№ files_lp_4_process_1_32076
File format: docx
Character count: 2983
File size: 33 KB
Official authorization form used to grant permission for handling VA sensitive research information outside VA facilities.
Date:
Not specified
From:
Not specified
To:
Director, Eastern Colorado Health Care System (554/00)
Thru:
ACOS/R&D (554/151), Information Security Officer (554/001), Privacy Officer (554/136D), Denver Area Deputy Manager (554/OI&T)
Protocol #:
Not specified
Type of Information:
VA Sensitive Information
Information Format:
Electronic, Paper-Based
Research Materials Included:
Database, Electronic Case Report Forms, Informed Consent Documents, Paper Case Report Forms
Purpose:
Transport, transmit, store, or utilize VA sensitive information for research
Acknowledgements:
Compliance with VA Handbook 6500, Return of research data upon study completion, Transfer of PI responsibilities if leaving VA
Signatories:
Robert Keith, MD; Eduardo Lorenzo; Nichelle Downing; Prince Rogers; Donald Huckaby
Organization:
Eastern Colorado Health Care System, Department of Veterans Affairs
Period of Action:
Duration of study
Legal References:
VA Directive 6500, HIPAA Privacy Rule, Privacy Act, Freedom of Information Act
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:
2007
Region / city:
Not specified
Subject:
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), Shipping Documentation
Document Type:
Training Unit
Organization / institution:
TLI Transport and Logistics Training Package
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Not specified
Validity Period:
Not specified
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
Year:
18 Years of experience
Region:
Gulf & East Africa
Field:
Mechanical Engineering
Document Type:
Resume
Organization/Institution:
SYSTRA PARSONS JV PMCS
Author:
Aftab Alam Amir Hassan
Target Audience:
Employers in engineering sectors
Period of Activity:
March 2018 to Present
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2014
Region / City:
Trichy, Tamil Nadu, India
Topic:
IT Career, Desktop Support, System Administration
Document Type:
Resume
Organization / Institution:
N/A
Author:
GOVINDHARASU.T
Target Audience:
HR managers, recruitment teams, IT industry professionals
Duration of Validity:
N/A
Date of Approval:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Context:
A professional resume detailing a career in IT with experience in desktop support, system administration, and certifications in relevant areas.
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Virginia
Subject:
Critical Infrastructure Information, Sensitive Security Information
Document Type:
Policy
Agency / Organization:
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)
Author:
Office of Safety, Security & Emergency Management (OSSEM)
Target Audience:
VDOT employees, contractors, vendors, and others accessing CII/SSI information
Effective Date:
July 18, 2024
Revision History:
September 1, 2003, April 7, 2004, August 1, 2004, October 15, 2004, April 15, 2005, February 3, 2006, November 2009, July 11, 2024
Year:
2007
Region / city:
United States
Subject:
Encryption of unclassified data at rest
Document Type:
Policy Memorandum
Organization:
Department of Defense
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
DoD personnel, contractors, and other related stakeholders
Period of validity:
Ongoing
Approval date:
July 3, 2007
Amendment date:
Not specified
Year:
2022
Note:
Region / city
Topic:
Wireless LANs, Latency sensitive traffic, rTWT mechanism
Document type:
Technical resolution
Organization / institution:
IEEE
Author:
Duncan Ho, Gaurang Naik, George Cherian, Alfred Asterjadhi, Abhishek Patil, Yanjun Sun, Abdel Karim
Target audience:
Technical professionals in wireless networking
Approval date:
Nov 11, 2022
Year:
2019
Region / City:
Upstate New York
Theme:
Sensitive document collection and destruction
Document Type:
Solicitation/Contract Order
Organization / Institution:
Department of Veterans Affairs
Author:
Michelle A. Harsch
Target Audience:
Contractors and government personnel
Validity Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Falmouth
Topic:
Environmental Regulation, Wastewater Management
Document Type:
Regulation
Agency:
Town of Falmouth, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
Author:
Town of Falmouth
Target Audience:
Property owners, builders, and environmental professionals
Effective Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Virginia
Topic:
Security Plan
Document Type:
Security Plan
Organization / Institution:
