№ lp_1_11868
File format: docx
Character count: 6232
File size: 720 KB
Application form for the KT Challenge supporting evidence-based practice projects in healthcare settings.
Year:
2023
Region / City:
British Columbia, Canada
Topic:
Knowledge Translation, Healthcare
Document Type:
Application Form
Organization / Institution:
Vancouver Coastal Health, Providence Health Care, BC Cancer
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Clinicians in PHC, VCH, BC Cancer
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Note:
Contextual Description
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:
2023
Region / City:
Clacks
Theme:
Youth Engagement, Volunteering, Education, Support Services
Document Type:
Meeting Notes
Organization / Institution:
CTSI, Reachout, DYW Forth Valley, FVC, TCV, CERT, SAMH, SDS
Author:
Chris White, Lesley Arthur, Michelle Carr, Helen Young, Josh Thornhill, Lucy Hawkins, Claire Murphy, Jean Hamilton
Target Audience:
Professionals working with youth
Period of Action:
November 2023
Date of Approval:
2nd November 2023
Date of Changes:
None
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Quimper
Topic:
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, Board meetings
Document Type:
Meeting Minutes
Organization / Institution:
Quimper Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
Author:
Gary Forbes, Julia Cochrane, Dean Carr, Sarah Walker, Peg Hunter, Roseanna Almaee, Joanna Sanders, Bill Testerman
Target Audience:
Board members, congregation members
Period of Validity:
August 28, 2025, meeting
Approval Date:
August 28, 2025
Date of Amendments:
N/A
Year:
2020
Region / City:
Birmingham
Subject:
Education Finance and School Funding
Document Type:
Meeting Minutes
Organization:
Birmingham City Council
Author:
Richard Green, James Hill, Maxine Charles, Debbie James, Mike White, and others
Target Audience:
Schools Forum members, Education and Local Authority Representatives
Effective Period:
2020-2021
Approval Date:
10th December 2020
Amendment Date:
N/A
Date:
May 8, 2022
Time:
4pm
Event:
Easter 4
Type:
Christian worship service liturgy
Organization:
AbbeyChurch
Location:
Traditional lands of the lək̓ʷəŋən People (Esquimalt and Songhees Nation)
Theme:
Easter, resurrection of Christ, faith, community, justice
Content elements:
prayers, hymn lyrics, scripture readings, sermon, creed
Scriptural references:
Psalm 9:9–14; 2 Corinthians 4:7–12; Luke 7:18–23
Authors and contributors:
Meagan Crosby-Shearer; John Updike; Wilda Gafney; Latifah Alattas; Liz Vice; Owen Stroud
Language:
English
Religious tradition:
Christianity
Denomination context:
Inclusive Christian community
Intended audience:
Congregation and visitors of AbbeyChurch
Rights and credits:
Photo by Iza Gawrych; music ©2020 Integrity’s Alleluia! Music and others
Year:
2021
Region / City:
United States
Topic:
Tax preparation, survey
Document Type:
Survey
Author:
IRS
Target Audience:
Tax preparers who did not attend the Due Diligence webinar
Period of Action:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2014
Region / City:
Geneva
Topic:
Revision of TGP/8, DUS Trial Design and Data Analysis
Document Type:
Draft Document
Organization / Institution:
International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV)
Author:
UPOV Office
Target Audience:
Technical Committees, Working Parties for Vegetables, Agricultural Crops, Fruit Crops, Ornamental Plants, and others involved in plant variety protection
Period of Validity:
Ongoing (as of 2014)
Approval Date:
May 27, 2014
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Virginia
Theme:
Early Intervention, Disability Education
Document Type:
State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report
Agency / Organization:
U.S. Department of Education
Author:
Virginia Department of Education
Target Audience:
State agencies, early intervention service providers, policymakers
Period of Validity:
2023-2025
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Revisions:
N/A
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Hawaii
Subject:
Early Intervention for Children with Disabilities
Document Type:
Government Report
Agency:
U.S. Department of Education
Author:
Hawaii State Department of Health
Target Audience:
Public, Policy Makers, Educators, Healthcare Providers
Period of Validity:
2023-2024
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Connecticut
Topic:
Early Childhood Intervention
Document Type:
Report
Agency:
Office of Early Childhood (OEC)
Author:
Office of Early Childhood (OEC)
Target Audience:
State and local education agencies, early childhood service providers
Effective Period:
