Evaluation Questions. Describe the customer service team that will be dedicated to the State of Florida account, including the team structure and how State of Florida users will be able to contact your company for customer service.
Evaluation Questions. This section is worth 250 points in the Technical Proposal. Each Question will be assigned points based evaluation criteria outlined below:
Evaluation Questions. The crawler used in the evaluation has four functions; each of them was inspected.
Evaluation Questions. The following is a list of indicative and generic evaluation questions. A more specific set of evaluation questions shall be drafted and validated during the inception phase of the evaluation, especially taking account of the results described in ‘COVID delays mitigation’ above, so that the external evaluation efforts are complementary to those already evident from the project progress reports produced in December 2022. The CLIMWAR project (started 2017) also provided an extensive report, including self-assessment, at the end of 2022. In line with the main purpose presented above, the evaluation will focus on the following two main aspects. ⮚ Adequacy of XXXX Governance, management and coordination mechanisms: • In what ways could the deployment of resources under XXXX be optimized to enhance the potential impacts of the invested financial resources (e.g., ensuring complementarities with other UNESCO donors in order to multiply effects and avoid duplications)? (Question AC-1) • How effective and efficient are the governance, coordination, advisory, management frameworks established under the trust fund by the two sides? This includes the meetings of the Steering Committee and bilateral consultations between UNESCO’s relevant services and the Flemish Government (in particular with BSP, the Natural Science Sector, IOC and concerned field offices) and the project selection process in Flanders. (Question AE-1) ⮚ Assessment of projects funded under the Trust Fund, in particular the following selected Large-Scale projects: OTGA 2, OIH, PACMAN, CLIMWAR and BE- RESILIENT - Relevance: • To what extent was the timeframe, the geographic coverage and thematic coverage of the projects adequate within the context of the overall programmes? (Question R-1) • What is the current and future potential of the projects to contribute to relevant UNESCO’s/ the Flemish government policies in the light of the 2030 Agenda? (Question R-2) • To what extent did the selected projects meet stakeholder and beneficiaries’ needs in consideration of regional, national and basin scale (local) priorities? (Question R-3) Has there been particular attention to consideration of how scientific and science-based activities can be true enablers, how the projects related to specific area-based disadvantaged groups, indigenous peoples, and any social and environmental concerns specific to the project and, more generally, of gender equality? (Question R-4) • How has the support provided through XXXX c...
Evaluation Questions. Below are a set of general questions organized by categories that support the evaluation goals and objectives. The purpose of listing these general questions is to facilitate dialogue between the evaluation team, CIRD management and USAID to determine if the evaluation is meeting their needs and expectations. Technical progress toward achieving results • Is the CIRD technical strategy clearly linked to the USAID results? • Is the workplan and activitie s clearly linked to the USAID results? • What measurable progress has been made toward each of the objectives? • Does the monitoring and evaluation plan, process and tools adequately measure the desired results? • If there have been problems achieving the stated results, what have they been and why? • How can the strategy and/or workplan be modified to address these challenges? Management support toward achieving results • Has CIRD hired the staff and consultants with the appropriate skills and experience? Is there enough staff to carry out the workplan within budget? • Do CIRD staff and consultants’ scopes of work job match the technical program? Is the staff fully utilized to their potential? Is the staff producing the desired technical results? • Does the workplan program the right type and mix of technical activities that will lead to the desired technical results? • Does the budget support these activities? • Does CIRD management review workplan activities and budgets on a regular basis to ensure that activities are on-time and on-track to deliver results? Do they review it with the staff? • Do CIRD staff and consultants receive adequate and timely guidance and feedback on their work from Project Director? From USAID? Quality of CIRD technical assistance • Does CIRD provide timely and quality technical assistance that responds to the counterparts needs? • How well do CIRD staff work with the counterparts? With USAID? With other partner organizations? • Do CIRD staff use the latest methodologies and technical approaches in their work? • What is positive and you want CIRD to continue and/or expand? • How can CIRD improve the quality of their technical assistance?
Evaluation Questions. The desired outcomes driving Georgia Organics’ FTS program are centered around increased access and implementation of FTS for districts and ECE centers, improved access for historically underrepresented and under-resourced populations, increased purchasing from and connectedness to local organic farms, and specific farm to school activities related to regenerative agriculture and climate change mitigation. As such, the key outcome questions motivating the evaluation follow these specific program themes and anticipated program results. Key evaluation questions include:
1. Are schools and early care and education centers reporting increased knowledge, capacity and intentions of incorporating farm to school activities following Georgia Organics’ workshops and trainings?
2. Are schools and early care and education centers reporting increased implementation of organic, local food procurement, regenerative school garden practices, and incorporation of food, nutrition, and regenerative agriculture education in the curriculum following Georgia Organics’ farm to school activities?
3. Do a greater number of BIPOC, Spanish speaking, special needs, or strike force district students have access to and participate in farm to school activities each year?
4. Are students and families more connected to local food and is the amount of money spent on local food increasing each year?
5. Is the farm to school team equipped to incorporate racial equity into their work across the state and equitably distribute resources and knowledge through farm to school program activities?
Evaluation Questions. Task 1: The evaluator shall collaborate with the stakeholders to develop agreed-upon questions for the guidance of the evaluation study at a preliminary meeting. This meeting shall take place prior to the development of this contract.
Evaluation Questions. The IEB will evaluate the extent to which IGC successfully influences the adoption and implementation of credible growth policies in developing countries, and influences global debates. The IEB should be guided by considering the evaluation questions below, but are free to set their own, and ensure alignment with the evaluation purpose and objectives set out in Section 2 above as well as recognised evaluation criteria (the DAC evaluation criteria).
Evaluation Questions. The evaluation of program effectiveness focuses on how well the program is being marketed and implemented and the reactions of participating employees to the various program components. Factors that can being reviewed to determine whether the program is being properly administered are reach, awareness, satisfaction, knowledge gained and improved health habits or conditions. The primary questions the evaluation seeks to address and the associated indicators are displayed in Table 1.
Evaluation Questions. This M&E Plan contains the following evaluation questions; however, the final list of questions will be documented in the final evaluation designs. Facility Sub-Activity: Wherever relevant, each evaluation question shall be addressed for both funding windows
