Suchergebnisse

Intro -- NUTRITIONAL SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS -- NUTRITIONAL SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS -- Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data -- CONTENTS -- PREFACE -- INTRODUCTION -- Chapter 1 -- LITERATURE SEARCHOF PUBLISHED TOOLS -- Chapter 2 -- SELECTION OF AN APPROPRIATE TOOL -- A. TOOL APPLICATION -- Target Population -- Outcome Variable and Risk Groups -- Initial and Subsequent Times of Administration -- Professional Group(s) of Administrators -- Review Conclusion -- B. TOOL DEVELOPMENT -- Content -- Content Based on Literature Search and Experience -- Content Validity -- Format -- Proforma Design -- Pilot Study -- Presentation of Tool -- Derivation -- Redundant Variables Excluded -- Subjective Assessment -- Pre-Defined Criteria -- Total Score -- Other Analytical Procedure -- Review Conclusion -- Chapter 3 -- MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS -- Dataset -- Univariate Analysis -- Multivariate Analysis -- Nutritional Screening Tool -- Evaluation -- Modifications -- Other Multivariate Techniques -- Further Issues -- C. TOOL EVALUATION -- Chapter 4 -- RELIABILITY -- Subjects -- Raters -- Independent Assessments -- Sample Size -- Analysis -- REVIEW CONCLUSION -- METHODOLOGY FOR RELIABILITY STUDY -- Dichotomous Data -- Ordinal Data -- Numerical Data -- Establishment of Reliability -- Chapter 5 -- VALIDITY -- TOOL USAGE -- Subjects -- Raters -- Independent Assessments -- REVIEW CONCLUSION -- CONSTRUCT VALIDITY -- Constructs -- Independent Assessments -- Sample Size -- Analysis -- REVIEW CONCLUSION -- Sample Size for Construct Validity Study -- (I) Equal Size Risk Groups -- (II) Unequal Sized Risk Groups -- Establishment of Construct Validity -- CRITERION VALIDITY -- Independent Assessments -- Sample Size -- Analysis -- REVIEW CONCLUSION -- Sample Size for Criterion Validity Study -- (I) Sensitivity -- (II) Specificity

In recent years, there has been a drive to strengthen existing public accountability arrangements and to design new ones. This prompts the question whether accountability arrangements actually work. In the existing literature, both accountability 'deficits' and 'overloads' are alleged to exist. However, owing to the lack of a cogent yardstick, the debate tends to be impressionistic and event-driven. In this article we develop an instrument for systematically assessing public accountability arrangements, drawing on three different normative perspectives. In the democratic perspective, accountability arrangements should effectively link government actions to the 'democratic chain of delegation'. In the constitutional perspective, it is essential that accountability arrangements prevent or uncover abuses of public authority. In the learning perspective, accountability is a tool to make governments effective in delivering on their promises. We demonstrate the use of our multicriteria assessment tool in an analysis of a new accountability arrangement: the boards of oversight of agencies.

In recent years, there has been a drive to strengthen existing public accountability arrangements and to design new ones. This prompts the question whether accountability arrangements actually work. In the existing literature, both accountability 'deficits' and 'overloads' are alleged to exist. However, owing to the lack of a cogent yardstick, the debate tends to be impressionistic and event-driven. In this article we develop an instrument for systematically assessing public accountability arrangements, drawing on three different normative perspectives. In the democratic perspective, accountability arrangements should effectively link government actions to the 'democratic chain of delegation'. In the constitutional perspective, it is essential that accountability arrangements prevent or uncover abuses of public authority. In the learning perspective, accountability is a tool to make governments effective in delivering on their promises. We demonstrate the use of our multicriteria assessment tool in an analysis of a new accountability arrangement: the boards of oversight of agencies.

An effective and efficient justice system is essential for sustained economic growth. In a well-functioning, independent, and efficient justice system, decisions are taken within a reasonable time and are predictably and effectively enforced, and individual rights, including property rights, are adequately protected. Among other objectives, the efficiency of the judicial system is important for creating a good business climate, attracting foreign direct investment, securing tax revenues, and supporting economic growth. Research has shown that weak contract enforcement, for example, raises the cost of borrowing and shortens loan maturities, with a resulting negative effect on investment and GDP. Weak court enforcement systems have also been linked to late payments, which can lead to liquidity issues for companies and increase insolvency. Since the publication of the World Bank's World Development Report 2005, the importance of well-functioning courts to strengthening the investment climate and ultimately to reducing poverty and boosting shared prosperity has been brought to the forefront and become internationally recognized. Indicators of commercial court performance, and business community perceptions of and trust in the courts, are a part of the World Bank Group's (WBG) country-level investment climate assessments and its influential Investment Climate Surveys and Doing Business reports. Court performance has also become an element of European Union (EU) and Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) accession. Helping countries to improve commercial court operations and ensure improved accessibility and effective delivery of services are important components of the development assistance provided by the WBG. The Commercial Court and Enforcement Assessment Tool has been designed to assist assessment teams and client agencies in this effort.

Unique health identifiers help improve quality and continuum of care, strengthen surveillance of communicable diseases, eradicate diseases, and optimize provider and payer transactions in health financing schemes. They are important enablers for achieving Universal Health Coverage. Through this tool kit, governments and experts will learn how to assess the existing legal, policy, and institutional framework; information and communication technology infrastructure; and current use of identifiers relevant for the health sector, to inform policy decisions on advancing unique identification in the health sector.

In recent years, there has been a drive to strengthen existing public accountability arrangements and to design new ones. This prompts the question whether accountability arrangements actually work. In the existing literature, both accountability 'deficits' and 'overloads' are alleged to exist. However, owing to the lack of a cogent yardstick, the debate tends to be impressionistic and event‐driven. In this article we develop an instrument for systematically assessing public accountability arrangements, drawing on three different normative perspectives. In the democratic perspective, accountability arrangements should effectively link government actions to the 'democratic chain of delegation'. In the constitutional perspective, it is essential that accountability arrangements prevent or uncover abuses of public authority. In the learning perspective, accountability is a tool to make governments effective in delivering on their promises. We demonstrate the use of our multicriteria assessment tool in an analysis of a new accountability arrangement: the boards of oversight of agencies.

In recent years, there has been a drive to strengthen existing public accountability arrangements and to design new ones. This prompts the question whether accountability arrangements actually work. In the existing literature, both accountability 'deficits' and 'overloads' are alleged to exist. However, owing to the lack of a cogent yardstick, the debate tends to be impressionistic and event‐driven. In this article we develop an instrument for systematically assessing public accountability arrangements, drawing on three different normative perspectives. In the democratic perspective, accountability arrangements should effectively link government actions to the 'democratic chain of delegation'. In the constitutional perspective, it is essential that accountability arrangements prevent or uncover abuses of public authority. In the learning perspective, accountability is a tool to make governments effective in delivering on their promises. We demonstrate the use of our multicriteria assessment tool in an analysis of a new accountability arrangement: the boards of oversight of agencies.

AbstractWith the growing need to provide leadership development opportunities for graduate and professional students, this article discusses how to integrate leadership assessment and inventories within graduate and professional education. The DiSC personality test, insights discovery assessment, Myers–Briggs type indicator, and CliftonStrengths will be reviewed and described as tools to foster leadership identity development. Additionally, this article will discuss the need to connect these tools with existing theoretical frameworks.

Determining the appropriate use of national or multicampus leadership assessments requires careful consideration of program goals and resources. This chapter explores quantitative dimensions of assessing leadership.