zilongwang/ReadingBank huggingface dataset:
I 1. DATE: NAME: SIGNATURE: Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form – Schedule 2 (Reference: COI Guidelines Section 5.4) Disclosures are required under Section 5.4 of the Conflict of Interest Guidelines for those activities or interests involving any Party during the past two years which benefited the Member, their immediate family members, or the department or organization for which they have managerial responsibility, particularly as the activities relate to the following areas (add pages as necessary): For each Party and drug, technology or topic, identify the type of funding or benefit received and indicate the total value (dollar range). Check () type of benefit / interest as appropriate Check () dollar range as appropriate Name of Party (see section 2.2 for definition) Drug, technology or involved and year of funding Employment Payment as Advisor or Consultant Research funding or grants Payment for academic appointments (endowed chairs) Personal education funding Stocks or Stock Options of more than $10,000 (excluding mutual funds) Value of benefit or interest $0 - $5,000 $5,001 - $10,000 $10,001 - $50,000 Over $50,000
voice.codecPref.G7221_C.48kbps="" voice.codecPref.iLBC.13_33kbps="" voice.codecPref.iLBC.15_2kbps="" voice.codecPref.Lin16.8ksps="" voice.codecPref.Lin16.16ksps="" voice.codecPref.Lin16.32ksps="" voice.codecPref.Lin16.48ksps="" voice.codecPref.Siren14.32kbps="" voice.codecPref.Siren14.64kbps="" /> <voice.volume voice.volume.persist.handset="1" voice.volume.persist.handsfree="1" /> <voIpProt.SIP voIpProt.SIP.allowTransferOnProceeding="0" voIpProt.SIP.use486forReject="1" voIpProt.SIP.specialEvent.checkSync.alwaysReboot="1" /> <!-- se.rt.custom2 intentionally not used --> <se
Methods research of interest for new applications include: Research related to ethical and Human Subjects Protections issues in PCOR/CER Methods to support data research networks, including: Methods to improve distributed analyses Methods to improve data quality The Methods program will also accept resubmissions that address any of the research areas of interest from 2015 cycles or from Cycle 1 2016, such as: Methods for patient and stakeholder engagement Methods related to patient-centered outcomes (PCOs) and outcomes (PROs) Methods to improve study design Methods to improve validity and efficiency of analyses Although all letters of intent have been screened for programmatic fit, please notify your MRO if you believe any of your assigned applications do not align with the Methods program’s research areas of interest. Programmatic alignment concerns should NOT affect your scores or your written critiques. What is Methods NOT interested in? Methods cannot fund applications that measure cost effectiveness Research cannot conduct a formal cost-effectiveness analysis Research cannot compare the cost of care between two or more alternative approaches to providing care Please notify your MRO if an application includes a formal cost-effectiveness analysis or proposes to develop clinical practice guidelines or recommendations.
Methods cannot fund applications that develop clinical practice guidelines, coverage recommendations, payment or policy recommendations. Methods applications proposing the following are considered Non-methodological research Develops a discrete intervention or healthcare practice Compares the efficacy of two or more health interventions Develops best practices for healthcare delivery Narrowly focused research Development, refinement, and validation of a disease- or condition-specific measure Reminder of important required application component Methods applications must adhere to all relevant PCORI Methodology Standards Please address in your written critique how well the application has described this required component.
RPS Foundation Framework Cluster 1 Patient and Pharmaceutical Care Cluster 2 Professional Practice Cluster 3 Personal Practice Cluster 4 Management and Organisation Patient Consultation Need for Medicine Provision of Medicine Selection of Medicine Medicine Specific Issues Medicines Information and Patient Education Monitoring Medicine Therapy Evaluation of Outcomes Transfer of Care Professionalism Organisation Effective Communication Skills Team Work Education and Training Gathering Information Knowledge Analysing Information Providing Information Follow Up Research and Evaluation Clinical Governance Service Provision Organisations Budget and Reimbursement Procurement Staff Management RPS Advanced Pharmacy Framework Cluster 1 Expert Professional Practice Cluster 2 Collaborative Working Relationships Cluster 3 Leadership Cluster 4 Management Cluster 5 Education, Training and Development Cluster 6 Research and Evaluation Expert Skills and Knowledge AS1 AS2 Delivery of Professional Expertise AS1 AS2 M Communication AS1 AS2 M Teamwork and Consultation AS1 AS2 M Strategic Context AS1 AS2 M Governance AS1 AS2 M Vision AS1 AS2 M Innovation AS1 AS2 M Implementing National Priorities AS1 AS2 M Resource Utilisation AS1 AS2 M Standards of Practice AS1 AS2 M Management of Risk Role Model AS1 AS2 M Mentorship AS1 AS2 M Conducting Education and Training AS1 AS2 M Critical Evaluation AS1 AS2 M Identifies Gaps in the Evidence Base AS1 AS2 M Develops and Evaluates Research Protocols
Reasoning and Judgement AS1 AS2 M Professional Autonomy AS1 AS2 Service Development AS1 AS2 M Motivational AS1 AS2 M AS1 AS2 M Managing Performance AS1 AS2 M Project Management AS1 AS2 M Managing Change AS1 AS2 M Strategic Planning AS1 AS2 M Working Across Boundaries AS1 AS2 M Professional Development AS1 AS2 M Links Practice and Education AS1 AS2 M Educational Policy AS1 AS2 M AS1 AS2 M Creates Evidence AS1 AS2 M Research Evidence into Working Practice AS1 AS2 M Supervises Others Undertaking Research AS1 AS2 M Establishes Research Partnerships AS1 AS2 M Please enclose a copy of the case-based discussion form (if applicable), here.
