№ files_lp_3_process_7_016303
File format: docx
Character count: 3069
File size: 23 KB
A form for individuals or households to apply for food assistance under the TEFAP program, providing details on eligibility based on income and participation in other federal programs.
Year:
2024-2025
Region / City:
United States
Theme:
USDA Program, Food Assistance
Document Type:
Application Form
Agency:
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Author:
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Target Audience:
Individuals and households seeking food assistance
Eligibility:
Income-based
Approval Date:
October 1, 2024
Date of Last Update:
September 30, 2025
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:
2025
Region / City:
Massachusetts
Topic:
Emergency Food Assistance
Document Type:
State Program Plan
Agency:
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Author:
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Target Audience:
Food distribution agencies, emergency feeding organizations
Period of Validity:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
January 2025
Date of Last Revision:
January 2025
Year:
2022
Region/City:
United States
Subject:
Food Assistance, TEFAP
Document Type:
Application and Reporting Guidelines
Agency:
Food and Nutrition Service (FNS)
Author:
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Target Audience:
Applicants for TEFAP grants
Period of Effectiveness:
Until grant expiration
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Minnesota, USA
Topic:
TEFAP (The Emergency Food Assistance Program)
Document Type:
Policy
Organization / Institution:
Minnesota Department of Human Services
Author:
Minnesota Department of Human Services
Target Audience:
Food shelf staff, volunteers, and TEFAP participants
Effective Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Permanent adoption
Date of Changes:
2021
TEFAP Regulations:
USDA TEFAP regulations
SNAP Resources:
Included
Voter Registration Materials:
Included
Interpretative Services:
Included
Annual Civil Rights Training:
Required
Eligibility Verification:
Self-declared income at or below 300% of Federal Poverty Guidelines
Confidentiality:
Ensured
Record Retention:
Adherence to TEFAP record retention policies
Description:
A policy document outlining the new intake process for TEFAP Food Shelves in Minnesota, where participant signatures are no longer required, and eligibility is self-declared based on income.
Year:
2022
Region / City:
Maine
Subject:
Food Assistance Eligibility
Document Type:
Eligibility Form
Organization / Institution:
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Author:
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Target Audience:
Individuals and families seeking food assistance
Validity Period:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Amendment Date:
N/A
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Kentucky
Topic:
Food Assistance Program
Document Type:
FAQ
Organization:
Dare to Care
Author:
Unknown
Target Audience:
TEFAP partners, food pantry staff
Effective Period:
FY23
Approval Date:
Unknown
Modification Date:
Unknown
Note:
Year
Topic:
Food Assistance, Religious Objection
Document Type:
Referral Request Form
Target Audience:
Beneficiaries with religious objections
Year:
Not specified
Country:
United States
State:
Virginia
Topic:
Civil Rights compliance in federal food assistance programs
Document Type:
Volunteer training summary sheet
Program:
Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP); The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP)
Issuing Agency:
Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS)
Related Federal Agency:
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Intended Audience:
Program volunteers and site staff
Legal Framework:
Federal Civil Rights law and USDA Civil Rights regulations
Protected Classes:
Race, color, national origin, sex, disability, age
Program Eligibility Reference:
Individuals aged 60 or older for CSFP
Required Compliance Elements:
Non-discrimination statement, “And Justice for All” poster display, complaint procedures, accessibility accommodations, confidentiality rules
Training Requirement:
Volunteer Civil Rights training documented in the CSFP Volunteer Training Log
Complaint Procedure Reference:
USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form AD-3027
Year:
2023
Region / City:
USA
Theme:
Social Inclusion, Education, Disability Awareness
Document Type:
Workshop Program
Author:
Jennifer, Katy
Target Audience:
Teachers, Educators
Action Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Note:
Contextual description
Year:
2024-2027
Region / City:
United States
Topic:
Education Data Collection
Document Type:
Communication Package
Organ / Institution:
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department of Education
Author:
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)
Target Audience:
Educational institutions, CEOs, Keyholders, Coordinators
Period of Activity:
2024-2027
Approval Date:
February 2024
Amendment Dates:
May 2025, October 2025, December 2025
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Global
Topic:
Transboundary river research, Natural Language Processing, Named Entity Recognition, Python
Document type:
Research methodology
Organization / Institution:
None mentioned
Author:
Sahana et al.
