A further level of complexity is added by the FPs’ extended range of objectives and their of- ten rather general formulation. The traditional objective to strengthen European research has been complemented by expected research contributions to reaching larger EU economic goals and by the inclusion of the policy goal of building the ERA. This leads to an ever more complex portfolio of FP objectives and of expected contributions to various overarching pol- icy goals without a visible, spelled-out single overall FP target. This reflects the complex real- ity of European research and permits the FP to react to the core issues of the European re- search system in a flexible way. But it makes it also difficult to assess the ‘success’ of the FP and its elements and to identify the relationships between individual action lines or instru- ments and observed outcomes. In addition, especially broader policy and overall FP objec- tives are typically expressed in qualitative, but not in quantitative terms. Therefore, quantifi- able success criteria and baselines, against which achievements could be measured, are not readily available. This opens a wide field for (potentially subjective) interpretation and makes it difficult to measure the programme’s performance against its initial objectives, the rele- vance of these initial objectives (in the light of actual situation) and its performance against possibly revised criteria. A higher degree of measurability would be desirable. 21 A step into this direction has been made with the ex-ante impact assessment of FP7 (European Com- mission (2005b)), which has formulated a number of such quantifiable objectives.
implies a rising awareness of the need for effective M&E procedures in order to increase the social and economic effectiveness of budget expenditures. Thus, the CMU “Declaration of goals and objectives of the budget policy for 2008” set tasks with regard to the development of “norms and standards of the uniﬁ ed legislative base of the state internal ﬁ nancial control system” and “implementation of a sy- stem of continuous monitoring and measurement of the budget program perfor- mance indicators for the purpose of managerial decision-making”. In an analogous 2009 declaration, a goal was set to “conduct monitoring of the effectiveness of BP fulﬁ lment by means of improving evaluation criteria” to increase the effectiveness of public expenditures. Thus, we may state that the Ukrainian government, at least on paper, understands the need for better monitoring and evaluation of public expenditure programs. At the same time, in spite of the above mentioned declara- tions, the regulatory environment of M&E has remained rather disconnected, lacking the general methodology for M&E and incentives to implement it. From the very beginning of PBB implementation, some researchers have discus- sed approaches to PI formulation (Pavlyuk, 2005). After the MoF approved its recommendations concerning PIs, it became clear that MSUs would not follow them properly. Some Ukrainian researchers noted the inadequacy of current PI sets used for M&E purposes: they do not truly reﬂ ect the effectiveness and efﬁ - ciency of the spending of money on a BP implementation. Such conclusions were made concerning BPs in health care (Pryimak and Baryla, 2010), agriculture (Ko- marova, 2008) and some other areas. Our study of a BP dedicated to the state support of coal mining industry brought us to the same conclusion.
A discrepancy was defined as a difference between the accumulated weekly data versus the monthly data. A fur- ther analysis of data transfer accuracy (Figure 2) showed that it was in particular for the “under 5” and “treatment adherence support” indicators, that discrepancies be- tween the weekly and monthly totals were observed. For example, CHW1 had 68 visits on her weekly forms for “treatment adherence support”, whereas she reported 46 on the monthly form. This shows an absolute discrep- ancy of 22. When the CHWs were asked about the dis- crepancies in the paper forms, they reported that it was due to the lack of understanding the indicator defini- tions: “We never got [proper] training for the paper sys- tem. We don’t know about the new paper forms. We were given the paper forms and its up to us to understand those with our knowledge. We are confused on household visits and other elements. When new tools are added, we never get additional training” (FGD November 2012).
The site profile is a form used to obtain a general overview of the selected implementation site. The implementing sites are expected to provide (upload) similar data to RASDOON, the regional web-based surveillance system. The general information obtained by this form is extremely useful during the initial stage of the monitoring process. The tool covers: demographic information, management of health facilities, availability of the basic infrastructure and social facilities, community organization (clarifying the number of trained cluster representatives, members of the village/community development committee (VDC/CDC), education, health and sanitation status, major community-based interventions and a brief on community needs and plans for the future.