Palliative Care Practice Development Steering Group Minutes of Meeting held on Wednesday 30th November 2016 10.00 am – 12.00 pm WS301 Beatson WOS Cancer Centre Present: Shirley (SB) (Co-Chair), Claire O’Neill (CO’N) (Co-Chair), Paul Corrigan (PC), Susanne Gray (SG), Christina Hamill (CH), Les McQueen (LMcQ), Jennifer Pennycook (JP), Patricia O’Gorman (PO’G), Margaret Fitzpatrick (MF), Bridget Johnson (BJ), Russell Jones (RJ), Karen Mackay (KMcK), Lynn McKendrick (LMcK), Jane Miller (JM), Deirdre Moriarty (DM) Apologies: Euan Paterson, Helen Pickering, Anne Louise Cunnington, Margaret Connolly, Tara Coolidge, Graham Whyte, Lesley Jackson, Helena Kelly, Una Gildea, Elaine Stevens. In Attendance: Armstrong Minutes: 1 Welcome and Introductions Shirley and Claire welcomed everyone to the meeting and introductions were made around the table. 2 Minutes of Previous Meeting The minutes of the previous meeting held on 31st August 2016 were agreed. 3 Action Points from Previous Meeting All - Spiritual Care Feedback – response to short questionnaire. Russell will discuss this at the next meeting once the results of the short questionnaire have been collated. JW – GAEL Update – report on progress of Pilot in GRI. Claire will discuss this Action under item 9 of the agenda. 4 Update on MCN subgroup feedback relating to PCPDSG MCN Claire reported back from the recent MCN meeting held on the 22nd November 2016. It was decided that the current MCN structure was no longer suitable. will be a final meeting in February to decide how the group will be taken forward in the future. Claire stated that a small short life working group has been convened to discuss options. Care Homes Christina gave feedback on both the Care Homes and OOH subgroup. The Care home meeting scheduled for November was postponed due to the number of apologies received. There is a meeting planned for January 2017. The group will be looking at the identified key themes to see how they can be taken forward in 2017. Out of Hours
No 1 Meetings Timescales Leads 1. Attending other Meetings/ Communication Template To work in partnership with others on specific matters arising To report and disseminate information relating to palliative care and palliative care practice development to other interested parties Advocate & share any relevant information post meeting to wider PC team and interested others Each PCPD team member to take responsibility for feeding back key points from meetings that they attend on behalf of their role within PCPD Team in the communication template Individuals within PCPD team to keep up to date with the information held within the communication sheet 22 2 18 - Team to input relevant/key point/updates from meetings onto communication sheet template. Only notes of interest from meetings to be included in Monthly service report Ongoing Acute PCPD Team Senior Nurse Meeting To report & disseminate information relating to Palliative care across sectors To report to Lead Nurse and enhance teamwork & partnerships in care To promote the sharing and identification of relevant in house projects/work streams To Advocate & share any relevant information post meeting to wider PC team and interested others Bi-Monthly CON/ PDF attendance dependant on PD & SN Agenda Acute PCPD Team Meetings To meet regularly as a team. To review progress of workplan and identify any challenges within practice development & education Identify initiatives and share Plan equal distribution of work Advocate & share any relevant information post meeting to wider PC team and interested others Share work plan with NHSGGC Acute Group 22 1 18 Workplan to be updated as soon as after the meeting and housed on a Palliative Care Webpage similar to the Acute Group. Bi-Monthly All
Team Members The PCP Process requires, at a minimum, participation by the Person, the Guardian (if applicable), and the Case Manager. The Personal Plan must also include input from Agency Service Planners, the appointed Volunteer Correspondent (if applicable) and other members chosen by the Person. If the Person objects to any of these members, the Case Manager should work with the Person to find a comfortable way to get input from each team member. The Person is the key participant. The team needs to support the Person to understand their role in the process, as well as what to expect from others at each step in the process. The Person may also need coaching, practice and support in order to communicate his or her desires and take an active role in planning. It is the responsibility of the team to ensure that the Person is meaningfully involved in each stage of planning. For this to be most effective, it is
Assistive Technology This dimension is completed by the Case Manager. All information entered is discussed in the and sections. Career Planning Ancillary Supports Domains – Ancillary Supports Only Domains – All Services except Ancillary Supports Though there are different domains present for different services the general idea is the same. Domains link services to a MaineCare Billable component. All Domains in active services should have a support needed selected – even if the selection is “None” or “Not applicable”. If the Support Needed is something other than “None” or “Not applicable”, then the Purpose of Support should also be identified. Otherwise, the Purpose of Support does not need to be changed. Appendix C – Exemplary, Satisfactory, and Unsatisfactory Goals Exemplary Using the , service providers can work with the Person to generate goals genuine to the person and balance between enough detail, so that people know what the Person will be supported to do, and enough open-endedness to allow for creativity and change.