FFY 2023
Approval Date:
N/A
Amendment 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
Application deadline:
April 14, 2025, 4:00 pm
Program:
Knowledge Translation (KT) Challenge
Type of document:
Application form
Offering organizations:
Providence Health Care; Vancouver Coastal Health; BC Cancer; Northern Health; Fraser Health
Eligible applicants:
Clinicians in nursing, allied health, and medical staff
Geographic scope:
British Columbia, Canada
Submission method:
Email submission
Submission email:
[email protected]
Project duration:
Up to 2 years
Required sections:
Lay Summary; Need and Evidence Base; Implementation Strategies; Evaluation Plan; Work Plan and Dissemination Plan; Budget; Mentor Contribution; Patient Family Partner Contribution
Page limit:
Five pages, double-spaced, 12-point font
Required approvals:
Team Lead; Team Members; Manager; Mentor; Patient Family Partner
Funding components:
Personnel; Equipment; Services
Source type:
Institutional program application documentation
Year:
Not specified
Region / city:
Not specified
Topic:
Responsible Business Conduct (RBC), Sustainability
Document type:
Plan
Organization / institution:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Companies implementing responsible business practices
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Date of amendments:
Not specified
Year:
2022
Region / City:
Nevada
Topic:
Special Education, Disability Rights
Document Type:
Government Report
Agency:
U.S. Department of Education
Author:
Nevada Department of Education
Target Audience:
State Educational Agencies, Local Educational Agencies, Educators, Stakeholders
Period of Validity:
Reporting on FFY 2022
Approval Date:
February 1, 2024
Date of Last Changes:
June 2023
Year:
2018
Region / City:
Washington, D.C.
Theme:
Due diligence, private equity
Document Type:
Questionnaire
Institution / Organization:
Institutional Limited Partners Association (ILPA)
Author:
Institutional Limited Partners Association (ILPA)
Target Audience:
General Partners, Limited Partners, Placement Agents
Period of Validity:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
September 2018
Date of Changes:
September 2018
Year:
2024
Region / City:
United States
Theme:
Scholarships for English Majors
Document Type:
Application Form
Organization / Institution:
University of Illinois
Author:
Nancy Rahn
Target Audience:
Undergraduate students majoring in English, Creative Writing, and Teaching of English
Period of Action:
Fall Semester 2023 - Spring Semester 2024
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Contextual description:
Application form for undergraduate scholarships available to English majors at the University of Illinois, requiring personal, academic, and faculty recommendation information.
Project Number:
15100042-1-2021
Amendment/Modification Number:
XXX1
Contract ID Code:
36C257
Issued By:
Department of Veterans Affairs, RPO West - NCO 17, Health Care Resources Branch, 111495 Turner Road, El Paso TX 79936-1372
Administered By:
Nesha Nelson - (915) 217-1250, [email protected]
Effective Date:
1/31/2022 5:00 PM ET
Solicitation Number:
20R000201-15-2020
Contract/Order Number:
36C257
Type of Document:
Contract Amendment / Modification
Authority:
FAR 43.103(b)
Purpose:
Update FAR Clauses and Provisions per FAC 2021-02 and extend solicitation due date
Reference Date of Original Solicitation:
1/31/2021
Applicable Regulations:
FAR 52.212-4, FAR 52.202-1, FAR 52.233-1
Jurisdiction:
United States of America
Year:
2016
Region / city:
United States
Theme:
Dispute Resolution under IDEA
Document Type:
Report
Institution:
Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
Author:
Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
Target audience:
State education agencies, educational staff, policymakers
Period of action:
2021 and onwards
Approval date:
Not specified
Date of amendments:
Not specified
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Global
Topic:
Investment Funds Distribution
Document Type:
Questionnaire
Institution / Entity:
N/A
Author:
N/A
Target Audience:
Fund Sponsors/Manufacturers, Financial Institutions
Period of Action:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Amendment Date:
N/A
Year:
2023
Note:
Region / City
Year:
2024
Region / City:
York
Topic:
Patient Participation, Public Consultation, Health Inequalities
Document Type:
Meeting Minutes
Organization:
Woolpack House
Author:
Murray Rose (Chair), Kathy Gibson (Minutes), Wendy Stevens, Steff McGurk
Target Audience:
PPG members, Practice staff, Public participants
Period of Action:
April 2024
Approval Date:
8th April 2024
Date of Changes:
N/A