Document bar2R90dxzY6rN02XDp664QV0

DownloadSearchable PDFRandom document
TO: Interoffice Communication FROM: DATE: SUBJ: Bruce Trego 7SG: Jee ERT-. MJH: W T. G. Grumbles March 18, 1991 XF: -heAOe ADDTT10NALREV1EW OF RESPONSIBLE CARE CAER SELF-EVALUATION RESULTS VISTA We have compared the 1990 self-evaluation results with this year's results to identify areas where we have improved. In theory we should not regress on any code element. However, the Aberdeen results appear to indicate this has occurred on the elements listed below. Please review these elements to verify this and let me know the cause for this. If it was an inadvertent mistake or actual change in your assessment, I need to communicate this change to CMA. It could affect the overall industry trend analysis, but I also need to assure they understand the reasons. I realize the scorecard stages changed this year. Please keep in mind that a stage I and stage Vi were added this year to allow consistency with other code selfevaluations. Last year's stage I is a stage II this year, last years stage If is a stage III, etc. This may be a reason for one stage regressions. Please review your seif-assessment and let me hear from you by April 1. Code# 5 6 7 9 None Community Awareness 1990 V V V V Emergency Response 1991 111 IV III IV Thomas G. Grumbles aio 1001GN/TGG.025 cc R. W. Seymour VVV 00000620^ TO: George Williams Interoffice Communication FROM: DATE: SUBJ: T. G. Grumbles March 18, 1991 ADOTTIONALREVIEWOFRESPONSIBLE CARE CAER SELF-EVALUATION RESULTS VISTA We have compared the 1990 self-evaluation results with this year's results to identify areas where we have improved. In theory we should not regress on any code element. However, the Blane results appear to indicate this has occurred on the elements listed below. Please review these elements to verify this and let me know the cause for this. If it was an inadvertent mistake or actual change in your assessment, I need to communicate this change to CMA. It could affect the overall industry trend analysis, but I also need to assure they understand the reasons. I realize the scorecard stages changed this year. Please keep in mind that a stage I and stage VI were added this year to allow consistency with other code selfevaluations. Last year's stage I is a stage li this year, last years stage II Is a stage III, etc. This may be a reason for one stage regressions. Please review your self-assessment and let me hear from you by April 1. Code# 4 None Community Awareness 1990 III Emergency Response 1991 ' II Thomas G. Grumbles ajo 1001GN/TGG.024 VVV 000006205 TO: Matt Tonkovich FROM: DATE: Interoffice SUBJ: Communication T. G. Grumbles March 18, 1991 ADDITIONALREVtEW OF RESPONSIBLE CARE CAER SELF-EVALUATION RESULTS VISTA We have compared the 1990 self-evaluation results with this year's results to identify areas where we have improved, in theory we should not regress on any code element. However, the Hammond results appear to indicate this has occurred on the elements listed below. Please review these elements to verify this and let me know the cause for this. If it was an inadvertent mistake or actual change in your assessment, I need to communicate this change to CMA. It could affect the overall industry trend analysis, but I also need to assure they understand the reasons. I realize the scorecard stages changed this year. Please keep in mind that a stage I and stage VI were added this year to allow consistency with other code selfevaluations. Last year's stage I is a stage il this year, last years stage II is a stage III, etc. This may be a reason for one stage regressions. Please review your self-assessment and let me hear from you by April 1. Code# 2 6 Community Awareness 1990 IV Emergency Response V 1991 III IV Thomas G. Grumbles ajo 1001GN/TGG.023 cc J. Pavao VVV 0000062.06 TO: Joe Ware FROM: DATE: Interoffice Communication SUBJ: T. G. Grumbles March 18, 1991 ADDITIONALREVIEW OF RESPONSIBLE CARE CAER SELF-EVALUATION RESULTS We have compared the 1990 self-evaluation results with this year's results to identify areas where we have improved. In theory we should not regress on any code element. However, the LC LAB results appear to indicate this has occurred on the elements listed below. Please review these elements to verify this and let me know the cause for this. If it was an inadvertent mistake or actual change in your assessment, 1 need to