8.1 Please outline the main to the success of the project indicating if the potential impact and probability of the risks are high, medium or low. How will these risks be monitored and mitigated? If the risks are outside your direct control, is there anything you can do to manage their potential effects? If relevant, this may include an assessment of the risk of engagement to local partners. The risk assessment for your programme needs to clearly differentiate the internal risks and those that are part of the external environment and over which you will have less (or little) control. (You may add extra rows if necessary - as long as you do not exceed the overall page limits). Explanation of Risk Potential Probability Mitigation measures Community may not respond/ be interested in engaging E High Low Develop the project in line with requests from the community Health staff atthe community clinics may be disinterested or disallowed from engaging with the project E High Low Ensure health staff understand the benefits and identify means to motivate them Increased demand cannot be met adequately at health facilities E High Medium Advocate for improved quality services. Collect community data to enable facilities to respond better to community needs PCP turnover may be high I Medium Low Ensure adequate budget for recruitment, orientation, training and follow up e health facilities to respond better to community PCP staff may be exposed to hostility from healthcare providers for advocating on behalf of communities I Medium Low Ensure staff are well versed with messaging to justify their work Community health committees may be unreceptive to women’s group member participation I Medium Low Maximise opportunities through strong supportive individual members Changes in the political environment including general strikescausing disruptionE Medium Medium Strengthen existing structures which will remain in place despite political changes and allow sufficient time to implement project activities accounting for scheduling changes Seasonal and weather disruption e.g. flooding E Medium Medium Allow sufficient time to implement project activities accounting for scheduling changes SECTION 9: CAPACITY OFALL PARTNER ORGANISATIONS (Max 3 pages each) Please copy and fill in this section for each partner organisation identified in section 6.1 9.1 Name of Organisation Women and Children First (UK) 9.2 Address United House, North Road, London, N7 9DP 9.3 Web Site
Communication & Interaction Demonstrates listening and oral and written communication skills sufficient to understand and out routine assignments. Interactions occur within defined parameters. Is able to communicate and interact with audience at of detail required to resolve issues of moderate complexity. Specialist Is able to communicate and interact to readily and clearly define issues and predict effects / outcomes. Ensures users understand the scope of their requests and the consequence of their decisions. Expert Communicates problems, technologies and policies with a wide and / or diverse audience. Frequently requires skills to instruct, advise, and / or consult multi-specialty / teams. Principal Leadership Realizes the contributions of others and productively works within a team environment. Entry Works both independently and on a team and may have some responsibility for team deliverables. Specialist Responsible for interfacing team deliverables. Frequently has team leadership responsibilities. Expert the local IT community to cost effective solutions and ensures existing resources (systems & people) are utilized to fullest extent for maximum benefits to the community. Principal
PCRS-UK; media trained members and approved spokespeople Media Trained (July 2014) Noel Baxter Andy Whittamore Sandy Walmsley Stephen Gaduzo Other approved spokespeople (media trained independently and /or PCRS-UK leads ) Iain Small (former PCRS-UK Executive Chair) Steve Holmes ( Education Lead & former PCRS-UK Executive Chair and Kevin Gruffydd Jones (Clinical Policy Lead) Duncan Keeley (Policy Lead) Rupert (Research Lead) Hilary Pinnock (Primary Care Respiratory Update Editor ) Carol Stonham (Nurse Lead)
LVMH competency Key Strength Development opportunity Non Applicable Creativity/ innovation management E M Strategic agility E M Managing vision and purpose E M Customer focus E M Building effective teams E M Motivating others E M Drive for results E M Dealing with ambiguity E M Integrity and trust E M Delegation E M Identify, if necessary, the specific competencies in the position and/or your company (technical competencies, languages etc.). E M E M Outstanding Exceeds objectives Achieves objectives Partially achieves objectives Does not meet expectations
Process Objectives Metric(s) Goal Provide real time catch and effort data for quota monitoring and Research Set Aside (RSA) program On-time running of scripts 90% reporting compliance within 24 hours of trip completion Key Process Elements Requirements for Process Elements Personnel Fishery Information Specialists Equipment IVR Call-In System/Server PCs Servers Software SQL scripts Oracle Database Oracle SQL Developer Information IVR background tables Quota monitoring tables Permits tables LOA EFP Materials Letterhead Environment Standard office environment Documents Defining Process SOP – Reporting – Vessel IVR
