№ files_lp_4_process_2_38169
File format: docx
Character count: 2509
File size: 24 KB
Formal amendment to a public service contract detailing extended terms, updated exhibits, and compliance adjustments for the CSB in response to the COVID-19 public health emergency.
Year:
2020
Region:
Virginia, USA
Subject:
Community Services Contract Amendment
Document Type:
Legal Agreement
Organization:
Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services
Author:
Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services and [Community Services Board Name]
Affected Period:
FY2019–FY2020
Effective Date:
July 1, 2020
Contract End Date:
December 31, 2020
Purpose:
Adjust contract terms and compliance requirements due to COVID-19
Signatories:
Alison G. Land, Commissioner; [Chairperson Name], Chairperson; [Executive Director Name], Executive Director
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:
Joplin, Missouri
Theme:
Community Development, Housing, Infrastructure
Document Type:
Action Plan
Agency / Organization:
City of Joplin, Planning, Development and Neighborhood Services
Author:
City of Joplin
Target Audience:
Local Government, Community Development Organizations
Period of Validity:
Fiscal Year 2019
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
2019
Region / city:
Georgia, USA
Topic:
Homelessness, Housing Programs
Document Type:
Policy Addendum
Organization / institution:
Georgia Balance of State Continuum of Care
Author:
Georgia Balance of State CoC
Target audience:
Project applicants for CoC funding
Period of validity:
FY2019
Approval date:
May 24, 2017 (initial approval), May 13, 2019 (updated approval)
Modification date:
June 20, 2017
Date of certification:
August 6, 2019 (renewal applicants), August 7, 2019 (new applicants)
Year:
2019
Region / city:
Berea, KY
Subject:
Membership renewal process
Document type:
Checklist
Organization:
Fahe
Author:
Fahe
Target audience:
Fahe members
Effective period:
FY2019
Approval date:
July 31, 2018
Date of changes:
N/A
Year:
2019
Region / State:
United States
Document Type:
Survey Instructions and Data Collection Guide
Organization:
North American Quitline Consortium (NAQC)
Target Audience:
State quitline coordinators and staff
Survey Period:
Fiscal Year 2019 (varies by state)
Submission Deadline:
February 28, 2020
Training Webinar Date:
December 11, 2019
Data Collection Platform:
SurveyMonkey
Content Focus:
Quitline services, budgets, utilization, and evaluation metrics
Year:
2018
Region / City:
Northeast Region, USA
Topic:
Board Meeting Minutes
Document Type:
Meeting Minutes
Organization:
Northeast Region CSI, Inc.
Author:
Bill DuBois
Target Audience:
Board Members, Chapter Directors, CSI Members
Effective Period:
FY2019
Approval Date:
August 9, 2018
Modification Date:
N/A
Year:
FY2020
Program:
Buy Local, Buy Wisconsin (BLBW) Grant Program
Statutory Authority:
93.48, Wis. Stats.
Document Type:
Grant application cover sheet and proposal template
Issuing Agency:
Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection
Division:
Division of Agricultural Development
Address:
PO Box 8911, Madison, WI 53708-8911
State:
Wisconsin
Country:
United States
Project Start Date:
June 2020 (assumed)
Required Attachments:
Past two years’ sales figures or P&L statement; two-year organizational/business budget for 2020–2021; detailed project budget; two letters of commitment
Financial Requirements:
1:1 in-kind or cash match; eligible project expenses only
Reporting Requirements:
Economic development activity including increased local food sales, new and/or retained jobs, and new investment generated
Travel Compliance:
Must follow State of Wisconsin travel guidelines
Year:
2020
Region / city:
Global
Topic:
Road Safety Research
Document type:
Application Form
Organization / institution:
GRSF
Author:
GRSF
Target audience:
Applicants for GRSF Research Program
Period of validity:
FY2020
Approval date:
N/A
Date of revisions:
N/A
Context:
Application form template for submitting company/institution information for consideration in the GRSF Research Program, focusing on road safety research and consultancy projects.
Year:
2020
Region / City:
Rockdale County, Georgia
Theme:
Education
Document Type:
Budget Report
Organization:
Rockdale County Public Schools
Author:
Keith Hull, Chief Financial Officer
Target Audience:
School Board, Educational Stakeholders
Period of Action:
FY2020
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Program Title:
Patapsco Valley Heritage Area Mini-Grant Program
Administering Organization:
Patapsco Heritage Greenway
Oversight Authority:
Maryland Heritage Areas Authority
Geographic Scope:
Patapsco Valley Heritage Area, Maryland
Fiscal Year:
FY2020
Maximum Grant Award:
$5,000
Funding Requirement:
1:1 cash match with non-state funds
Eligible Applicants:
Non-profit organizations and local jurisdictions within or benefitting the Patapsco Valley Heritage Area
Eligible Project Types:
Non-capital heritage tourism, interpretation, planning, programming, digital resources, research, marketing
Ineligible Activities:
Capital expenditures, salaries and benefits of grantee staff, alcohol
Payment Structure:
Two installments (50% upfront, 50% reimbursable upon approval of final report)
Project Completion Deadline:
June 1 of the fiscal year awarded
Final Report Deadline:
June 15 of the fiscal year awarded
Contact Person:
Lindsey Baker, Executive Director
Contact Address:
3748 Old Columbia Pike, Ellicott City, MD 21043
Contact Email:
[email protected]
Application Information:
Patapsco.org/Mini-Grants
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:
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
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