Assessment of the PREDIT 3

Submitted by nsennhauser on 5 February, 2009 - 01:00
Assessment of the PREDIT 3
Documents
Appraisal Main Report: 
application/msword iconFR17_T1_Appraisal_report1.doc
Appraisal Appendices Report: 
application/msword icon2283FR17_T1_ToR1.doc
Appraisal Characteristics
Who conducted the appraisal ?: 
External
Timing of the appraisal: 
Ex-Post (after the implementation of the policy measure)
Purpose of the appraisal: 
Summative ("judgemental")
Topics covered in the appraisal (Questions that the appraisal aims to answer)
External Consistency (If the measure's goals were appropriate and consistent with the external challenges the measure was meant : 
Yes
Internal Consistency (If the measure's modalities were appropriate and consistent with its goals): 
Yes
Coherence/Complementarity (Whether the measure was coherent with, and complementary to, other programmes and policy initiatives): 
Yes
Goal Attainment/Effectiveness (If the goals of the measure were achieved): 
Yes
Outputs, Outcomes and Impacts (The consequences or results of the measure): 
Yes
Quality of Outputs (Whether the outputs of projects were of a high quality): 
Yes
Value for Money/Return on Investment/Cost-Benefit Efficiency (If there were adequate returns on investment): 
No
Programme Implementation Efficiency (If the measure was well-managed): 
Yes
Project Implementation Efficiency (If projects supported by the measure were well-managed): 
Yes
Input Additionality (If the measure stimulated more investment in innovation than would have occurred in the absence of the meas: 
Yes
Output Additionality (If the measure stimulated more innovation outputs than would have occurred in the absence of the measure): 
Yes
Behavioural Additionality (If the measure stimulated persistent changes in the behaviours of the participants that would have no: 
Yes
Policy/Strategy Development (Implications for future strategy development and policy formulation): 
Yes
Gender issues: 
No
Minority issues: 
No
Did the appraisal look at the following inpacts?
Scientific: 
Yes, on the participants and beyond
Technological: 
Yes, on the participants and beyond
Economic: 
Yes, on the participants and beyond
Environmental: 
Yes, on the participants and beyond
Sponsor(s) of the appraisal
Programme Owner/Manager: 
Yes
Other Government Department: 
No
Oher Public Bodies (e.g. court of auditors, parliament committee): 
No
Data analysis method employed in the appraisal
Case Study Analysis: 
Employed
Network Analysys: 
Not Employed
Econometric Analysis: 
Not Employed
Descriptive Statistics (e.g. updake analysis): 
Employed
Input/Output Analysis: 
Not Employed
Document Analysis: 
Not Employed
Context Analysis: 
Employed
Before/After Group Comparison Approach: 
Not Employed
Control Group Approach: 
Not Employed
Counter-Factual Approach: 
Employed
Cost/Benefit Approach: 
Not Employed
Data collection methods and data sources employed in the appraisal
Existing Surveys/Databases: 
Employed
Participant Surveys: 
Employed
Non-participant Surveys: 
Not Employed
Interviews: 
Employed
Focus Groups/Workshops/Meetings: 
Employed
Peer Reviews: 
Employed
Technometrics/Bibliometrics Search: 
Not Employed
Document Search: 
Employed
Monitor Data: 
Yes, on the participants and beyond
Main intended audiences for the appraisal
Policy Makers (Politicians): 
Yes
Policy Makers (Government Officials): 
Yes
Programme Management: 
Yes
Auditors/Financial Authorities: 
No
Those directly supported by the measure: 
Yes
External/International (co)sponsor of the measure/programme: 
Yes
Potential Users of the Measure: 
Yes
Policy Analysts: 
No
General Public: 
No
Quality of the Appraisal
Where the Terms of Reference available in the appraisal report?: 
No
  • 234 reads