While these milestones are of note, the community of ocean researchers and users has only begun to realize the potential of optical sensor technologies. New sensor tech- nologies require decade-level time and support to see con- cepts to wide-scale adoption (Weisberg et al., 2007). With the notable exceptions of oxygen optodes, turbidity sensors, chlorophyll a fluorometers, and possibly PAR sensors, most commercial sensors are still sold only for specific research niches, and have yet to reach the larger ocean monitoringcommunity. Many of the technologies described in this arti- cle are still in developmental phases and are still years away from commercial realization. For those sensors that are com- mercialized there are still significant issues in assimilating them into the current ocean monitoring infrastructure. For turbidity sensors and single channel fluorometers, this is a relatively straight forward process. However, as the sen- sors become more complex so does the problem of integra- tion. Beyond the basic challenges of coupling sensors into platforms and systems, there are other issues, such as pro- duction of data products appropriate for models, examina- tion with other sampling methods and tools, and develop- ment of general usage protocols and expectations for accu- racy, stability and other qualities that make a sensor widely useful. These are transition steps that must eventually be ac- complished with all sensors if they are to serve in an op- erational capacity. A unique aspect for the case of optical sensors comes from the quantity and diversity of technolo- gies involved. With the continued advancement of enabling technologies, the progress in the newer spectroscopic meth- ods for sensors, and the growing demand for understanding ocean processes and providing effective resource manage- ment, the pressure for technology will only grow. It is im- portant for the scientific community to understand that, as with the other aspects of development, effective adoption and transition is going to require qualified people and a consistent commitment of resources for years to come.
Discussion with peers to refine plans and challenge ideas Throughout the four steps above, plans were discussed with internal and external colleagues to benefit from their sugges- tions. We shared draft ToCs and M&E plans with experts in M&E and engagement in other countries, through email, Skype and presentations at two workshops on community engagement (the Global Health Bioethics Network 2016 Summer School, and the GHBN/MESH 2017 Evaluating Community Engagement workshop). These discussions challenged and refined our thinking about intended goals and impact pathways. In particu- lar, they pointed to the importance of considering impacts on researchers, the difficulty of attaining some higher level outcomes, and the value of less instrumental outcomes such as enjoyment among participants, aspects discussed further below.
The researcher would also like to note that most of the respondents would prefer to rate the Likert scale in the middle part. Perhaps, despite the explanations and forewarnings, the respondents seemed to be wary about putting their school down in terms of performance, thus, they were more inclined to rate the level of implementation somewhere in the middle part. Despite this fact, many of the respondents rated the level of implementation under the fourth item lower as compared to the previously mentioned statements. Therefore, the information still provided important implications on how data was utilized during SMEA conferences. The current SMEA system involves a great number of indicators. Important questions regarding its utilization should be carefully answered. For instance, do the data gathered truly represent the current effort of the school, the teachers and the community? Are the indicators used results indicators or behavioral indicators? If so, are the data gathered used to implicate the teachers and the school staff? These questions were further delved into the narrative analysis of the interview responses. The study of Huse (2005) has explicated the need for avoiding indicators that are not in complete control of the employees. Such indicators will lessen accountability since employees will feel the injustice of how their performance is measured.
Therefore it may not come as a surprise that after the ending of the Joint Action for ECHIM in June 2012, no follow up structure was put in place by the Commission. The Commission is performing a formal evaluation of the use and usefulness of ECHI in/for the Member States in 2013 and thereafter a decision about ECHI’s fu- ture will be taken. The success and future of ECHI, how- ever, depends on the ability of a central EU organization to organise and implement the collection and use of ECHI data at EU level in health monitoring and reporting. A health information system like ECHI needs constant maintenance, e.g. in the form of metadata compilation and indicator improvement. In addition, the countries need to be able to provide required data in a timely way and with sufficient quality, preferably through international data
effort on behalf of the local authority (Blair & Murphy-Greene 2006), as well as social-scientific and technical expertise (Johnston & Memon 2007). However, if indicators are to truly reflect the values of all sectors of the community, local authorities must secure the input of a cross-section of the community during indicator development processes (Blair & Murphy-Greene 2006, Burke 2004, Hoernig & Seasons 2004). This is best achieved through a participatory approach to indicator development. Under the LGA, local authorities must measure the progress of their community outcomes through monitoring selected indicators, and then report progress back to the community. Although the LGA gives councils very little guidance to how they should go about developing, monitoring and reporting indicators, it is expected that councils undertake the process in a participatory and ongoing manner (Johnston & Memon 2007). The first round of mandatory three yearly community outcomes progress reports is due shortly. The purpose of this research is to explore the manner in which different local authorities are undertaking the function of community indicator development, monitoring and reporting for community outcomes. This will be examined both broadly and in-depth. The research will also explore the related issues of co- ordination and integration between LGA and Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) indicator monitoring and reporting regimes, and the extent of co-ordination and integration of community indicator frameworks across government authorities.