Virginia Information Technologies Agency (VITA)
Author:
Chandos Carrow, Allen McLaughlin
Target Audience:
IT system administrators, security officers, risk managers
Effective Period:
From 01/05/2024
Approval Date:
01/05/2024
Modification Date:
09/10/2025
Jurisdiction:
Massachusetts, United States
Issuing authority:
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
Program name:
Natural Resource Nitrogen Sensitive Area Grant Program
Fiscal year:
FY26
Funding purpose:
Planning activities related to Watershed Management Plans and watershed permit applications addressing nitrogen pollution
Eligible applicants:
Local Government Units in designated Natural Resource Nitrogen Sensitive Areas
Geographic scope:
Cape Cod watersheds designated as NRNSA
Funding source:
Capital Fund
Total funding available:
Up to $830,000
Grant amount range:
$20,000–$350,000 per award
Eligible activities:
Watershed planning, nitrogen load assessment, modeling, and related analyses
Ineligible activities:
Construction, implementation, operation, or maintenance projects
Application period:
State Fiscal Year 2026
Eligible work period:
July 1, 2025 – June 30, 2026
Regulatory references:
314 CMR 21.00; 310 CMR 15.000; Clean Water Act §208
Jurisdiction:
Arizona, United States
Court:
Superior Court of Arizona
Division:
Family Court
Document type:
Confidential court form
Record status:
Confidential pursuant to ARFLP 43(G)(1)
Case categories:
Dissolution (Divorce); Legal Separation; Annulment; Order of Protection; Paternity; Legal Decision-Making (Custody); Parenting Time; Child Support; Registration of Foreign Order
Parties:
Petitioner; Respondent
Personal data included:
Social Security Number; date of birth; gender; contact information; employment information
Filing instructions:
Filed with Clerk of Court
Interpreter information:
Interpreter need and language indication
Legal representation:
Self-represented or represented by lawyer; lawyer bar number
Year:
2018
Region / city:
Northern Ireland
Topic:
Data Protection, Sensitive Data Processing
Document Type:
Policy
Organization / Institution:
Police Service of Northern Ireland
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
PSNI officers and staff, data controllers
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Note:
Year
Region / city:
Fort St. John, B.C.
Topic:
Environmental Management, Oil and Gas Development
Document Type:
Form
Organization / Institution:
BC Energy Regulator, Blueberry River First Nations
Target Audience:
Industry professionals, environmental consultants, government regulators
Jurisdiction:
Brown County, Wisconsin, United States
Document type:
Affidavit
Subject:
Environmentally Sensitive Area map correction
Issuing body:
Brown County Planning Commission
Affiant:
Devin Yoder, Brown County Senior Planner
Property name:
Baer Creek Estates
Affected parcels:
Lot 11 and Lot 12
Location:
Village of Howard, Brown County, Wisconsin
Legal description:
SW¼-NW¼ Section 4, Township 24 North, Range 20 East
Regulatory context:
Brown County Urban Service Area Water Quality Plan
Related authorities:
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Notarial jurisdiction:
State of Wisconsin
Summary of change:
Updated wetland and floodway boundaries with a 35-foot setback designated as an environmentally sensitive area
Conditions of approval:
Development restrictions within environmentally sensitive areas; signage, restrictive covenants, and recordation requirements
General Security Requirements for Contractor Personnel Access to Sensitive Information and Locations
Note:
Year
Note:
Year
Subject:
Research Ethics Approval
Document Type:
Application Form
Organization / Institution:
ASU (University)
Target Audience:
Researchers, Academic Staff, Students
Year:
2023
Region / city:
United States
Topic:
Information security
Document type:
Memorandum
Author:
Department of Veterans Affairs
Target audience:
Facility Information Security Officer, Facility Chief Information Officer, Medical Center Director
Effective period:
N/A
Approval date:
N/A
Amendment date:
N/A
Contextual description:
Memorandum outlining the authorization process for transporting sensitive information outside protected environments, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Year:
2014
Region / City:
United States
Topic:
Information Security
Document Type:
Handbook
Organization:
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Author:
Department of Homeland Security
Target Audience:
DHS Components
Period of Validity:
Indefinite
Approval Date:
August 5, 2014
Date of Changes:
August 5, 2014