diverse perspectives. Students apply a broad range of reading, writing, speaking, and listening skills. Students address how a writer influences the views and opinions of his or her audience. Key outcomes include: citing strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly; evaluating how an author’s point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text; analyzing and evaluate the effectiveness of the structure an author uses in his or her exposition or argument; analyzing seminal texts based upon reasoning, premises, purposes, and arguments; writing with an awareness of the stylistic aspects of composition; and presenting information, findings, and supporting evidence, conveying a clear and distinct perspective. Module Objectives At the end of this module, students will be able to independently use thier learning to: Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly Evaluate how an author’s point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text Analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of the structure an author uses in his or her exposition or argument Analyze seminal texts based upon reasoning, premises, purposes, and arguments. Write with an awareness of the stylistic aspects of composition Present information, findings, and supporting evidence, conveying a clear and distinct perspective Focus Standards Addressed in this Module Important Standards Addressed in this Module Misconceptions Students may have misconceptions about how to convey a clear and distinct Proper Conceptions Careful examination of how to convey a clear and distinct perspective which is
Misconceptions Proper Conceptions The term "cite" implies that a specific citation format (i.e. APA, MLA, etc.) should be utilized. The term "academic vocabulary" applies to content specific vocabulary. The term "point of view" always refers to 1st person, 2nd person, or 3rd person point of view. The narrator's point of view and the author's point of view are synonymous. The term "cite" implies that the student should cite evidence from a text, giving informal credit to the source (i.e. "The author states..."). The term "academic vocabulary" refers to vocabulary that is generalizable and of high utility across content areas. The term "point of view" refers to a person's worldview and how that worldview shapes his or her writing/thinking. Students should understand that the narrator's point of view may or may not be that of the author. Concepts Main Idea Text Analysis Vocabulary Point of View Content for Writing Competencies Determine a central idea of a text and analyze its development over the course of the text, including its relationship to supporting ideas; provide an objective summary of the text. Cite the textual evidence that most strongly supports an analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences, conclusions, and/or generalizations drawn from the text. Analyze the influence of the words and phrases in a text including figurative, connotative, and technical meanings, and how they shape meaning and tone. Vocabulary supports self-generated avenues analyze influence propel reveal provoke influence evaluate motives diverse distinguish alternate or opposing compare and contrast modern themes patterns traditional rendered relationships particular
JUNE 2015 Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 16 1st Day of the PCS TIP Summer Camp 17 18 22 23 24 25 29 Oak Grove at PTC Clearwater 30 Lakewood HS at PTC St. Petersburg JULY 2015 Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 1 Oak Grove at Valpak 2 Lakewood HS at Valpak 6 7 8 Oak at USPSP 9 Lakewood HS at USFSP 13 14 15 16 Last Day of the PCS TIP Summer Camp
£550 + 0.8 1.00 20.00 3.75% IC or 0.37% FBC With Mymoneyworks Avg Contribution Scheme AMC RP AP IC TV Commission £100 - £249.99 1.00 13.00 4.25% IC or 0.42% FBC £250 - £399.99 1.00 19.00 4.25% IC or 0.42% FBC £400 - £549.99 1.00 21.50 4.25% IC or 0.42% FBC £550 + 1.00 23.00 4.25% IC or 0.42% FBC With Mymoneyworks Avg Contribution Active AMC Scheme AMC RP AP IC TV Commission £100 - £249.99 0.85 1.25 14.00 5% IC or 0.52% FBC £250 - £399.99 0.85 1.25 20.00 5% IC or 0.52% FBC £400 - £549.99 0.85 1.25 23.00 5% IC or 0.52% FBC £550 + 0.85 1.25 25.00 5% IC or 0.52% FBC With Mymoneyworks Avg Contribution Active AMC Scheme AMC RP AP IC TV Commission £100 - £249.99 0.94 1.00 11.00 4.25% IC or 0.42% FBC £250 - £399.99 0.94 1.00 16.00 4.25% IC or 0.42% FBC £400 - £549.99 0.94 1.00 20.00 4.25% IC or 0.42% FBC £550 + 0.94 1.00 21.00 4.25% IC or 0.42% FBC
Spring Semester 2018 - Sophomore/Second Year Civic Engagement: An Introduction for Presidential Citizen Scholars. This 2-credit course meets Wednesdays from 11:00 – 12:15 pm Fall Semester 2018 – Year Civically Engaged: A Capstone for Presidential Citizen Scholars. This 2-credit course meets Wednesdays from 11:00 – 12:15 pm Students must also participate in one of the following prior to graduation: A 4 credit Civic Engagement Across the Curriculum Course (CEAC) An internship through a non-profit or governmental entity or through The Washington Center A one credit approved IDIS course
County Durham, Teeside, Tyne & Wear Angela Pownall LTM angela.pownall@nhs.net North Yorkshire Sophie Meek LTM Sophie.meek@nhs.net West Yorkshire Laven LTM Peter.laven@nhs.net North West Jonathan Gore RLM jonathangore@nhs.net Cumbria Diane Thornton LTM diane.thornton@nhs.net Lancashire Louise Hennessy LTM louise.hennessy2@nhs.net Cheshire & Merseyside Liam Royle LTM liam.royle@nhs.net Greater Manchester Gemma Lenehan LTM g.lenehan@nhs.net South Central Gill Appleby RLM gill.appleby@nhs.net Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire & Milton Keynes Kirsty Adlem LTM k.adlem@nhs.net Berkshire Linda Oyebisi LTM linda.oyebisi@nhs.net Hampshire & Isle of Wight Debbie Rowe LTM debbie.rowe@nhs.net South East Claire Horner RLM clairehorner@nhs.net Kent Julie Gibson LTM julie.gibson3@nhs.net Sussex Grant Foster LTM grant.foster@nhs.net Surrey and Croydon CCG, Kingston CCG, Richmond CCG Aeysha LTM a aeysha.tanna@nhs.net eysha.tanna@nhs.net West Midlands Jonathan Gore RLM jonathangore@nhs.net Shropshire & Staffordshire Gary Turner LTM Gary.Turner@nhs.net Herefordshire, Worcestershire, Coventry, Warwickshire Sean Glanfield LTM Sean.glanfield@nhs.net Birmingham, Dudley, Walsall, West Bromwich, Solihull & Wolverhampton Rifat Zulfqar LTM r.zulfqar@nhs.net South West Millie Miller RLM millie.miller@nhs.net Devon, Cornwall, & Isles of Scilly Tracey Bird LTM tracey.bird@nhs.net Dorset & Somerset Christie LTM c.dodge@nhs.net Gloucestershire, Wiltshire & Bristol Joanna Berkeley LTM Joanna.berkeley@nhs.net
Primary Care Support England GP Registrar Mileage Claim Form Name of GP Registrar Name of GP Trainer Regular User/Standard User * delete as appropriate Month of claim Date of Visit (A) Details of Journey Miles Travelled (A) (Nature or reason for starting and finishing point (usually the Practice) and places visited.) Practice Business (B) Home to Practice & Return (max 20 miles) (C) Public Transport (D) Date of Visit (A) Details of Journey Miles Travelled
ets Process Control System – Measure and Control Elements Form Process Name: Process Owner: Critical Customer Requirements: Process Customer: Process Purpose: Current Sigma Level: Outcome Indicators: Process and Quality Indicators Checking / Indicator Monitoring Contingency Plans / Misc. Actions Required for Exceptions Procedure References Process Indicators (P) Control Limits Data to Collect Timeframe (Frequency) Responsibility Quality Indicators (Q) Specs / Targets What is Checking Item or Indicator Calculation? When to Collect Data? Who Will Check? Approved: Date: Rev #: Rev Date:
Appendix 3 SCHOOL NAME: PROPOSED PROGRAMS Program Length Measured In: Program Clock Hours Credit Hours PROGRAM TITLES Lecture Lab Externship Total Charges (if Total $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ \FORMS\FORM2 (Rev. 10/99)
Financial Resources An applicant must demonstrate that there are sufficient financial resources to operate a school. A new school may choose to provide from either of the following two options if the school collects tuition in multiple installments from or on behalf of students: Financial guarantee in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit or a renewable performance bond that is sufficient to 100% of the tuition liability of the proposed school OR A financial statement that is reviewed or audited by an independent certified public accountant, and A financial guarantee in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit or a renewable performance bond that is sufficient to cover 50 % of the tuition liability of the proposed school unless the Secretary determines that financial conditions warrant a greater amount. A new school that does not collect tuition in multiple installments from or on behalf of its students must provide: A financial guarantee in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit or a renewable performance bond that is sufficient to cover 100% of the tuition liability of the proposed school. Related Application Costs The following must be submitted with the application: Application Fee: (1) A $300 non-refundable application fee OR (2) for applicants seeking approval of more than 3 programs, a non-refundable application fee that totals $300 plus $100 for each program over three. GSTF Payment: A payment of at least $2,500 to the Guaranty Student Tuition Fund. Financial Guarantee: (Described under Financial Resources) Market Demand Evidence will be required to substantiate that a market demand exists in Maryland for proposed program(s) Curriculum The curriculum is the cornerstone of the school. It is essential that it receive a great deal of careful planning. School Catalog and Enrollment Contract The catalog and enrollment contract are key documents that provide important information the school. Refer to the enclosed Catalog and Enrollment Agreement Checklists to ensure that all required information is included in the submitted documents. Note that all private career schools are required to establish and disclose in their catalogs the following: Admission requirements for each program to ensure that prospective students have the ability to benefit from the training; Graduation requirements for each program (including a requirement that a student shall have a minimum attendance rate of 80 percent of the total program, in order to be graduated from a program); A grading system and standards of satisfactory academic progress. APPLICATION FOR INITIAL APPROVAL TO OPERATE A
PART I, TAB G Cover Page (All required materials for Section G should be included, in after this page.) SCHOOL CATALOG Provide one hard copy and one digital copy of the proposed school's catalog. Complete and submit the enclosed “Catalog Checklist for a Private Career School” (Appendix 6) to ensure that all required items are included in the catalog. Note: The catalog must comprehensively describe the school’s programs, policies, and information prescribed by the Secretary and identified on the Catalog Checklist for a Private Career School. The following sections may require the applicant to reference the sections of the school catalog where the requested information is found.