communicate this change to CMA. It could affect the overall industry trend analysis, but I also need to assure they understand the reasons. I realize the scorecard stages changed this year. Please keep in mind that a stage I and stage VI were added this year to allow consistency with other code selfevaluations. Last year's stage I is a stage II this year, last years stage II is a stage III, etc. This may be a reason for one stage regressions. Please review your self-assessment and let me hear from you by April 1. Code# None 5 Community Awareness 1990 Emergency Response IV 1991 III Thomas G. Grumbles ajo 1001 GN/TGG.022 cc R. Gantz VVV 000006207 TO: George Shirley FROM: DATE: Interoffice SUBJ: Communication T. G. Grumbles March 18, 1991 ADOmONAL.REVIEW OFRESPONSIBLECARE CAER SELF-EVALUATION RESULTS We have compared the 1990 self-evaluation results with this year's results to identify areas where we have improved. In theory we should not regress on any code element. However, the LC VCM results appear to indicate this has occurred on the elements listed below. Please review these elements to verify this and let me know the cause for this. If it was an inadvertent mistake or actual change in your assessment, I need to communicate this change to CMA. It could affect the overall industry trend analysis, but I also need to assure they understand the reasons. I realize the scorecard stages changed this year. Please keep in mind that a stage I and stage VI were added this year to allow consistency with other code selfevaluations. Last year's stage I is a stage I! this year, last years stage II is a stage III, etc. This may be a reason for one stage regressions. Please review your self-assessment and let me hear from you by April 1. Community Awareness Code# 1990 1 IV 3V ____________5___________ V Emergency Response 2V 3V 1991 II IV II IV IV Thomas G. Grumbles ajo 1001 GN/TGG.021 cc P. Carrico VVV 000006203 TO: Keith Fogg Interoffice Communication FROM: DATE: SUBJ: T. G. Grumbles March 18, 1991 ADDITIONALREVIEW OF RESPONSIBLE CARE CAER SELF-EVALUATION RESULTS We have compared the 1990 self-evaluation results with this year's results to identify areas where we have improved. In theory we should not regress on any code element. However, the LCCP results appear to indicate this has occurred on the elements listed below. Please review these elements to verify this and let me know the cause for this. If it was an inadvertent mistake or actual change in your assessment, I need to communicate this change to CMA. It could affect the overall industry trend analysis, but I also need to assure they understand the reasons. I realize the scorecard stages changed this year. Please keep in mind that a stage I and stage VI were added this year to allow consistency with other code selfevaluations. Last year's stage I is a stage II this year, last years stage II is a stage III, etc. This may be a reason for one stage regressions. Please review your self-assessment and let me hear from you by April 1. Code# None | Community Awareness 1990 Emergency Response 5V 7V 1991 ' II III IV Thomas G. Grumbles ajo 1001GN/TGG.020 ec J. Friend WV 000006209 TO: Paul Warner FROM: DATE: Interoffice Communication SUBJ: T. G. Grumbles March 18, 1991 ADDmONALREVlEWOF RESPONSIBLE CARE CAER SELF-EVALUATION RESULTS VISTA We have compared the 1990 Self-evaluation results with this year's results to identify areas where we have improved. In theory we should not regress on any code element. However, the Baltimore results appear to Indicate this has occurred on the elements listed below. Please review these elements to verify this and let me know the cause for this, if it was an inadvertent mistake or actual change in your assessment, I need to communicate this change to CMA. It could affect the overall industry trend analysis, but I also need to assure they understand the reasons. I realize the scorecard stages changed this year. Please keep in mind that a stage I and stage Vi were added this year to allow consistency with other code selfevaluations. Last year's stage 1 is a stage II this year, last years stage II Is a stage III, etc. This may be a reason for one stage regressions. Please review your seif-assessment and let me hear from you by April 1. Code# 1 4 1 Community Awareness 1990 V V Emergency Response V 1991 111 II IV \i -- Thomas G. Grumbles ajo 1001 GN/TGG.019 j cc L. R. Bauer VVV 000006210