selection board members when they are looking for in-depth information about a rated officer’s performance and potential. - Numbers; 1-10, write them out (e.g. one, two, ten). 11 or higher, write the number; e.g. 11, 15, 105. Exception, when a 1-10 is WITH an 11 or higher; e.g. “5 tool kits with 20 tools each.” - Fashion the narrative to the officer; double check use of “he/his” vs. “she/hers.” - Awards: Awards and/or special recognition received during the rating period may be cited in evaluation comments (for example, “received the Humanitarian Service Medal” or “named the Instructor of the Year”). - Raters and SR CAN use the officer’s name in the narrative; e.g. “1LT Joe was ….” Rater and Rater Narratives: - Focus on PERFORMANCE; explaining what the rated officer did and how well he/she did it. - Focus on specifics to quantify and qualify performance. - Raters should advocate the rated officer to the SR. - When there is no SR (due to lack of qualifications), rater’s narrative provides the input on both performance and potential. Senior Rater (SR) and SR Narrative (see SR Rater Narrative section for examples): - Focus on POTENTIAL, 3-5 years out (promotions, command, school, & assignments). - Can amplify box checks by using the narrative to clearly send the appropriate message to selection boards. - CANNOT mention Box Check. - Additional information for when SR is also Rater can be found in DA PAM 623-3, pg. 26, “DA Form 67–10–1, part VI: block c—Senior Rater Narrative.” OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: - School/Course Comments: Bullets about how a Soldier did in a school or course are ONLY allowed if that school did not produce an AER/DA Form 1059. - Narratives are not a laundry list of superlatives – more is not necessarily better. - Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. - Excessive use of technical acronyms, or phrases not commonly recognized. - Techniques aimed at making specific words, phrases, or sentences stand out from the rest of the narrative; e.g. excessive use of capital letters; unnecessary quotation marks; repeated use of exclamation points; wide spacing between selected words, phrases, or sentences to include double spacing within a paragraph or between paragraphs. - Inappropriate references to box checks; e.g “Would be TOP BLOCK if profile allowed” or “absolutely far exceeded the standard”. - Trying to quantify (e.g. “top 2% of my captains”) with a small population. - Stay in your lane/level; avoid comments like “Best 1LT in the Army” unless you’re the Army CoS. - Stating “the best ever”; having 10 in the population, 50 in the profile. - Using overused phrases and clichés that are counterproductive or overused; e.g. stellar, historic, “delivered a dazzling performance,” “hit the ground running,” consummate professional, and unlimited potential. - Using specific selection board-type language. Examples of this include, “definitely a 6+ Soldier”. - Don’t exaggerate; “If I could prove it, CPT X is an LTC disguised as a CPT.” - Be mindful of what IS NOT said; it can have the same impact as what is said; e.g. NOT having numbers, or quantifiable points. - Don’t say the sa
Note:
en
Topic:
Officer Evaluation, Narrative Guidelines
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Raters, Senior Raters
Note:
and the site visit team chair eight (8) weeks prior to the site visit)(4.2024)
Year:
2024
Region / City:
N/A
Theme:
Accreditation
Document Type:
Schedule Template
Organization / Institution:
ARC-PA
Author:
N/A
Target Audience:
Program administrators, Site visit team
Period of Validity:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Modification Date:
N/A
Year:
2022
Organizations:
Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE), Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE), East Bay Community Energy (EBCE)
Document Type:
Code Amendment Recommendations
Scope:
Residential and Nonresidential EV Charging Requirements
Version Dates:
May 11, 2022; July 8, 2022; September 2022; October 2022
Target Audience:
Local jurisdictions and code administrators
Reference:
2022 Title 24 Part 11 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen)
Topics:
EV Charging Stations, EV Ready Spaces, Direct Current Fast Charging, Automatic Load Management Systems, Multifamily and Nonresidential Buildings
URL:
BayAreaReachCodes.Org
Year:
2022
Region / city:
California
Theme:
Water Quality, Environmental Assessment
Document Type:
Technical Report
Organization / Institution:
Caltrans
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Environmental regulators, project managers
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Idaho
Topic:
Conservation, Big Game Species
Document Type:
Guideline
Agency:
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG)
Author:
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
Target Audience:
Wildlife managers, conservationists, land management authorities
Effective Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified