861 resultados para Reward Cost Benefit Evaluation


Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This report introduces the ENPI project called “EMIR - Exploitation of Municipal and Industrial Residues” which was executed in a co-operation between Lappeenranta University of Technology (LUT), Saint Petersburg State University of Economics (SPbSUE), Saint Petersburg State Technical University of Plant Polymers (SPbSTUPP) and industrial partners from both Leningrad Region (LR), Russia and Finland. The main targets of the research were to identify the possibilities for deinking sludge management scenarios in co-operation with partner companies, to compare the sustainability of the alternatives, and to provide recommendations for the companies in the Leningrad Region on how to best manage deinking sludge. During the literature review, 24 deinking sludge utilization possibilities were identified, the majority falling under material recovery. Furthermore, 11 potential utilizers of deinking sludge were found within the search area determined by the transportation cost. Each potential utilizer was directly contacted in order to establish cooperation for deinking sludge utilization. Finally, four companies, namely, “Finnsementti” – a cement plant in Finland (S1), “St.Gobian Weber” – a light-weight aggregate plant in Finland (S2), “LSR-Cement” – a cement plant in LR (S3), and “Rockwool” – a stone wool plant in LR (S4) were seen as the most promising partners and were included in the economic and environmental assessments. Economic assessment using cost-benefit analysis (CBA) indicated that substitution of heavy fuel oil with dry deinking sludge in S2 was the most feasible option with a benefit/cost ratio (BCR) of 3.6 when all the sludge was utilized. At the same time, the use of 15% of the total sludge amount (the amount that could potentially be treated in the scenario) resulted in a BCR of only 0.16. The use of dry deinking sludge in the production of cement (S3) is a slightly more feasible option with a BCR of 1.1. The use of sludge in stone wool production is feasible only when all the deinking sludge is used and burned in an existing incineration plant. The least economically feasible utilization possibility is the use of sludge in cement production in Finland (S1) due to the high gate fee charged. Environmental assessment was performed applying internationally recognized life cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies: ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. The results of a consequential LCA stated that only S1 and S2 lead to a reduction of all environmental impacts within the impact categories chosen compared to the baseline scenario where deinking sludge is landfilled. Considering S1, the largest reduction of 13% was achieved for the global warming potential (GWP), whereas for S2, the largest decrease of abiotic depletion potential (ADP) was by 1.7%, the eutrophication potential (EP) by 1.8%, and a GWP of 2.1% was documented. In S3, the most notable increase of ADP and acidification potential (AP) by 2.6 and 1.5% was indicated, while the GWP was reduced by 12%, the largest out of all the impact categories. In S4, ADP and AP increased by 2.3 and 2.1% respectively, whereas ODP was reduced by 25%. During LCA, it was noticed that substitution of fuels causes a greater reduction of environmental impact (S1 and S2) than substitution of raw materials (S3 and S4). Despite a number of economically and environmentally acceptable deinking sludge utilization methods being assessed in the research, evaluation of bottlenecks and communications with companies’ representatives uncovered the fact that the availability of the raw materials consumed, and the risks associated with technological problems resulting from the sludge utilization, limited the willingness of industrial partners to start deinking sludge utilization. The research results are of high value for decision-makers at already existing paper mills since the result provide insights regarding alternatives to the deinking sludge utilization possibilities already applied. Thus, the research results support the maximum economic and environmental value recovery from waste paper utilization.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

We compared the cost-benefit of two algorithms, recently proposed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, USA, with the conventional one, the most appropriate for the diagnosis of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the Brazilian population. Serum samples were obtained from 517 ELISA-positive or -inconclusive blood donors who had returned to Fundação Pró-Sangue/Hemocentro de São Paulo to confirm previous results. Algorithm A was based on signal-to-cut-off (s/co) ratio of ELISA anti-HCV samples that show s/co ratio ³95% concordance with immunoblot (IB) positivity. For algorithm B, reflex nucleic acid amplification testing by PCR was required for ELISA-positive or -inconclusive samples and IB for PCR-negative samples. For algorithm C, all positive or inconclusive ELISA samples were submitted to IB. We observed a similar rate of positive results with the three algorithms: 287, 287, and 285 for A, B, and C, respectively, and 283 were concordant with one another. Indeterminate results from algorithms A and C were elucidated by PCR (expanded algorithm) which detected two more positive samples. The estimated cost of algorithms A and B was US$21,299.39 and US$32,397.40, respectively, which were 43.5 and 14.0% more economic than C (US$37,673.79). The cost can vary according to the technique used. We conclude that both algorithms A and B are suitable for diagnosing HCV infection in the Brazilian population. Furthermore, algorithm A is the more practical and economical one since it requires supplemental tests for only 54% of the samples. Algorithm B provides early information about the presence of viremia.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Les nouvelles technologies médicales contribuent aux dépenses en santé qui ne cessent de croître, alors que les budgets se trouvent limités. L’évaluation économique des technologies devraient permettre d’identifier quelles sont celles qui sont les plus rentables. Malgré cela, plusieurs technologies dont le rapport coût-efficacité reste plutôt limite ou défavorable sont utilisées en médecine moderne et remboursées par notre système public de santé. Ce mémoire se concentre sur deux technologies en santé cardiovasculaire dont le rapport coût-efficacité est plutôt limite mais qui sont fréquemment utilisées au Canada; les tuteurs médicamentés ou pharmaco-actifs et les défibrillateurs cardiaques implantables (DCI). Nous avons fait une évaluation contingente de ces technologies dans le but d’examiner si ce type d’évaluation économique complémentaire pouvait procurer un point de vue nouveau sur la valeur économique et sociétaire des ces technologies. Les résultats de ces deux évaluations indiquent que les patients accordent une grande importance aux bénéfices que procurent ces deux technologies. Nos résultats soutiennent les politiques de santé actuelles de rembourser de façon libérale ces deux technologies.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Bien que la douleur soit une expérience subjective universelle, la façon de la percevoir et de l’interpréter est modulée par une multitude de facteurs. Plusieurs interventions cognitives se sont montrées efficaces pour réduire la douleur dans des conditions cliniques et expérimentales. Cette thèse s’intéressera particulièrement aux mécanismes psychophysiologiques impliqués dans les stratégies de modulation volontaire de la douleur. Ces stratégies sont intéressantes puisqu’elles encouragent une prise en charge par l’individu, lui permettant de jouer un rôle actif dans la régulation de sa douleur. La première étude s’intéresse à l’efficacité du biofeedback comme moyen de modulation volontaire de la douleur. Il s’agissait de déterminer si le fait de présenter une rétroaction de l’amplitude du réflex RIII (évoqué par une stimulation électrique du nerf sural) au cours d’un entraînement de plusieurs essais permettrait au participant d’adopter des stratégies de modulation de la douleur et d’activer volontairement des mécanismes de contrôle descendant de la douleur. De façon à évaluer spécifiquement les changements induits par le biofeedback, la modulation du réflexe RIII et de la douleur était comparée dans trois groupes (biofeedback valide, faux biofeedback et groupe contrôle sans rétroaction). Dans les trois groupes, il était suggéré aux participants d’utiliser des stratégies cognitives de modulation de la douleur (attention, modulation de la respiration, réévaluation cognitive et imagerie mentale) afin d’augmenter ou de diminuer leur réflexe RIII comparativement à leur niveau de base. Les résultats de notre étude indiquent que les participants des 3 groupes ont réussi à moduler leur réflexe RIII (p<0,001) ainsi que leurs évaluations de douleur (p<0,001) (intensité et désagrément). Les résultats de notre étude montrent que l’entraînement au biofeedback n’était pas nécessaire pour obtenir une modulation du réflexe RIII et de la douleur, ce qui suggère que l’utilisation de stratégies cognitives pourrait être suffisante pour déclencher des mécanismes de contrôle de la douleur. La deuxième étude découle de la première et s’intéressait à l’influence de la fréquence et de la phase respiratoire sur la nociception spinale, l’activité cérébrale et la perception de douleur. Le contrôle volontaire de la respiration est un moyen commun de régulation des émotions et est fréquemment utilisé en combinaison avec d’autres techniques (ex. : relaxation, méditation) dans le but de réguler la douleur. Les participants étaient invités à synchroniser leur respiration à des indices sonores indiquant le moment de l’inspiration et de l’expiration. Trois patrons de respiration étaient proposés (respiration à 0,1Hz avec une inspiration de 4 secondes, respiration à 0,1Hz avec une inspiration de 2 secondes et respiration à 0,2Hz avec une inspiration de 2 secondes. La moitié des stimulations étaient données durant l’inspiration et l’autre moitié durant l’expiration. Afin d’évaluer l’effet de ces manipulations, l’amplitude du RIII, l’évaluation subjective d’intensité de la douleur et de l’anxiété suscitée par le choc en plus des potentiels évoqués étaient mesurés. Les résultats de cette étude démontrent que les évaluations d’intensité de la douleur n’étaient pas affectées par le patron respiratoire (p=0,3), mais étaient statistiquement plus basses durant l’inspiration comparativement à l’expiration (p=0,02). Un effet de phase (p=0,03) était également observé sur les potentiels évoqués durant la condition de respiration à 0,1hHz avec une inspiration de 2 secondes comparativement au patron de respiration de 0,2Hz. Paradoxalement, l’amplitude du réflexe RIII était augmenté durant l’inspiration (p=0,02) comparativement à l’expiration. Ces résultats montrent que la manipulation de la fréquence et de la phase respiratoires (par une synchronisation imposée) a un effet marginal sur les évaluations de douleur et sur l’activité cérébrale et spinale évoquée par une stimulation électrique (douleur aigüe). Cela suggère que d’autres mécanismes contribuent aux effets analgésiques observés dans la relaxation et la méditation. Plus largement, nos résultats font état de la nécessité d’études plus approfondies avec une méthodologie plus rigoureuse afin de contrôler les effets non spécifiques aux traitements évalués. Une meilleure connaissance des mécanismes sous-tendant chaque stratégie permettrait de mieux cibler les clientèles susceptibles d’y répondre et de mieux considérer le ratio coût bénéfice de chaque traitement.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

La littérature abordant les enjeux socio-éthiques et réglementaires associés aux médicaments est relativement abondante, ce qui n’est pas le cas des dispositifs médicaux (DM). Ce dernier secteur couvre une très large diversité de produits qui servent à de multiples applications: diagnostic, traitement, gestion des symptômes de certaines conditions physiques ou psychiatriques, restauration d’une fonction débilitante, chirurgie, etc. À tort, on a tendance à croire que les DM sont réglementés de la même manière que les médicaments, que ce soit pour les exigences concernant leur mise en marché ou des pratiques de surveillance après mise en marché. Or, au cours des dernières années, leur usage élargi, leur impact sur les coûts des soins de santé, et les rappels majeurs dont certains ont fait l’objet ont commencé à inquiéter la communauté médicale et de nombreux chercheurs. Ils interpellent les autorités réglementaires à exercer une plus grande vigilance tant au niveau de l’évaluation des nouveaux DM à risque élevé avant leur mise en marché, que dans les pratiques de surveillance après mise en marché. Une stratégie plus rigoureuse d’évaluation des nouveaux DM permettrait d’assurer un meilleur suivi des risques associés à leur utilisation, de saisir la portée des divers enjeux socio-éthiques découlant de l’utilisation de certains DM, et de préserver la confiance du public. D’emblée, il faut savoir que les autorités nationales n’ont pas pour mandat d’évaluer la portée des enjeux socio-éthiques, ou encore les coûts des DM qui font l’objet d’une demande de mise en marché. Cette évaluation est essentiellement basée sur une analyse des rapports risques-bénéfices générés par l’usage du DM pour une indication donnée. L’évaluation des impacts socio-éthiques et l’analyse coûts-bénéfices relèvent des agences d’Évaluation des technologies de santé (ÉTS). Notre recherche montre que les DM sont non seulement peu fréquemment évalués par les agences d’ÉTS, mais l’examen des enjeux socio-éthiques est trop souvent encore incomplet. En fait, les recommandations des rapports d’ÉTS sont surtout fondées sur une analyse coûts-bénéfices. Or, le secteur des DM à risque élevé est particulièrement problématique. Plusieurs sont non seulement porteurs de risques pour les patients, mais leur utilisation élargie comporte des impacts importants pour les systèmes de santé. Nous croyons que le Principisme, au cœur de l’éthique biomédicale, que ce soit au plan de l’éthique de la recherche que de l’éthique clinique, constitue un outil pour faciliter la reconnaissance et l’examen, particulièrement par les agences d’ÉTS, des enjeux socio-éthiques en jeu au niveau des DM à risque élevé. Également, le Principe de Précaution pourrait aussi servir d’outil, particulièrement au sein des agences nationales de réglementation, pour mieux cerner, reconnaître, analyser et gérer les risques associés à l’évaluation et l’utilisation de ce type de DM. Le Principisme et le Principe de Précaution pourraient servir de repères 1) pour définir les mesures nécessaires pour éliminer les lacunes observées dans pratiques associées aux processus de réglementation, et 2) pour mieux cerner et documenter les enjeux socio-éthiques spécifiques aux DM à risque élevé.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

En el presente estudio se describen y evalúan todos los aspectos comerciales, operacionales, administrativos y financieros que hay que tener en cuenta para poder implementar la producción y comercialización del producto Bonyurt Costeño en la Costa Caribe colombiana. Este es un producto innovador en el mercado nacional y regional puesto que presenta una combinación de productos que se consumen en la costa Atlántica como son el suero y los snacks , los cuales al consumidor le toca obtenerlo por separado. Es un producto 100% natural, sin preservantes ni aditivos, lo que lo convierte en un bien que coadyuva a preservar la salud del consumidor y a la preservación del medio ambiente, puesto que en su procesamiento no intervienen agentes dañinos al entorno. En la investigación de mercado que se realizó por parte de las autoras se encontró que el producto en mención tiene una alta aceptación ya que el mercado objetivo se identifica culturalmente con el producto y está a la expectativa de su realización. De acuerdo con la evaluación financiera del proyecto, esta es conveniente para los inversionistas ya que presenta una buena rentabilidad en el mediano plazo. El periodo de la recuperación de la inversión se da en el quinto año de operaciones de la empresa para el flujo neto de efectivo a precios reales con y sin financiamiento; en el sexto año de operaciones para el caso de precios corrientes sin financiamiento y en el cuarto año de operaciones para el caso de precios corrientes con financiamiento.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

De acuerdo con el Programa de la Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente (PNUMA), la producción más limpia «es una estrategia ambiental preventiva integrada que se aplica a los procesos, productos y servicios a fin de aumentar la eficiencia y reducir los riesgos para los seres humanos y el ambiente.» (Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente (PNUMA), 2006) Esta estrategia es aplicable para cualquier proceso, producto o servicio y contiene diversas acciones que incluyen sencillos pasos que van desde pequeños cambios en los procedimientos operacionales de fácil e inmediata ejecución, hasta cambios mayores que impliquen la sustitución de materias primas, insumos o líneas de producción a unas más eficientes. De acuerdo con la investigación realizada, se formuló un plan estratégico de PML para la Universidad del Rosario que permita la conservación de las materias primas, como el agua y el manejo energético eficiente, la reducción de las materias primas toxicas, en cuanto a toxicidad y cantidad, y la reducción de emisiones y residuos que van al agua y a la atmósfera impactando el entorno a causa de los procesos que se desarrollan en la Universidad para la prestación de sus servicios. En este orden de ideas, la Producción más Limpia implementada en la Universidad requiere que se modifiquen ciertas actitudes, el desarrollo de una gestión ambiental responsable, la creación de políticas convenientes y la evaluación de nuevas opciones tecnologías que impacten de manera positiva su implementación a través de las siguientes técnicas: • Mejoras en el proceso • Buenas prácticas operativas • Mantenimiento de equipos • Reutilización y reciclaje • Cambios en la materia prima • Cambios en la tecnología De esta manera los resultados presentarán un modelo transformador para la Institución, que permita su perdurabilidad, convirtiéndola en una Universidad pionera capaz de disminuir su impacto de operaciones en la sociedad.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Objetivo:Describir los costos asociados al soporte nutricional enteral en pacientes adultos hospitalizados en Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos (UCI), Metodología: La elaboración de este documento se realizó en una búsqueda exhaustiva de acuerdo a las especificaciones y recomendaciones de la revisión de literatura, en MEDLINE, PUBMED, SCIENCE DIRECT, EBSCO por considerarse como bases de datos reconocidas por contener artículos de mayor fiabilidad y más usadas en el ámbito académico. Se evidencio en los 70 artículosel cumplimiento de los criterios de inclusión, enel cual se realizó un análisis de costos en el manejo del soporte nutricional enteral y se identificó la importancia del manejo de la nutrición en pacientes adultos del servicio de UCI. Resultados: De tal manera la importancia del soporte nutricional enteral, en su proceso precoz se identifica la reducción de costos y de recursos que se puede manejar ante el paciente crítico. Dentro de este marco se resalta que el soporte nutricional enteral debe ser la primera opción en paciente. Conclusión:La nutrición enteral considerada un modelo de innovación al soporte nutricional en las últimas décadas, ha evolucionado contribuyendo una adecuada alternativa de intervención y sin efectos adversos clínicos relevantes, que además mejoran la calidad de vida y contribuyen a la toma de decisiones clínicas basadas en la evidencia y en los análisis de costes con el uso racional de los recursos, así mismo, es una práctica costo- efectiva,con componente de costo- beneficio para el usuario al mejorar calidad de vida, obteniendo mayores beneficios a un menor costo.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Determinar el efecto de la cirugía laparoscópica versus cirugía abierta sobre la supervivencia en el manejo de pacientes del cáncer colorectal.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Objective: To identify and assess healthy eating policies at national level which have been evaluated in terms of their impact on awareness of healthy eating, food consumption, health outcome or cost/benefit. Design: Review of policy documents and their evaluations when available. Setting: European Member States. Subjects: One hundred and twenty-one policy documents revised, 107 retained. Results: Of the 107 selected interventions, twenty-two had been evaluated for their impact on awareness or knowledge and twenty-seven for their impact on consumption. Furthermore sixteen interventions provided an evaluation of health impact, while three actions specifically measured any cost/benefit ratio. The indicators used in these evaluations were in most cases not comparable. Evaluation was more often found for public information campaigns, regulation of meals at schools/canteens and nutrition education programmes. Conclusions: The study highlights the need not only to develop harmonized and verifiable procedures but also indicators for measuring effectiveness and success and for comparing between interventions and countries. EU policies are recommended to provide a set of indicators that may be measured consistently and regularly in all countries. Furthermore, public information campaigns should be accompanied by other interventions, as evaluations may show an impact on awareness and intention, but rarely on consumption patterns and health outcome.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background and context The Grain Legumes CRP was established to bring all research and development work on grain legumes within the CGIAR system under one umbrella. It was set up to provide public goods outcomes to serve the needs of the sustainable production and consumption of grain legumes in the developing world, capitalising upon their properties that enhance the natural resource base upon which production so unequivocally depends. The choice of species and research foci were finalised following extensive consultation with all stakeholders (though perhaps fewer end users), and cover all disciplines that contribute to long-lasting solutions to the issues of developing country production and consumption. ICRISAT leads Grain Legumes and is partnered by the CGIAR centers ICARDA, IITA and CIAT and a number of other important partners, both public and private, and of course farmers in the developed and developing world. Originally in mid-2012 Grain Legumes was structured around eight Product Lines (PL) (i.e. technological innovations) intersecting five Strategic Components (SC) (i.e. arranged as components along the value chain). However, in 2015, it was restructured along a more R4D output model leading to Intermediate Development Outcomes (IDOs). Thus five Flagship Projects (FP) more closely reflecting a systematic pipeline of progression from fundamental science, implementation of interventions and the development of capacity and partnerships to promote and adopt impactful outcomes: FP1) Managing Productivity through crop interactions with biotic and abiotic constraints; FP2) Determination of traits that address production constraints and opportunities; FP3) Trait Deployment of those traits through breeding; FP4) Seed Systems, post-harvest processing and nutrition; FP5) Capacity-Building and Partnerships. Another three cross-cutting FPs analyse the broader environment surrounding the adoption of outputs, the capitalising of investments in genomics research, and a focus on the Management and Governance of Grain Legumes: FP6) Knowledge, impacts, priorities and gender organisation; FP7) Tools and platforms for high throughput genotyping and bioinformatics; and FP8) Management and Governance. Five FPs focus on R4D; FPs 5 and 6 are considered cross-cutting; FP 7 has a technical focus and FP 8 has an overarching objective. Over the three year period since its inception in July 1012, Grain Legumes has had a total budget of $140 million, with $62M originally to come from W1/W2 and the remaining $78M to come from W3/bilateral. In actuality only $45M came from W1/W2 but $106M from W3/bilateral corresponding to 106% of expectation. Purpose, scope and objectives of the external evaluation Principally, the evaluation of Grain Legumes is to ensure that the program is progressing in an effective manner towards addressing the system-level outcomes of the CGIAR as they relate to grain legumes. In essence, the evaluation aims to provide essential evaluative information for decision-making by Program Management and its funders on issues such as extension, expansion and structuring of the program and adjustments in relevant parts of the program. Subsequent to the formal signing of the agreed terms of reference, the evaluation team was also invited to comment upon the mooted options for merging and/or disaggregating of Grain Legumes. The audiences are therefore manifold, from the CGIAR Fund Council and Consortium, the Boards of Trustees of the four component CGIAR centres, the Grain Legumes Steering, Management and Independent Advisory Committees, to the researchers and others involved in the delivery of R4D outcomes and their partner organisations. The evaluation was not only summative in measuring results from Grain Legumes at arm’s length; it was also formative in promoting learning and improvements, and developmental in nurturing adaption to transformational change with time. The evaluation report was written in a manner that allows for engagement of key partners and funders in a dialogue as to how to increase ownership and a common understanding of how the goals are to be achieved. We reviewed research undertaken before the CRPs but leading to impacts during Grain Legumes, and research commenced over the past 2.5 years. For related activities pre- and post-commencement of Grain Legumes, we reviewed the relevance of activities and their relation to CGIAR and the Grain Legumes goals, whether they were likely to lead to the outcomes and impacts as documented in the Grain Legumes proposal, and the quality of the science underpinning the likelihood to deliver outcomes. Throughout, we were cognisant of the extent of the reach of CGIAR centres’ activities, and those of stakeholders upon which the impact of CGIAR R4D depends. Within our remit we evaluated the original and modified management and governance structures, and all the processes/responsibilities managed within those structures. Besides the evaluation of the technical and managerial issues of Grain Legumes, we addressed cross-cutting issues of gender sensitivity, capacity building and the creation and nurturing of partnerships. The evaluation also has the objective to provide information relating to the development of full proposals for the new CRP funding cycle. The evaluation addressed six overarching questions developed from the TOR questions (listed in the Inception Report, 2015 [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh] and others including cross-cutting issues, phrasing them within the context of traditional evaluation criteria: 1. Relevance: Global development, urbanisation and technological innovation are progressing rapidly, are the aims and focus of Grain Legumes coherent, robust, fit for purpose and relevant to the global community? 2. Efficiency: Is the structure and effectiveness of leadership across Grain Legumes developing efficient partnership management and project management across PLs? 3. Quality of science: Is Grain Legumes utilising a wide range of technologies in a way that will increase our fundamental understanding of the biology that underpins several PLs; and are collected data used in the most effective way? 4. Effectiveness: Are Product Lines strategic contributors to the overarching aims and vision for Grain Legumes? 5. Impact: Are the impact pathways that underlie each PL well defined, measureable and achievable; and are they sufficiently defined in terms of beneficiaries? Does progress towards achieving outputs and outcomes from the major research areas indicate a lasting benefit for CGIAR and the communities it serves? 6. Sustainability: Is Grain Legumes managing the increasing level of restricted funding in terms of program quality and effectiveness, including attracting and retaining quality staff? Questions for the evaluation of governance and management focused on accountability, transparency, the effectiveness and success of program execution, change management processes and communication methods, taking account of the effects of CGIAR reform. The three crosscutting issues were considered as follows: i) gender balance in program delivery, e.g. whether each PL is able to contribute to the increased income, food security, nutrition, environmental and resource conservation for resource-poor women and men existing in rural livelihoods; ii) are internal and external capacity gaps identified/met, is capacity effectively developed within each product line, and are staff at all levels engaged in contributing ideas towards capacity building; and iii) is there effective involvement of partners in research and activity programming, what are the criteria for developing partnerships, how they are formalised and how is communication between partners and within Grain Legumes managed? It was not in remit to search for output, outcomes or impact, however as highlighted later, much of our time was spent on searching for information to support claims of impact, since Grain Legumes had no effective dedicated M&E in place at the time of undertaking the review. Approach and methodology The evaluation was conducted when Grain Legumes had been operational for approximately 3 years. The approach and methodology followed that outlined in the Inception Report [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh]. The CCEE Team based its findings, conclusions and recommendations on data collection from several sources:  review of program documents, communications with the CO, minutes and presentations from all management and governance committee meetings  review of previous assessments and evaluations  sampling of Grain Legume projects in 7 countries1  more than 66 face to face interviews, a further 133 persons in groups and 4 phone/Skype conversations: ICRISAT, ICARDA, CIAT and IITA staff, partners and stakeholders. Meetings with one Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC) member.  meetings with over 100 people in 16 external groups, such as farmers’ groups  online survey completed by 126 (33.4%) scientists who contribute to Grain Legumes and a number of non-CGIAR partners and Management representatives  bibliometric review of 10 publications within each PL to qualitatively assess the design, conduct, analysis and presentation of results  quantitative and qualitative self-assessment of the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above completed by PLCs (see below). We reviewed the Logical Framework that underpins the desired Goals, or Impacts of Grain Legumes, and the links between the outputs and inputs as they related to the organisational units of Grain Legumes. The logical framework approach to planning and management of Grain Legumes activities implies a linear process, leading from activities, outputs, outcomes, to impacts, but within such an approach there may be room for a more systems dynamics approach allowing for feedback at every step and within every step, in order to refine and improve upon the respective activities as new results, ideas, and directions come to light. We then developed a matrix that summarised quantitatively and qualitatively the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above. Main findings and conclusions Grain legume production and consumption remain of great importance to the food security of not inconsiderable populations in the developing world, and merit sustained research investment. We conclude that Grain Legumes continues to contribute significant returns to research investments by the CGIAR, and such investment should continue. The global research community looks to the CGIAR for leadership in Grain legumes, but needs to be assured of value adding when bringing CGIAR centres under the expected umbrella of synergy. However, there is considerable scope for improving the efficiency with which outcomes are achieved. We note that an absence of an effective M&E has hampered the assessment of the effectiveness of proposed impact pathways. Likewise progress has been hampered by the limited numbers of research partnerships with Advanced Institutes and by budgetary constraints (lamented for their stifling effects on continuation of ongoing exciting research). The unworkable management structure constrains the CRP Director’s leadership role; responsibility without authority will never lead to effective outcomes. Good fortune is responsible for many of the successes of Grain Legumes, underpinned by a devoted work force across the participating CGIAR centres and partners. The quality of the science is not uniformly high, and we believe that mentoring of scientists should be given priority where quality is poor. Simplified yet informative reporting is an imperative to this. World class science underpins the identification of, and molecular basis for, traits important for yield improvement and this expertise should be extended to all grain legume species, capitalising upon the germplasm collections. The linking of Grain Legumes with regional research and development consortia has been very successful, with outcomes aligning with those of Grain Legumes. We see that with declining funding consolidation of research effort based on likely successes will be necessary, and welcome the move afoot to incorporate grain legumes into an agri-food system focused on successful value chains that deliver sustainable outcomes. Relevance and Strategy Grain Legumes has geographic and disciplinary relevance, addressing the major supply chain issues of variety development seed system and agronomy, with some attention to quality and postharvest marketing systems. The CRP has provided the opportunity to cut ongoing and to initiate new research. Research funded by the Gates Foundation (Anon, 2014) suggests that the need for improvement is greatest in Africa and advocates reducing the number of crop by country combinations when resources are sparse. The lesser research investment in Latin America, however, is not in line with the regions’ dependency on legumes. In spite of the fact that there is no evidence of strong inter-partner CGIAR centre or internal synergy, the program is still moving ahead on most fronts in line with the overall project logframe. This is in spite of continual pushing and pulling by in particular donors and the CO. However, to quantify real impact, we believe Grain Legumes must have access to reliable baseline data on production and consumption, and this is missing. Similarly, there is little evidence of the proposed ‘Inclusive Market Oriented Development’ (IMOD) framework being used to assist with priority setting. The product lines, eight of which cover most of the historical programmes in place in the partner CGIAR centres at the commencement of the Grain Legumes, do not cover all the constraints for formal constraints analysis was not undertaken at the inception of the Grain Legumes, and some of this additionally identified research is undertaken under the umbrella of the FPs; this needs to be rationalised. We found the PLs to be isolated in activity, even with minimally-integrated activities within each PL, with little evidence of synergy between PLs. Even though the SCs should ensure a systems approach, as with the new FPs, we did not get a feel that this is so. The underplaying of agronomy, and production practices may be one reason for this. We believe that treating legume crops as if they were horticultural crops will increase farmer returns from investment. The choice of Flagship Projects makes sense, with the flow of activity firstly around crop management and agronomy followed by the logical sequence of trait discovery, incorporation into improved varieties, dissemination of those varieties through appropriate seed chains leading to market impacts, and the capacity building required at all steps. One obvious omission, however, is the lack of a central and strategic policy on the role of transgenics in Grain Legumes. We found four notable comparative advantages for Grain Legumes: the access to germplasm of component species, the use of the phenotyping facility at ICRISAT, the approach for village level industry for IPM, and the emphasis on hybrid pigeonpea. Efficiency Each centre has strong control of, and emphasis on, their ‘species’ domains, and ownership of the same detracts from possible synergy. Without synergy or value add, the Grain Legumes brings with it no comparative advantage over each centre continuing their own pre-CRP research agendas. We found little evidence of integration of programmes between centres and almost no cross-centre authorship of publications, such as could have occurred with the integrated cross-centre approaches to stress tolerance including crop modelling: the one publication (Gaur et al., 2015) on heat tolerance by ICRISAT, CIAT and ICARDA does not provide any keys to inter-centre collaboration. The integration of each centre with NARS and university research programmes is good, but the cross-centre links with NARS are poor. A better coordinated integration with Grain Legumes, , rather than through the individual centres, may reduce transactions costs for NARS, Monitoring and evaluation is, as noted throughout our report, one area of Grain Legumes research management that has not been given the attention it should have received. If it had have received proper attention, some of the issues of poor efficiency might have been nipped in the bud. A strong monitoring and evaluation system would have provided the baseline data and set the milestones that would have allowed both efficiency and effectiveness to be better appraised. We found no attempt to define comparative advantages of the CGIAR centres and their R4D activities, although practice showed the better grasp of CIAT in developing innovative seed distribution systems. During field visits and interviews, the CCEE Team observed shortcomings in the communication processes within Grain Legumes and with the broader scientific community and the public. For example, the public face of the program on the internet is out of date. Survey findings, however, suggest that information is shared freely and routinely within the PL within which scientists work. Some external issues, such as those with funding, low W1/W2 and poor sustainability of funding (especially if funding is top heavy with a few agencies), undermine research investment and confidence of partners in the system (e.g. as voiced by researchers working on crops and countries not included in TL III and the cessation of ongoing competitively-funded projects especially in India), but other issues attributable to the governance and management of the Grain Legumes, such as opaque integration of W3/bilaterals with W1/W2 funding require attention. Offsetting this, the existence of the Grain Legumes did mobilise additional funding [that it would not have if Grain Legumes did not exist]. We were concerned that Grain Legumes is simply not recognised outside of the CRP, with a limited www presence and centres promote themselves, rather than Grain Legumes (with exception in IITA). This is not a good move if one wishes to increase investment in the Grain Legumes. Although funding agencies require cost:benefit ratios, for example for each PL we faced difficulty in determining comparative value for money between investment in different types of research, and in being able to clearly attribute research and development outcomes to financial investment. There was also a time CCEE frame issue too. There is poor interaction with the private sector, notably in areas where they have a comparative financial advantage. We questioned in particular the apparent lack of interaction with the major agro-chemical companies, with respect to the development of herbicide tolerant (HT) grain legumes and the lack of evidence that the regulatory and trade aspects related to herbicide tolerant crops had been considered. Quality of science The quality of the science is highly variable across Grain Legumes, with pockets of real excellence that are linked to good levels of productivity, whereas other PLs are struggling to deliver quality publications, and outputs and outcomes that are based on these. There is much evidence of gradualism in terms of research output and outcomes, i.e. essentially the same activities that were ongoing at the time of the launch of Grain Legumes are still in place. However, there are examples of game changers including those from valuable investments in genomics, phenotyping, and bio-control. We were pleased to see large proportions of collaboration on publications with non-CGIAR centres, reflecting cooperation with partners in developed and developing countries. The