Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Evaluation recommendations are sometimes included in evaluation reports to highlight specific actions to be taken to improve a program or to make other changes to its operational context. This preliminary study sought to examine evaluation recommendations drawn from 25 evaluation reports published by Canadian federal government departments and agencies, in order to examine the evaluation issues covered and the focus of the recommendations. Our results show that in keeping with policy requirements, the evaluation recommendations focused on program relevance, effectiveness and efficiency and economy. Furthermore, a significant number of recommendations also focused on the implementation of more rigorous performance measurement strategies. The focus of the recommendations did not vary by publication date, recommendation type, and organizational sector. The findings also show that for the most part, the management responses produced as part of the broader evaluation process support the recommendations included in the report and identify specific timelines for implementation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.02.008 | DOI Listing |