The third challenge is linked to the adoption of a new decision-making process within the Commission and the systematic requirement for ex-ante assessments. This faces evaluation with a lasting issue since the causality between very broad objectives (e.g. improving competitiveness or employment) and precise actions (which are limited in scope to match the RTD support) is difficult to establish. This calls for focusing attention on the ways political “broad” goals are transformed into “research policy objectives” and expression of the latter in ways that are “verifiable”, i.e. subject to quantification or description which can later be measured or traced. This has three implications for the proposed process. (i) The establishment of verifiable objectives should be a major deliverable of ex-ante impact assessment activities, requiring strong articulation between both activities. (ii) However, one should be cautious, at least for the coming period, to keep open the notion of “verification” and recognise that in many instances, “qualitative indicators” (which are better labelled “descriptors”) are better suited to analyse effects. (iii) This calls for considering the first round of such evaluations as “real size experiments”, thus accepting a trial-and-error process and remaining realistic in terms of what it can deliver.
T his translates into an important waste of knowledge on essential aspects of the Portuguese economy and society. T his finding is in line with Anninos (2014), Altbach (2015) and Lopes (2016) developments and findings. It is evidence in favor of the existence of an important vicious circle in the production, dissemination and use of scientific knowledge’s results described in Figure 1. T he results of knowledge that fall outside the international reference repertories become obscured and underutilized, irrespective of their relevance to the country in question, even if they are published in other types of scientific publications. On the other hand, knowledge disseminated throughout those repertoires is well recognized, widely disseminated and perceived as prestigious, even though it has little or nothing to do with the specific characteristics and problems of the society which correspond to the scientific community that produces them. It often assumes the character of ‘official knowledge’, in the words of Michael Apple, that successive generations run the risk of being fed with.
3.1. General Evaluation Index System of Collaborative Innovation of School-Enterprise Based on the research results at home and abroad, this paper classifies indexes used to evaluate collaborative innovation ability of school-enterprise into three categories: knowledge collaborative innovation ability, tech- nology collaborative innovation ability and information collaborative innovation ability. Among these three categories, information collaborative innovation ability has never been put forwarded by scholars, because they classified it into knowledge collaborative innovation ability. In consideration of the need for the development of information era and information that is playing an increasing important role in universities and enterprises, this paper presents information collaborative innovation ability with knowledge collaborative innovation ability and technology collaborative innovation ability. Furthermore, this paper extracts typical indexes to value it accord- ing to practical situation, enriching narrow connotation of information, extending it to degree of information sharing and opening. In accordance to this framework, these three main factors are broke up into eighteen sub- factors, as shown in Table 1.
Abstract: Randomized clinical trials are the preferred study design to address key research questions about the bene ﬁ ts or harms of interventions. However, randomized trials of oxygen therapy are dif ﬁ cult to conduct and have limitations. The purpose of this article is to offer our view on the potential use of patient registries in the ﬁ eld of home oxygen in COPD as an alternative to randomized trials by referring to the Swedish experience with a national registry for respiratory failure. Patient registries use observational study methods to collect uniform data (clinical and other) to evaluate speci ﬁ ed outcomes for a population de ﬁ ned by a particular disease, condition, or exposure. As opposed to administrative databases, patient registries serve one or more predetermined scienti ﬁ c, clinical, or policy purposes. By systematically and prospectively compiling relevant data, patient registries may describe the natural history of a disease, determine effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, assess safety or harm, and measure quality of care. Registry-based randomized trials (ie, randomized trials within a clinical registry) combine the advantages of a prospective randomized trial with the strengths of a large-scale all-comers clinical registry. Challenges and issues in the design and implementa- tion of patient registries include the representativeness of participants, data collection, quality assurance, ownership, and governance. Notwithstanding their limitations, patient registries represent valuable tools in the conduct of research in the area of home oxygen therapy. Keywords: patient registry, home oxygen, COPD, evaluation
Until recently the two main indicators recommended for the assessment of progress in malaria prevention with insecticide-treated nets (ITN) have been the “proportion of households owning at least one ITN” and the “propor- tion of children under five (or pregnant women) sleeping under an ITN the previous night” . These indicators have been used to monitor progress in the early years  as well as following the scale-up of mass distributions of ITN around 2005 [3-6] and consistently found a consider- able gap between ownership of at least one ITN at house- hold level and actual use of ITN by children which has often been interpreted as a failure to convince people to use available nets and triggered calls for better behavioural change communication (BCC) programmes  and/or assistance in hanging the nets . While undoubtedly there is need for BCC programmes to strengthen net use and strategies have been developed for these , it has been pointed out as early as 2009 by Eisele and colleagues that the most important determinant of use is ownership of enough ITN, and that BCC programmes should address the gap that remains once sufficient intra-household access to ITN has been achieved . This was confirmed by Hetzel et al. in Papua Guinea who observed that 99.5% of household members not using a net did not have access to one within the household  and pointed to the need to better differentiate between a lack of ITN within the household and the behavioral failure to use a net that was available.