Application Part II Page 1. Name of Proposed School: 2. Address: Street City State Zip 7. Contact Information: 7a. Primary person to contact about Application: 7b. 7c. Mailing address if other than above: 7d. Telephone number if other than above: Date Application Received by MHEC: MHEC90PAA\P7-2A (Rev. 01/2011)
20. List below all of your postsecondary education including coursework at career schools, colleges and universities. By Maryland regulations, “Instructors shall demonstrate up-to-date knowledge and continuing study of the field they are teaching. Instructors must possess, and have maintained for a minimum of 2 years, at least the level of licensure, certification, or credential for which the program they are instructing prepares graduates.” Name & Location of Educational Institutions Dates Attended Major or Major Subject Graduated Degree, Certificate or License and Date Received Hours Completed From To Yes No 21. List below any certificate(s) or license(s) now held. ( A copy of each certificate/license MUST be By Maryland regulation, “Instructor must possess, and have maintained for a minimum of 2 years, at least the level of licensure, certification, or credential for which the program they are instructing prepares graduates.” Name of Certificate/License Entity that Issued Certificate/License Date Received Expiration Date 22. List any other courses or workshops directly related to your position at the school that you have completed in the past 5 years. Include the dates of attendance. Courses or Workshops of Attendance
DPES FUN RUN WHEN Friday, May 5th WHAT TO DO Ask for pledges from parents & grandparents, aunts & uncles, family friends, parent’s workplace, neighbors, coaches and local businesses. Ask your parents to help find sponsors. Call and email family and friends. Fill out the Fun Run Pledge Form. Be sure to include your name on the “Pledges For” line, and include your grade and teacher name. Ask sponsor to fill out Sponsor Name, Phone Number and Pledge per Lap or Donation. Upon completion of Fun Run collect pledges in cash or checks made payable to DPES PTO. WHAT TO SAY Our school is having a Fun Run on May 5th to money for new playground equipment. My goal is to run between __ and __ laps and my goal is to raise $__. Your pledge is all I need today. I will collect pledges starting on May 6th. You can donate with cash or by check. Will you sponsor me? Note: One way to determine how many laps you can complete is to calculate how many laps you run during PE’s Mileage Club. Course run during Mileage Club is 1/8 mile and Fun Run course is 1/5 mile. Class Prizes· Class to raise highest amount will win the FUN RUN trophy, extra recess and PE class choice· Top Class per grade will win extra recess! Fun Run Pledge Forms & Pledges are due Friday, May 12th Questions? contact School Spirit Physical Activity Team Building Encouragement Parent Involvement 8:50-9:50 2nd grade 9:50-10:50 4th grade 12:30-1:30 Kindergarten 1:45-2:45 3rd grade 2:45-3:45 1st grade FUN RUN IN THE SUN! Please wear bright colors, sunglasses, crazy socks, etc. Want to volunteer? Contact Cynthia at All volunteers are required to complete a volunteer form through TISD Do you know an individual or a business that would provide healthy snacks or water?
Rubric 4 3 2 1 Photos Creative; Are connected in a unique way; Use multiple film techniques; Have a unique argument in response to the topic. Creative; Are connected; Use multiple film techniques; Have an argument in response to the topic. Somewhat creative; Are somewhat connected; Use multiple film techniques; Have an argument in response to the Uncreative; OR Not connected; OR Use few film techniques; OR Have no or unclear argument in response to the topic. Artist Statement Clearly explains film techniques, connection between photos, and argument. Explains film techniques, connection between photos, and argument. Somewhat explains film techniques, connection between photos, and argument. Does not explain film techniques, connection between photos, OR argument. Critique Evaluation, feedback, and creative question are insightful and use specific evidence. Evaluation, feedback, and creative question use specific evidence. Evaluation, feedback, and creative question use general evidence. Evaluation, feedback, and creative question are incomplete OR use no evidence. Reflections Complete; Use specific examples to back up opinions; Show critical thinking about project. Complete; Use examples to back up opinions; Show thinking about project. Complete; Use general examples to back up opinions; Show some thinking about project. Incomplete; OR Use few examples to back up opinions; OR Show little thinking about project. Final Projects Policy: Work turned in after due date and time will get automatic 1s on all standards. Work not turned in at all receives 0s.
In the knowledge-based economy of the 21st century, which is characterized by leading edge technology, heightened competition and the need for improved competitiveness, the importance of patent protection on a global level has become crucial. Consequently, the role of the international patent protection system offering high quality services has also become increasingly important. The PCT system, in our view, is an efficient provider of international patent protection. We highly appreciate the great success of the PCT system and the advantages it offers to users all over the world. At the same time, our region, the Central and Eastern European region miss a PCT Authority, which by sharing the workload could contribute to sustaining the high quality services of the PCT system. The VPI was established with the desire to foster innovation and creativity in this region by pooling the resources of the industrial property Offices of the V4 countries for the benefit of their users, in particular individual inventors, small and medium-sized enterprises, and publicly funded research organizations. The synergies and accumulated resources of the V4 industrial property Offices will enable the VPI to fulfill the criteria for appointment as ISA and IPEA and to better offer services meeting the international standards. On the other hand, the cooperation is foreseen to increase the quality and efficiency of the work performed by our individual industrial property Offices. Consequently, the in the V4 countries fully support the idea of establishing the VPI as a PCT Authority in the region. The headquarters of the VPI will be in Budapest with branch Offices in each Contracting State. The VPI shall be governed by an Administrative Board and administered by a Secretariat managed by a Director. Following the model of the Nordic Patent Institute, activities of the VPI as an ISA and IPEA will be carried out by the national Offices of the V4 countries on behalf of the VPI. We look forward to your favorable consideration and cooperation. Mr. Director General, please accept the assurances of our highest consideration, [signed by] Kratochvíl [signed by] Miklós Bendzsel [signed by] Alicja Adamczak [signed by] Ľuboš Knoth President President President President Industrial Property Office of the Czech Republic Hungarian Intellectual Property Office Patent Office of the Republic of Poland Industrial Property Office of the Slovak Republic II follows]