value of collaboration when ensuring quality of science cannot be stressed highly enough both within the CRP, and with other global and national partners. PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. There is little cohesion between PLs and with other CRPs as evidenced by publications, although there are some exceptions. We suspect the reasons for this are driven by funding. Productivity from the different PLs is also highly variable and it is not clear what other activities staff are engaged in since, in some PLs, they do not appear to lead to quality publications. Effectiveness Grain Legumes has been very effective in addressing component issues of research, but not the continuum from variety development to legumes on someone’s dinner plate. Our overall assessment of the effectiveness of Grain Legumes in stimulating synergy, innovation and impact indicate that gradualism is more prevalent than innovation. It also shows, as do publications, that there is little integration of disciplines or a focus on ‘systems’. The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. However, research on genomics, plant breeding and seed systems have made great strides forward, on the brink of delivering impact. Agronomy has been a poor sister, but some of the competitive grants within Grain Legumes have unearthed some potential game changers, such as objective use of transplanting as an agronomic practice. As mentioned earlier, the lack of effective M&E (however, this was part of some major projects such as TL II/TL III), and therefore the ability to monitor impact pathways and achievement of impact, implies no systematic management of data. This creates difficulty when attempting to evaluate the achievement of the Grain Legumes objectives. One might have expected at least one attempt to try to develop publications between centres arguing for similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella, but we did not find any evidence for this. It is most unfortunate that, due to budgetary cuts, the new ‘schemes’, e.g. competitive grants and scholarships, were cut off before gaining a foothold. With 8 species addressed by Grain Legumes, it is not unexpected that there will be little evidence of shared protocols across centres/species. One rare example was that hosted by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) on shared methods for phenotyping of legume germplasm. Researchers from CIAT, IITA, ICRISAT and three USDA stations attended, focusing in simple canopy temperature and root morphology measurements. It is our belief that as a set of research centres, the CGIAR centres should be focusing on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral), it is less so for a research institute, and the structure should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres as in a CRP). Impact It is well known that research does not always lead to scientific breakthroughs. Also, activities such as plant breeding are long term; making impacts difficult to assess. We believe that sufficient progress with genomics and associated research has been made to warrant impact, but we are unable to quantify the levels of impact, or the timeframe for the same. Work in Grain Legumes has enormous potential for real impact in scientific research, commercial, farming, smallholder and household communities, much of which is being realised. However, the PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases that are strongly evidenced for these impacts, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding. Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment. Interviews conducted by the CCEE during site visits showed that PLs are quantifying the area of adoption of varieties, but in most cases they are not measuring the impact on environment, health/nutrition. Since the health and nutritional benefits and the environmental gains from growing legumes are major arguments for supporting grain legume research, the community is currently missing substantial opportunities to strengthen its own case for continued support. Whilst there are some impressive examples of considering the whole value chain, e.g. white beans from production through to export; in the main, the pipeline to end user is somewhat piece-meal, with no clear definition of the end user nor differential responsibility of Grain Legumes and of partners. The lack of robust time-defined impact pathways is highlighted in Section 7.4, and even though developed for PL5, timeframes are essential for measuring progress against prediction. Sustainability In summary, there is general acknowledgement that future funding is likely to become more limited, specifically in W1&2 and there is understandable concern over the support for the staff and basic infrastructure that underpin the Grain Legumes programme. For example, it is reported that staffing in parts of CIAT has been dependent on W1&2 and that this is too unstable to re-establish a critical mass. The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2. This position is not sustainable in the long term as there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. The only obvious options to prevent this outcome include a severe reduction in the fixed costs of the centres and/or a refusal to accept W3 and bilateral funding with an inadequate overhead component. In the latter case, there is an obvious danger that funders will move their resources away from the CGIAR system towards other, perhaps less expensive, suppliers of research, and possibly more relevant development expertise. This issue must be addressed. As the Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Gender is not mainstreamed, but there is some evidence that this is improving, especially with dedicated gender specialists and the slow integration of gender across CRPs. There is a need to approach gender through the vision of agriculture as a social practice, with recognition of what changes will be acceptable culturally and what not, and capitalising upon the perceived and actual features of production and processing that grain legumes are primarily women-based crops. Gender awareness may be high among Scientists, but it appears to be a predominantly passive attribute with few proactively seeking opportunities for gender equity. It is, however, a sound sensitivity base on which to build. Nevertheless, examples of notable gender initiatives were identified during field visits. For example, in Benin, the development of biocontrol technologies has enthusiastically integrated diversity, engaging with women farmers’ and youths while maintaining cultural norms. Women are gathering and processing, youths are taking the product to market. The implication is that several groups benefit, rather than domination by the majority group. In Malawi, innovative approaches have been developed to improving nutrition for children, such as incorporating nutrient enriched bean flour products into