№ lp_1_2_25666
File format: docx
Character count: 114179
File size: 1095 KB
This document outlines the data specifications for Tertiary Education Organisations (TEOs) for reporting via the Single Data Return (SDR) and Indicative Data Return (IND) systems, including validation rules and data classifications.
Year:
2025
Region / city:
New Zealand
Subject:
Tertiary Education Data Reporting
Document type:
Technical Specification
Organ / institution:
Tertiary Education Commission (TEC)
Author:
Tertiary Education Commission (TEC)
Target audience:
Tertiary education organisations (TEOs)
Period of validity:
From 08 July 2025
Approval date:
08 July 2025
Date of changes:
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:
2019
Region / City:
Massachusetts
Topic:
Trauma Registry, Data Collection
Document Type:
Technical Specification
Organization:
Bureau of Health Care Safety and Quality, Massachusetts Department of Public Health
Author:
Bureau of Health Care Safety and Quality
Target Audience:
Medical professionals, health departments, trauma centers
Effective Period:
October 1, 2016 – September 30, 2018
Approval Date:
October 2019
Revision Date:
Multiple revisions until 2016
Applicable Regulations:
Massachusetts Trauma Registry regulations
Data Submission Requirements:
XML format
Data Transmission Specifications:
XML schema, file submission guidelines
Data File Format:
XML
Data Quality Standards:
Trauma data validation, error handling
Trauma Data Code Tables:
Included in specification
Trauma Data Record Specification:
Detailed in the document
Year:
2024
Region / city:
United Kingdom
Theme:
Organic food certification
Document type:
Form
Organization / institution:
Soil Association
Author:
Soil Association
Target audience:
Companies submitting products for certification
Effective period:
From September 2025
Approval date:
Not specified
Amendment date:
March 2024
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Global
Topic:
3GPP Specifications
Document Type:
Technical Report
Organization:
3GPP
Author:
Huawei
Target Audience:
Technical professionals involved in 3GPP specifications
Period of validity:
N/A
Approval Date:
15th January 2026
Change Date:
N/A
Year:
2020
Region / city:
Australia
Topic:
Biosimilar medicine submission
Document type:
Pharmaceutical submission
Organization / institution:
Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC)
Author:
Maxx Pharma Pty Ltd
Target audience:
Healthcare professionals, regulatory bodies
Period of validity:
Ongoing
Approval date:
November 2022
Modification date:
November 2022
Year:
2021
Region / City:
West and Central Africa
Topic:
Electricity, Governance, Institutional Strengthening, Africa
Document Type:
Report
Organization:
European Union, African Union Commission
Author:
Dr. Dimitris Papastefanakis, Dr. William Gboney, Dr. George Kyriakarakos, Mr. Jian Bani
Target Audience:
Policy makers, energy sector professionals
Period of Validity:
2021-2040
Approval Date:
August 31, 2021
Date of Revisions:
N/A
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Australia
Subject:
Chronic migraine, medicinal product submission
Document type:
Submission for PBS listing
Organization:
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Australia Pty. Limited
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Health professionals, pharmaceutical regulatory bodies
Period of validity:
Not specified
Date of approval:
2 July 2018
Date of amendments:
November 2023
Year:
2015
Region / City:
Sacramento, California
Theme:
Education, Teacher Credentialing
Document Type:
Program Standards
Agency:
Commission on Teacher Credentialing
Author:
Commission on Teacher Credentialing
Target Audience:
Teacher candidates, educators, educational institutions
Effective Period:
Ongoing, with updates as of July 2024
Approval Date:
December 2015
Revision Date:
July 2024
Note:
Year
Theme:
Theatre Education
Document Type:
Course Matrix
Target Audience:
Teacher Candidates
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Maryland
Topic:
Mortgage Deed of Trust
Document Type:
Legal Instrument
Authority / Institution:
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Lenders, Notaries
Period of Effect:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
07/2021
Modification Date:
06/2025, 09/2025
Year:
2026
Document Type:
Procurement document
Jurisdiction:
United Kingdom
Regulation:
UK General Data Protection Regulation; Data Protection Act 2018
Version:
1.3
Sections:
Part I – Information concerning the procurement procedure and public body; Part II – Information concerning the bidder; Part III – Information on reliance on other entities; Part IV – Selection criteria; Part V – Reduction of qualified candidates; Part VI – Declarations and signature
Year:
2026
Region / city:
United States
Theme:
Housing Assistance, Housing Programs
Document Type:
Notice
Organization / institution:
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Author:
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research, HUD
Target Audience:
Public Housing Agencies, Housing Assistance Stakeholders
Period of Action:
Fiscal Year 2026
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
) 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
Type of Instrument:
Mortgage - One Hundred Eighty
Instrument Revision Date:
07/2021
Day Redemption:
10/2024 (Authorized Change 12 revised)
Use This Document For:
SD
Lien Type:
First
Product Type:
All
Property Type:
All, except cooperatives
Occupancy Type:
All
Note:
Required Changes
The following changes MUST always be made to this document:
To comply with the requirements of the Truth in Lending Act and Regulation Z (12 C.F.R. § 1026.36(g)), lenders MUST add the name of the mortgage loan originator (LO) and NMLSR ID number for both an organization and individual to the last page of the security instrument.
Year:
2021
Region / City:
South Carolina
Topic:
Mortgage Agreement
Document Type:
Legal Instrument
Organization / Institution:
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Lenders, Borrowers
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
October 2024
Contextual Description:
Legal document outlining requirements and options for lenders in South Carolina regarding a standard mortgage instrument for single-family properties, including modifications and authorized changes.
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Ohio
Topic:
Mortgage
Document Type:
Uniform Instrument
Author:
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac
Target Audience:
Lenders, Mortgage Professionals
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
10/2024
Contextual Description:
Document providing a standard uniform mortgage instrument with specific requirements and changes for lenders in Ohio.
Form number:
3034
Type of instrument:
Deed of Trust
Uniform instrument program:
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac
State:
North Carolina
Property type:
Single-family residential
Lien type:
First lien
Product type:
All
Occupancy type:
All
Original revision date:
07/2021
Instrument last modified:
10/2024
Authorized changes referenced:
Change 12, Change 13
Applicable law references:
Truth in Lending Act; Regulation Z (12 C.F.R. § 1026.36(g))
Permitted parties:
Lender, Borrower, MERS
Filing formats referenced:
Master Form, Short Form
Intended use context:
Mortgage loan security instrument