Mr. Luis Felipe Céspedes, Minister of Economy, Development and Tourism of Chile, addressed the Meeting in the afternoon of January 20, 2016. In his address, he in particular highlighted the importance of innovation as an engine for growth and increase in productivity for a country like Chile, and INAPI’s role and achievements in the just six years since its creation in 2009. 2: The session was chaired by Mr. Maximiliano Santa Cruz, National Director of the National Institute of Industrial Property of . 3: The Meeting adopted the agenda as set out in document PCT/MIA/23/1 Rev. 4: PCT The Meeting the presentation by the International Bureau on the most recent PCT Statistics. 5: There were no interventions under this agenda item. There were no interventions under this agenda item. There were no interventions under this agenda item. The Meeting with approval the Summary by the Chair of the Meeting’s Quality Subgroup set out in Annex II to this document, agreed with the recommendations contained in that Summary by the Chair and approved the continuation of the Subgroup’s mandate, including the convening of a physical meeting of the Subgroup in 2017. 6: Discussions were on document PCT/MIA/23/9. One Authority indicated that it was essential for an Authority to show to the PCT Committee for Technical Cooperation (PCT/CTC) that it met the minimum requirements for appointment by providing details along the same lines as had been proposed in the application form discussed by the Quality Subgroup. One Authority suggested clarifying the wording of Article 4 of the model agreement covering subject matter not searched by the International Authority. One Authority suggested that there could be a peer review process under which the documentation submitted for reappointment by one Authority was reviewed by one or more other Authorities to verify compliance with the minimum documentation requirements under Rule 36.1(ii). One Authority suggested that the re-appointment process should be processed according to the requirements of the existing rules and avoid increasing the workload of existing International Authorities. trial trial AUTHORITIES (B)
Before April 1, 2017, if there was a finding of lack of unity at the search stage, applicants would receive the written opinion on patentability (WO-ISA) only together with the "final" international search report (Rule 43bis.1). Since this date, the EPO sends a provisional opinion on the patentability of the invention (or group of inventions) first mentioned in the claims together with the invitation to pay further/additional fees and the partial search results (Form PCT/ISA/206) in a new EPO form (EPO Form 1707). EPO Form 1707 is made available to the public via online file inspection. It has, however, to be noted that the provisional opinion is provided for information only; no comments addressing the points raised in the provisional opinion should be filed by the applicant, and, if nevertheless filed, such comments are not taken into account by the examiner when completing the written opinion. Any amendments under Article 19, informal written comments, amendments and/or arguments under Article 34, and replies under EPC Rule 161 should therefore continue to be submitted after the "final" international search report and WOISA. This additional service not only covers search products issued by the EPO in the international phase but also applies to the searches carried out in the regional phase for both Euro-direct and Euro-PCT applications. The Working Group is invited to take note of the contents of the present document. [End of document]
While fundamental reforms were not needed, it was important to remain open to legal changes necessary to support developing requirements. The ability to see and, in accordance with national laws and procedures, make use of work products from other Offices was important. Some delegations expressed support for the formal integration of the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) into the PCT, which could provide an incentive for applicants to amend applications in the national phase. One delegation reiterated its concerns with this idea, which it believed would hinder the implementation of the technical recommendations of the PCT Roadmap and the WIPO Development Agenda to eliminate differences in search and examination capacities between Offices, and instead harmonize patent procedures between Offices by imposing examination practices on Offices in developing countries. Technical (IT) Environment The recent Meeting of Intellectual Property Offices on ICT Strategies and Artificial Intelligence for IP Administration had emphasized the importance and increased appetite for effective cooperation in the development of IT tools and standards. Increased use of standardized XML was important, both for application bodies and for Office communications, such as international search reports and written opinions. Improving tools for assisting Offices and sharing information, such as ePCT and WIPO CASE, was essential. Take up of XML filing was low at some IP Offices – the International Bureau and IP Offices might undertake further awareness raising of ePCT filing using DOCX and converting documents to XML format. Financial Issues It may be appropriate to consider whether certain fees remained appropriate in the digital environment. This included the concept of page fees, incentives for filing in preferred formats and whether fees such as the transmittal fee still made sense in view of more automated processing at receiving Offices. Receiving Offices might consider a waiver of the transmittal fee for universities. International Authorities might consider fee reductions for applicants from developing countries. Further measures might be considered for avoiding abuse of fee reductions. Measures such as netting to simplify and reduce the costs and burdens of fee exchange were important. One delegation emphasized the importance of PCT fee income towards the funding of the activities undertaken by WIPO and stated that reductions in PCT fees should not have an impact on the fee levels in the other global IP systems provided by WIPO. Quality Quality of search and examination was of paramount importance.
