Qualitative evaluation. The QuickGel LD Gel may be visually inspected for the presence of the bands.
Qualitative evaluation. The SPIFE Lipoprotein Gel may be visually inspected for the presence of bands.
Qualitative evaluation. The QuickGel Lipoprotein Gel may be visually inspected for the presence of bands.
Qualitative evaluation. The SPIFE IFE-9 Gel will be automatically scanned. Refer to the QuickScan Touch Plus Operator’s Manual for scanning parameters.
Qualitative evaluation. The urine and CSF samples run on the SPIFE Split Beta SPE Gel can only be visually inspected for the presence of the bands.
Qualitative evaluation. The Service Provider shall provider to the Fund the qualitative work package which is designed to provide the detailed, in depth understanding of the programme. The work package will be led by the Service Provider, with Brunel University also helping to design and deliver the work. This work package will specifically address research and evaluation questions around the understanding of the effectiveness of the approaches used by the projects. It will also explore in greater depth the causal factors and provide deeper and more vivid information about both individuals’ journeys and how the interventions are delivered in practice. It will also help to explore emerging findings from the impact evaluation, to explore the reasons why certain impacts are being felt, or not. The following tasks should be performed by the Service Provider: Annual project pro-forma Each of the 15-20 local areas will be asked to complete qualitative pro-forma on annual basis throughout the lifetime of their project (i.e. in years two to seven of the evaluation contract). This will be completed either electronically, or over the phone, as part of a project support catch up with their designated researcher, depending on the project’s preference. The purpose of the pro-forma will be to provide insights into the chosen delivery approach(es), their effectiveness, lessons learned and any changes or improvements made over the course of the project. The first pro-forma collection stage will take place after project delivery has fully commenced and will explore projects’ delivery approaches and inform the development of the project cluster typology that the Service Provider will use to inform our impact evaluation and linked analysis. This will in turn inform the type of case studies conducted in the project. Subsequent annual pro-formas will focus on capturing on-going learning and identifying good practice examples which will also feed into the themes and topics covered by learning events and programme level blogs and programme and project level reporting. The pro-forma will be carefully designed alongside the Fund’s own monitoring processes to ensure it does not duplicate efforts. Each year the Service Provider will review its design to ensure it captures the most relevant information. The further details are provided in the section 4.5 of Service Provider’s tender response (Annex 2 to this Contract).
Qualitative evaluation. This is based on analysis of the time-distance graphs. The re-planning performed, and the simulations based on the execution of the new RTTP, can be studied. In a first step the analysis and evaluation are made by the researchers. In a later step the quality of the re-planning decisions will also be evaluated by experienced traffic controller from the TCC in Boden.
Qualitative evaluation. The QuickGel CK Vis Isoenzyme Gel may be visually inspected for the presence of the bands.
Qualitative evaluation. 5.6.1 The qualitative evaluation of submissions will assess the responses to the Method Statement (5.3 of the Form of Tender). Method Statements Question Section Maximum score per question Weighting Points Available A1 Workforce 5 5 25 A2 Workforce Y/N n/a A3 Workforce 5 5 25 A4 Workforce 5 5 25 B1 Service Delivery 5 4 20 B2 Service Delivery 5 4 20 B3 Service Delivery 5 4 20 C1 User Focus 5 4 20 C2 User Focus 5 4 20 C3 User Focus 5 4 20 C4 User Focus 5 3 15 D1 Service Monitoring 5 4 20 D2 Service Monitoring 5 2 10 E1 Continuous Improvement 5 3 15 E2 Continuous Improvement 5 3 15 F1 Sustainability 5 4 20 G1 TUPE 5 2 10 Sub-total 5 60 300 H1(a) LOT 1 5 10 50 H2(a) LOT 1 5 10 50 H1(b) LOT 2 5 10 50 H2(b) LOT 2 5 10 50 H1(c) LOT 3 5 10 50 H2(c) LOT 3 5 10 50 H1(d) LOT 4 5 10 50 H2(d) LOT 4 5 10 50 Sub-total 5 20 100 Total Quality 5 80 400 Total Price 5 20 100 Note: For each of the Lots, the total of 500 marks is available. This consists of: 400 (Quality) + 100 (Price)
Qualitative evaluation. The Contractor shall collate data regarding whether statutory expectations have been 'met fully', 'partially' or 'not at all', probing case-wide consistency. In addition, the Contractor shall establish whether weaknesses or strengths in this regard, concentrate around particular points in the case handling and decision making process. The Contractor shall note any significant differences between court areas, although findings here will be necessarily tentative given the sample size. This evaluative analysis shall include specific reference to the extent to which effective participation by children and parents (and other relevant parties) in the process and representation of their views and the evidence they wish to adduce has been ensured at each decision point. Finally, the Contractor shall map particular difficulties arising in each case and the nature of their resolution onto the decision making process in each case.