Target audience:
Researchers in the field of natural language processing and transboundary river studies
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Date of changes:
Not specified
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Serbia
Topic:
Sustainable Development, SMEs, Green Transition, EU Funding
Document Type:
Press Release
Organization / Institution:
European Investment Bank (EIB), Banca Intesa, Intesa Leasing
Author:
European Investment Bank
Target Audience:
Businesses, SMEs, Financial Institutions
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
28 November 2024
Modification Date:
Not specified
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Bloemfontein
Subject:
Procurement
Document Type:
Request for Bid (RFB)
Organization / Institution:
SITA
Author:
N/A
Target Audience:
Potential Bidders
Validity Period:
200 Days from the Closing Date
Approval Date:
N/A
Amendment Date:
N/A
Note:
Year
Region / city:
Belize, Toledo District
Topic:
Disaster Risk Management, Climate Change Adaptation, Community Outreach
Document Type:
Terms of Reference
Organization / Institution:
Humana People to People Belize (HPPBZ), National Emergency Management Organization (NEMO), Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Enterprise (MoAFSE)
Author:
Humana People to People Belize (HPPBZ)
Target audience:
Prospective candidates for the Community Outreach Officer position
Period of validity:
Nine consecutive months
Year:
2026
Country:
Afghanistan
Province:
Samangan
Project name:
Strengthening Local Resilience and Integration through Improved Watershed and Irrigation System
Funding organization:
PATRIP Foundation
Implementing partner:
The Liaison Office (TLO)
Partner organization:
Swiss Peace
Document type:
Request for Quotation
Procurement method:
Restricted Tender Procedure
RFQ number:
PAT-TLO-RFQ-02-2026
Date of invitation:
6 January 2026
Submission deadline:
14 January 2026
Language of bids:
English
Goods procured:
Fruit saplings (almond and pistachio)
Quantities:
9,690 almond saplings; 6,000 pistachio saplings
Delivery location:
Asia Abad Watersheds, Samangan Province
Delivery timeframe:
Within 15 working days from contract signature
Currency:
USD
Warranty requirement:
365 days
Validity of offers:
90 days
Payment terms:
100% within 30 working days after delivery and acceptance
Copyright holder:
PATRIP Foundation and Georg Fiebig Consultants Pty Ltd
Year:
2023
Region / city:
Not specified
Subject:
Biotechnology, Green Chemistry
Document Type:
Peer Review Comments
Organization / Institution:
Asian Journal of Biotechnology and Bioresource Technology
Author:
Kamal Fared Almokhalelati
Target Audience:
Researchers in biotechnology, environmental science, and green chemistry
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Modifications:
Not specified
Year:
2025
Region / city:
N/A
Theme:
Technical adaptation, mobile devices, network operators
Document type:
Industry Specification
Organization / institution:
GSMA
Author:
GSMA
Target audience:
Manufacturers, Mobile Network Operators (MNOs), device developers
Period of validity:
Indefinite
Approval date:
N/A
Modification date:
N/A
Year:
20__
Region / city:
Mississippi
Subject:
Mental health treatment and outpatient commitment
Document type:
Court order
Organization / institution:
Circuit Court
Author:
Circuit Court Judge
Target audience:
Defendant, legal professionals, healthcare providers
Period of validity:
12 months (unless further order of the Court)
Date of approval:
____________, 20
Date of changes:
None
Year:
2025
Region:
Asia Pacific
Country:
Timor-Leste
Project Type:
Full Sized Project (FSP)
Duration Planned (months):
72
Duration Elapsed (months):
25
GEF ID:
10713
Grant ID:
S1-32LDL-000062
GEF Focal Areas:
Climate Change Adaptation, Land Degradation
GEF Financing Amount:
$9,845,662
Co-financing Amount:
$33,100,000
Date of CEO Endorsement:
2023-05-17
UNEP Project Approval Date:
2023-10-02
Start of Implementation:
2023-10-02
Date of First Disbursement:
2024-05-02
Total Disbursement as of 30 June 2025:
$500,000
Total Expenditure as of 30 June 2025:
$50,139
Expected Completion Date:
2030-06-30
Implementing Division:
Ecosystems Division
Executing Agency:
Directorate of Climate Change – State Secretary for the Environment
Co-implementing Agency:
UNDP
Other Project Partners:
RIKOLTO, Progreso Foundation, PT Profil Mitra Abadi, Sucafina, UNEP, GCF UNDP Project
UNEP Portfolio Manager:
Kavita Sharma
UNEP Task Manager:
Bunchin Bazartsaren
UNEP Finance Officer:
Pricillah Kaara
Project Manager:
Carion Da Costa
Finance Manager:
Benjamin Pinto
) 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:
2025
Jurisdiction:
Washington State
Region:
United States
Document type:
Records retention schedule
Issuing body:
Office of the Secretary of State
Approving authority:
State Records Committee
Legal basis:
RCW 40.14.050; RCW 40.14.030; chapter 42.56 RCW
Scope:
Public records of the Office of the Secretary of State
Effective date:
April 2, 2025
Revision history period:
2014–2025
Records coverage:
Elections, archives, corporations, charities, address confidentiality, state library, legacy records
Disposition rules:
Retention, destruction, transfer, archival appraisal
Archival authority:
Washington State Archives