(c) Limitations on scope of operation: (d) International Authorities which would remain competent for applications filed at the Office in its capacity as receiving Office: [COMMENT: One response to the Circular indicated that it would assist assessment of the benefit to the system as a whole if the Office were to indicate whether appointment as an International Authority would be adding to or changing the options available to applicants.] 4 – [Brief indication of reasons for applying, including what benefits the Office expects appointment to bring to: (i) its State or region, (ii) itself, and (iii) the PCT system as a whole.] 5 – [This section is intended to provide information on the likely levels of local demand for services of the Office if appointed and on the general level of support which is provided to innovation and related issues by the relevant government(s). Where the applicant Office is an intergovernmental organization or a national Office which does not intend to offer services to its own nationals and residents, this may not be relevant. In these cases, the section can be either omitted or replaced by alternative information which better serves the intended function.] [COMMENT: Several responses to the Circular pointed out that the questions in this section would be irrelevant in certain situations. The International Bureau agrees with this, but still considers that the underlying issues are ones which are valid for States to consider when deciding whether an Office should be appointed. The above explanatory note is therefore proposed, though alternative questions which more clearly address the issues would be a better solution if they could be identified and agreed.] (a) Regional location [Map showing State(s) and neighboring States] (b) Regional organization memberships:
Canada Main pre-grant fees for national applications and PCT national phase entries 50% 50% for 50 employees or fewer 50% for universities, 50% for 50 employees or fewer No 9% (2009 to 2012) Croatia Main pre-grant fees for national applications, PCT national phase entries and validation of European patents 50% if applicant is inventor 75% to certain categories (lower financial status, disabled veterans, pensioners etc.) on request 75% reduction available to universities on request (not available to research institutes) No 28.6% (average over last 5 Czech Republic Filing fee for national applications and PCT national entries 50% No 26.0% (2010) 20.3% (2011) 19.4% (2012)
Hungary Main pre-grant and maintenance fees for national patent application and after PCT national phase entry where application is not based on a priority application in a foreign country 75% for pre-grant fees, 50% for maintenance fees (where applicant is also inventor) Not stated 49.5% (2011) 45.2% (2012) 50.8% (2013) Israel Filing fee and fee for publication of acceptance for national patent applications first filed in Israel 40% 40% (companies with turnover less than ILS 10 million - about USD 3 million - in last calendar year) Not stated 400 applications in January-June 2013
Lithuania Filing fee and grant fee for national applications and PCT national phase entries 50% No 59% (2010) 50.5% (2011) 33% (2012) (figures based on Lithuanian applicants only) Norway Application fee for national applications and PCT national phase entries 80% 80% if number of permanent full-time equivalent members is less than 20 80% if number of permanent full-time equivalent members is less than 20 No Not provided Portugal Main pre-grant and maintenance fees up to 7th annual fee or 2nd quinquennial fee for national applications 80% if applicant provides that they do not have the revenues to cover costs 100% for public universities which are fee exempt Not stated 14 requests received and approved in last 5 years
Republic of Moldova Main pre-grant fees on national applications and PCT national phase entries 95% if applicant is inventor 85% is applicant is not inventor 85% if company has an average number of employees of at most 249 persons, total annual sales income of at most 50 million Moldovan lei and total annual balance sheet of assets not exceeding 50 million Moldovan lei 95% if organization is in science and engineering sphere - exemption from payment of maintenance fees is also given in first 5 years No About 95% in 2012 (264 national applicants, 9 foreign applicants) Russian Federation Main pre-grant and maintenance fees 50% if inventor is applicant, for handicapped persons or students and for various war veterans 50% if SME is included in Uniform State Register, share of participation of public sector entities, foreign organizations or nationals and certain non-profit organizations is no higher than 25%, and average number of employees over past year is under 100 and turnover is less than an established ceiling Yes for entities 6.4% (2011) 6.1% (2012) 4.1% (2013 – until mid-October)
national of PCT Procedure Does DO, national law applied by it, allow: same day priority claims (“priority” yes/no)? incorporation by reference of missing elements or (“incorporation” yes/no)? Priority yes / Incorporation yes (if DO has not submitted a notification of incompatibility Rule 20.8(b)) Priority yes / Incorporation no (if DO has submitted a notification of incompatibility under Rule 20.8(b)) Priority no Valid Priority Claim? Yes Yes No Incorporation by Reference of Missing Element or Part? Yes No (either international filing date would change or material incorporated by reference would be ignored) No (either international filing date would change or material incorporated by reference would be ignored) International Search Report Useful for DO? Yes (since international search took into account the missing element or part incorporated by reference) No international search took into account the missing element or part incorporated by reference, or was based on an earlier international filing date than that accepted by the DO) No international search took into account the missing element or part incorporated by reference, or was based on an earlier international filing date than that accepted by the DO) The Working Group is invited to comment on the proposed amendments to the PCT Regulations set out in the Annex to this document. [Annex follows]
ACU Australia Catholic University Graduate Certificate in the Psychology of Risk Unit 4 Lecturer Dr Robert Long Essay Topic Examine a project or activity in the light of Weick’s theories of organisational sense making and collective mindfulness. Submitted By: Philippa Curran Student ID: S00174367 Word Count: 5964 Date Submitted: 4 December 2014
GENERAL LEDGER Restricted funds separated appropriately Internal controls for receipts reviewed (see separate document for understanding of internal controls) Internal controls for disbursements reviewed Other asset accounts reviewed (equipment, buildings, contracts, etc.) Accounts payable reviewed Accounts receivable reviewed Prepaid expense account reviewed Any related party/employee loans noted Unearned Income account reviewed Fund from prior year correct Correct fund balance carried into next year NOTES: Date Completed Initials