Operationalization Sample Clauses

Operationalization. As mentioned in the theoretical framework, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ MSF is an adaptable framework making it an adequate theory to use as an analytical tool. Since the concepts of the MSF have been conceptualized in the theoretical framework it is vital to operationalize them. This section will start by operationalizing each stream.

Operationalization. The Parties shall establish, by mutual agreement, the steps and other applicable obligations, in order to operationalize the Prepayment of Receivables operations contained in this Agreement.

Operationalization the ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Interview (ZBI) questionnaire, which aims in assessing the reduction of the burden of care of the caregivers, was adapted in order to build the questionnaire “PART G – Care Demand”. This questionnaire will be administered at the beginning and at the end of the trial to a group of caregivers involved in the trial phase.

Operationalization. Table 1 summarizes the operationalization. Concerning systematic coverage, we appended the EPL evaluations found to the dataset containing major legislation to establish the proportion of legislation evaluated. It should be stressed that one EPL evaluation report may cover multiple pieces of legis- lation. Additionally, we charted the number of evaluations per year and assessed how many evaluations were obligatory in nature, owing to the pres- ence of an evaluation clause. We then established the object of evaluation, distinguishing between evaluations of regulations, of directives and of treaty articles. 1336 Journal of European Public Policy Table 1 Operationalization of meta-evaluation aspects Variable Aspect Indicator Source Systematic coverage Proportion Proportion of major legislation 2000 – 2002 covered by EPL evaluations Dataset 1 Number Number of EPL evaluations per year, 2000 – 2011 Dataset 2 Obligatory Proportion of obligatory evaluations Evaluation clause in evaluated legislation Object Regulation, directive or treaty article Evaluation report Type of evaluation Process Transposition, realization, implementation, compliance, enforcement, as reflected by central goal/question Product Achievement, effectiveness, efficiency, effects, as reflected by central goal/ question Evaluation report Evaluation report Methodological quality Well-defined scope Clear problem definition: 1 point Evaluation report Measurement validity Operationalization into clear indicators present before presentation of the results: 1 point External validity Justified selection of member states: 1 point Representative selection of cases within member states: 1 point Less than 50 per cent non-response at surveys or interviews: 1 point Reliability Replicability: 1 point Robust methodology Justification of methods: 1 point Substantiated findings Triangulation: 1 point Aggregate quality Aggregate score on the eight dimensions Process quality Stakeholder involvement No stakeholder involvement, stakeholder involvement for empirical information or stakeholder involvement for evaluation process as stated by the evaluation report Evaluation report Public availability Evaluation report made available by SG, DG, or elsewhere European Commission SG and DG websites Usefulness Clear executive summary Useful recommendations Executive summary of no more than 10 pages or report itself is less than 10 pages: Evaluation report 1 point Possible actions within the power of the Commission: 1 point ...

Operationalization. According to participating end user organisations, the social interaction of the elderly with a formal caregiver is not relevant to be assessed since this will not increase during the course of the trial. On the other hand the social interaction between the elder and his informal caregivers it is important for the elderly’s quality of life and will possibly be influenced by the Miraculous-Life project positively. Objective and subjective measurements will be used to measure the increase in social interaction of the elderly.

Operationalization. 18.1 The Applicant/Producer in cooperation with KOSTT will comply with the plans and responsibilities of the Connection Point defined in the Connection Code. These will be finalized before the generating equipment is connected. The Producer shall provide a statement that the generating equipment meets the requirements of the Connection Code, along with all technical requirements. 18.2 The Applicant/Producer shall fulfill all the conditions required in the Grid Code - Connection Code with respect to the Connection Point Assets and generation. 18.3 KOSTT has the right to test the Connection Point Assets to ensure that they are in compliance with the terms of this CA and the Network Code. The Applicant/Producer, Producer, and Independent Engineer have the right to attend the testing of the Connection Point Assets according to the Grid Code. 18.4 Prior to commissioning Connection Point Assets, the Producer must prepare all the necessary documentation for the Technical Approval Commission from KOSTT. Documentation includes various project designs, such as material/work type certificates, construction log, as well as other documents specified by the Technical Approval Commission of KOSTT and/or technical approval of Projects by KOSTT, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed. 18.4.1 KOSTT and the Applicant/Producer will follow the provisions required by the Energization Procedure for RES Generation Modules in the Transmission Network, developed by KOSTT.

Operationalization. The operationalization of TPA, NPM and PVM is based on their key char- acteristics that have been identified in the previous section: first column of table 1. These characteristics have been largely based on ▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ and ▇’▇▇▇▇▇’▇ conceptualizations of TPA, NPM and PVM, and ▇▇▇▇▇’▇ con- ceptualization of public value. Table 1 discusses these characteristics very theoretical without referring to a specific sector. Here, the table will be discussed again, but now more specifically for the MBO sector. In TPA, the Dutch second chamber would provide input for the strategy of the Executive Boards of ROC’s and AOC’s and the MBO institutions have to follow these guidelines, deciding very little themselves. The Inspection of Education and the Supervisory Board would play a big role and would extensively check whether ROC’s and AOC’s comply with the guidelines provided the Ministry. In NPM, the Ministry would conclude contracts with ROC’s and AOC’s including targets for which the Executive Board and the directors of the MBO colleges are responsible to achieve. In return for meeting targets, ROC’s and AOC’s would receive money as an incentive for performance. NPM would also include competition between ROC’s and AOC’s because contracts could for example contain agreements stating for example: the better a school’s study success, the more money it receives from the Ministry. PVM would include a more bottom-up approach where the Executive Boards of ROC’s and AOC’s would take more initiative in deciding on their strategy, in partnership with the Ministry, firms in their region and the municipality council or citizen representatives. The partners would pursue a common goal, which improving the quality of the skills of MBO graduates and provide the region with graduates that are adequately trained. 1. Managerial goals This characteristic examines whether the management of the ROC van Twente focuses on bureaucratic inputs, performance or on public value. A strong bureaucratic oversight will be identified by looking at the extent to which there is attention for compliance, rules and procedures. Whether the management of the ROC van Twente emphasizes performance will be identified by looking at the extent to which it focuses primarily on efficiency and targets such as a low dropout rate and study tempo instead of e.g. goals that are closer to what students want. A focus on public value by the management will be identified by examining how much attention there is for what stud...

Operationalization. The system will automatically and continuously measure the number of alerts generated in a weekly basis (1) Fall detection: the system measures (i) the number of fall detection (state 2: The Miraculous-Life system detects the figure of the elderly on the floor), (ii) the number of false alarm (state 3: ▇▇▇▇▇▇ stands up. She feels good and answers: “No, I am ok now”), (iii) the number of alarms sent to caregivers with the validation of the user (state 5: ▇▇▇▇▇▇ answers: “Yes” or “Call for help”), (iv) the number of alarms sent to caregivers without the validation of the user (see state 6.1 Conditional preferred solution)