№ lp_2_2_04628
File format: docx
Character count: 3284
File size: 17 KB
The document outlines an amendment to an act regarding the financial stability of behavioral health service and housing assistance providers in Maine, specifying contract extension processes under certain conditions.
Year:
2025-2026
Region / City:
Maine
Subject:
Behavioral Health Services, Housing Assistance
Document Type:
Legislative Amendment
Organization / Institution:
Department of Health and Human Services
Author:
Maine Senate
Target Audience:
Service Providers, Government Officials, Behavioral Health and Housing Assistance Professionals
Effective Period:
2025-2026
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
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:
2026
Region / City:
United States
Topic:
Federal procurement and contract management
Document Type:
Policy/Guidance
Agency / Institution:
GSA (General Services Administration)
Author:
GSA
Target Audience:
Contractors, Government Agencies
Period of Validity:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
N/A
Modification Date:
N/A
) 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
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Washington
Topic:
Road Safety, Litter Prevention
Document Type:
Public Awareness Campaign
Agency:
Washington State Department of Ecology, Washington State Department of Transportation
Author:
Washington State Agencies
Target Audience:
Drivers, Motorists, General Public
Effective Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Note:
Year Group
Year:
2026
Region / city:
UK
Subject:
Electric Vehicle Charge Points, Heat Pumps, and connection procedures
Document Type:
Application form
Organization / institution:
Distribution Network Operators (DNOs)
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Individuals or entities installing electric vehicle charge points (EVCP) or heat pumps (HP)
Effective Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Year:
2026
Region / city:
United States
Subject:
Government contracting
Document type:
Solicitation Guidelines
Organization / institution:
GSA
Author:
GSA
Target audience:
Contractors, procurement officers
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Amendment date:
Not specified
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Minnesota
Topic:
Language Access
Document Type:
Policy Document
Organization / Institution:
[Insert district or charter name]
Author:
[Insert district or charter name]
Target Audience:
Students, Families, School Staff
Period of Validity:
2025-2026
Approval Date:
[Insert date]
Date of Changes:
[Insert date if applicable]
Year:
Not specified
Region / City:
Not specified
Theme:
Universal Design for Learning
Document Type:
Educational Guidelines
Organization / Institution:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Educators
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Note:
Year
Topic:
Quality Management, Health and Safety, Environmental Management
Document Type:
Template
Target Audience:
Organisations implementing Integrated Management Systems
Description:
Template for assessing internal QHSE influences, linking internal factors to Quality, Health and Safety, and Environmental outcomes, while supporting alignment with ISO 9001, ISO 45001, and ISO 14001 standards.
Note:
Key accountabilities
Internal:
Relevant Reporting Manager, TFLE Work Team, TFLE Stakeholders.
External:
TFLE Stakeholders as applicable.
Decision making:
The role is accountable for delivering to the TFLE project work assignments on time and to expectations regarding quality, deliverables and outcomes.
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Hawarden
Theme:
Education, Additional Learning Needs
Document Type:
Policy
Organization / Institution:
Hawarden High School
Author:
Mrs. H Evans, Mr. P Connolly
Target Audience:
Teachers, School Staff, Parents
Effective Period:
2021-2024
Approval Date:
December 2024
Revision Date:
N/A
Note:
Year
Topic:
Health and safety, CDM regulations
Document type:
Checklist
Target audience:
Principal Designers, Project Managers, Contractors
Year:
2016
Region / City:
Geneva
Subject:
Plant Variety Protection
Document Type:
Technical Committee Report
Organization:
International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants
Author:
UPOV Secretariat
Target Audience:
UPOV members, authorities involved in plant variety examination
Validity Period:
N/A
Approval Date:
2016-03-08
Amendment Date:
N/A
Year:
2015
Region / city:
Geneva
Subject:
Macadamia
Document Type:
Draft
Author:
Experts from Australia
Target Audience:
Technical Working Party for Fruit Crops
Period of validity:
2015-08-24 to 2015-08-28
Approval Date:
2015-07-24
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Geneva
Topic:
Agricultural testing, plant varieties
Document Type:
Draft Guidelines
Organization:
International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV)
Author:
Expert from China
Target Audience:
Agricultural researchers, plant breeders
Period of Validity:
2025-05-19 to 2025-05-22
Approval Date:
2025-04-22
Amendment Date:
N/A
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Geneva
Subject:
Plant Variety Testing
Document Type:
Guidelines
Organization:
International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV)
Author:
Expert from the Netherlands
Target Audience:
Agricultural and plant variety testing professionals
Period of Effectiveness:
From 2025-10-20 to 2025-10-21
Approval Date:
2025-08-06
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
2020
Region / City:
International
Topic:
Biochemical and Molecular Markers, Plant Varieties
Document Type:
Draft
Organization / Institution:
International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV)
Author:
UPOV Office
Target Audience:
Technical Committee, Administrative and Legal Committee, and Council of UPOV
Effective Period:
2020
Approval Date:
August 10, 2020
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Context:
Guidance document outlining methods for using biochemical and molecular markers to assess distinctness, uniformity, and stability of new plant varieties for UPOV compliance.