Abstract - Mobile agent paradigm derives from two basic disciplines –artificial intelligence from where the concept of an agent originated and distributed systems that define the notion of code mobility having found applications in several areas. However, the implementation of an agent-based system can be through any client/server technology, it is different from classical client/server systems because there is no clear distinction between a client and a server. The mobile agent technology offers several unique capabilities to address the challenges in this area. The objective of this research is to; design a Mobile Agent System for monitoring and evaluating security applications in a network environment and develop a mobile agent capable of increasing the performance of the mobile agent by reducing the size of the agent and also to develop a mobile agent that will be acceptable to all hosts.
However, one major response in protecting flora values is the founding of a series of Phytophthora management zones (Schahinger et al. 2003). These are areas known to be free of P.cinnamomi and which correspond with suites of threatened species. The zones are agreed by land managers across government to be those requiring special quarantine measures and recognise that previous policy had not worked. For example, throughout the 1980s and 1990s the attempt to limit the spread of Phytophthora was through codes of practice, bushwalking guidelines, signs and education. No legal requirements attached to Phytophthora management, except where conditions were specified in statutory park management plans. The Phytophthora management zones then indicate a cross-cutting response in respect of a particular vegetation management issue. The failure of the approaches was recognised and a new defensive approach was proposed. The thrust of this was to draw a line around public land areas that contained flora values and were free of Phytophthora cinnamomi. Such areas were on various tenures of public land, including that managed by Forestry Tasmania and land managed by the Parks and Wildlife Service. Agreement across government was obtained in order to have uniform management measures adopted. These zones were established in 2003 but no monitoring of their efficacy has been instituted. This will be necessary to assess whether the zones are maintained, whether other responses to the threat need to be devised, or whether the attempt to manage for Phytophthora cinnamomi is
The overall case study revealed that there has been a definite lack of co-ordination between the key stakeholders especially of the executing agency with the PAPs right from the inception of the subproject. The consultations with the people in the subproject area reveled that they were not consulted during the feasibility study stage of the project and were not fully made aware about the subproject to be taken in hand and hence they remained to a great extent ignorant about the project. The affected people were not made aware of their respective entitlements and kept ignorant of their due compensation in terms of their respective asset loss and due compensations. The entitlement matrix adopted for the project was not discussed with the people as is a requirement as per the Loan agreement of ADB’s Loan 2151 under which Qazigund Kulgam Road is a subproject. It can also be concluded that the project being first of its kind in terms of it being externally funded both the officials at the exacting agency level as well as the people at the ground level were indifferent to their responsibilities and entitlements respectively. The executing agency on the one hand was not fully prepared to ensure compliance to the agreed upon resettlement frame work especially the participatory approach in dealing with the resettlement impacts of the subproject and they seemed to deal with the resettlement as they had been doing in the past while on the other hand people due to indifference from the executing agency did not come forward on time with their genuine demands as they were not aware the project being participatory in nature. Although the Short Resettlement Plan of the subproject has been prepared by the executing agency and stands approved by ADB yet its implementation by an experience NGO/agency has not been deemed necessary by the executing agency and that has definitely led to the problems that the people faced. One more important thing that can be concluded is the negative effect of absence of a proper monitoring and evaluation mechanism with the executing agency. Had there been proper monitoring and evaluation the grievances of the people to a great extent would have been solved in time and the resettlement issues of the subproject would have not been so grave.