№ lp_1_2_46853
File format: docx
Character count: 7513
File size: 26 KB
Note:
Year
Context:
A document explaining the policies, benefits, and considerations related to teleworking, outlining responsibilities for both employees and employers.
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.
Note:
Year
Subject:
Telework arrangement
Document Type:
Agreement
Institution / Organization:
University
Contextual description:
Agreement outlining the terms and conditions for hybrid or occasional telework for employees, including equipment provision and expectations.
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Washington
Theme:
Telework, Employment
Document Type:
Agreement
Organization / Institution:
University of Washington
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Employees, Managers
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Year:
2025
Region / City:
California
Topic:
Telework, Disability Accommodation, Employee Rights
Document Type:
FAQ
Organization / Institution:
ACSED
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
State employees in California
Effective Period:
Starting July 1, 2025
Approval Date:
March 3, 2025
Amendment Date:
March 13, 2025
Organization:
Insert Agency Name
Document Type:
Policy Statement
Subject:
Teleworking and Remote Work Assignments
Scope:
All agency offices, departments, divisions, and employees
Authority:
Agency Head or Appointing Authority
Implementation Responsibility:
Department Directors or Designees
Coverage:
Employees Approved for Telework
Key Sections:
Policy Statement; Purpose; Scope; Policy Details; Program Guidelines; Work Hours; Worksite; Equipment and Supplies
Cost Provisions:
Telework Assignments Intended to Be Cost Neutral
Liability Provisions:
Agency Not Liable for Personal Property Damage at Alternate Worksite
Year:
2020
Region / City:
Maryland
Theme:
Telework, COVID-19
Document Type:
Guidelines
Organization:
Notre Dame of Maryland University
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
NDMU employees
Period of validity:
During COVID-19 pandemic
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Context:
Temporary guidelines outlining the terms and conditions for teleworking at Notre Dame of Maryland University during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Year:
2021
Region / city:
Not specified
Topic:
Employee retention, flexible work arrangements, telework
Document type:
Research paper
Institution:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Employers, HR professionals, researchers
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Modification date:
Not specified
Year:
2023
Region / City:
University-wide
Topic:
Telework Guidelines and Procedures
Document Type:
Internal Memo
Organization:
University
Author:
Human Resources Department
Target Audience:
Supervisors and Employees
Approval Date:
N/A
Modification Date:
N/A
Note:
Year
Year:
2020
Region / City:
Wake County, North Carolina, USA
Topic:
Cybersecurity and Remote Work
Document Type:
Guidelines / Information Notice
Organization:
Wake County Information Services
Author:
Wake County Information Services Security Team
Target Audience:
Wake County employees
Effective Period:
During the coronavirus outbreak
Approval Date:
Not specified
Last Updated:
Not specified
Distribution Method:
Internal county network, email notifications
Year:
2014
Region / City:
Not specified
Topic:
Citation and referencing
Document type:
Guide
Organization:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Students, researchers
Effective period:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Amendment date:
Not specified
Note:
Year
Note:
Year
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Jersey
Subject:
Employment law, employee rights
Document type:
Contract, legal terms
Institution:
Employment Tribunal, JACS
Author:
Unknown
Target audience:
Employers, employees in Jersey
Period of validity:
Indefinite
Approval date:
September 2025
Amendment date:
None
) 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:
United States
Topic:
Informed Consent, Research Ethics
Document Type:
Research Guidelines
Organization:
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Human Research Protections
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Researchers, Institutional Review Board (IRB) members
Validity Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Last Update:
Not specified
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Colorado, Denver
Institution:
Metropolitan State University of Denver
Campus:
Auraria Campus
Topic:
Immigration enforcement on campus
Document type:
FAQ and guidance
Issuing body:
Immigrant Services Program
Related authorities:
Auraria Campus Police Department; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Department of Homeland Security
Audience:
Staff, faculty, students
Legal framework:
FERPA; SEVIS
Period referenced:
2025 and beyond
Contacts provided:
Immigrant Services Program; University Legal Counsel; Colorado Rapid Response Network; International Student Coordinator
Note:
Year
Topic:
Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Functions
Document Type:
Legal Analysis
Target Audience:
Legal Professionals, Administrative Authorities
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Glasgow
Topic:
Social Action, Minority Ethnic Communities, Community Involvement
Document Type:
Report
Organization / Institution:
Social Action Inquiry Scotland
Author:
Graham Ogilvie
Target Audience:
Local community members, researchers, policymakers
Period of Action:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
2021
Date of Amendments:
N/A
Note:
Context