snacks. In India, scientists collaborating with gender scientists and socio-economists are identifying the impact of mechanical harvesting on agricultural labour and the potential displacement of female labourers. In Kenya, a novel initiative is improving the accessibility of certified seed for new varieties. Seed suppliers have introduced small packs of grain legume seed at low unit cost, which are being purchased by young people and women. Capacity building efforts for external partners are not clearly aligned with the research mandate and delivery of Grain Legumes. However, there are a number of training activities that are being undertaken by Grain Legumes, largely through the W3/bilateral project. Gender balance never reaches parity, but it appears that efforts are made to include female participants. Within the evaluation timeframe it was not possible to conduct external surveys to further validate or review external capacity building efforts in Grain Legumes. Training of scientists is significant, with >40 benefiting. Postgraduate training is varied across PLs, and there is some opportunity to increase the numbers being supervised. We consider that support for postgraduates at ICRISAT could be better coordinated, satisfying more of the students’ needs. It is important, however, to follow up investments in capacity building by monitoring effectiveness, career progressions and so on. Training activities appear to be rather centre-specific, not following a coordinated programme managed by, nor at the level of, the Grain Legumes. Numbers of persons trained and their gender are important, but a measure of the effectiveness of the training is more important. Although optimism is expressed by the great majority of Research Managers that partnerships were working well to leverage knowledge and research capacities, scientists have a less favourable view, particularly in terms of their incentives to participate. It seems likely that the activities taking place within Grain Legumes were, in the most part, continuations of previous collaborations. This is not surprising in light of the reduction in the emphasis on partnerships as Grain Legumes evolved to a funded project, and the consequent lack of opportunity and ambition for establishing novel partnerships. Where they exist, partnerships are good on the whole, especially with US. They could be expanded where comparative advantages exist (for example with Canada and Australia for machine harvestable legumes), but some earlier identified partnerships, e.g. with Turkey, have not been capitalised upon. Others experience problems of variety access (the embargo on exports of some sources of materials from India), yet others do have relevance e.g. imported Brazilian varieties in pre-release in Ethiopia (even though two of the three are from CIAT materials). Governance and Management The standard format of committee structure and responsibilities is common to other CRPs, as are the attendant problems. One of the major problems is that the Grain Legumes Director has responsibility but no authority; hence, even with the support of the RMC, the Director is unable to ‘direct’ in the literal sense of the work the activities of Grain Legumes. We also see the same sense of helplessness with the role of the PLCs. They have responsibility but no authority in managing the affairs of their PL, and they have no access to funds with which to promote intellectual collaboration and cooperation. Minutes from governance and management meetings do not reflect the compromised weak position of the Director and the associated difficulties in the management of Grain Legumes. Nor do the minutes reflect concerns about the amount of time spent by scientists in meetings for planning, integration, evaluation and reporting. Many scientists reported significant opportunity costs in participating in the ongoing imposed [by the CO] evolution of Grain Legumes and CRPs in general. The changes brought in by the CO have not helped promote any greater authority and capacity of the Grain Legumes Director to direct. Likewise, they do not address any of the issues with the conflict of interest in having the Lead Centre chair the Steering Committee. Indeed, we believe that the combining of the Steering Committee with the Independent Advisory Committee, besides becoming unwieldy in number, annuls any sense of independence in advice offered to the Grain Legumes management. We have concerns with the declining proportion of W1/W2 funds (as expressed in the section on Sustainability), and believe that when basic financial planning takes place, integration of W1/W2 and W3/bilateral sources must occur, and be linked to anticipated outcomes and impacts. This will ensure a close alignment of collaborators’ and partners’ objectives and contributions to that of the Grain Legumes. We also queried the process for, and the formality, or lack of, surrounding, the approval of annual budgets, and the level of priority setting when budgets are cut. Recommendations for Grain Legumes The CCEE Team makes the following recommendations, critical issues are highlighted in bold, and those that require action by an entity other than the Grain Legumes Research Management Committee or Project Management united are identified in a footnote. Relevance and Strategy Recommendation 1: A period of consistency is necessary to raise confidence, morale and trust across scientists, managers and partners to foster the assembly of enduring Grain Legumes outcomes2.  There needs to be a concerted effort to undertake baseline studies and to implement a robust M&E activity during this period. Without these data the foundation for integrated research in grain legumes is jeopardised.  There is a strong need to link more closely with the private sector, especially where there are financial and other comparative advantages to do so. Recommendation 2: The agronomic and physiological trait targets of Grain Legumes (tolerance to changing climate patterns, to the pests and diseases of today and of the future, incorporation of quality traits and adaptations to intensive production systems [machine-harvestability and herbicide tolerance], and short season high yielding characters) are all worthy of continued investment when selecting for improved varieties.  There needs to be a common strategy, implemented across centres and species, as to how to address these trait targets through conventional and modern breeding approaches, but only if adequate funding is assured and secured and if a consistency and unity of purpose can be achieved across a large-scale. This should take the form of cross-species coordinated research programmes to address these breeding targets that cooperate across centres and make efficient use of facilities and other resources.  The CRP should undertake a detailed strategic review of the role of transgenics across the range of targets in the mandate crops. Efficiency Recommendation 3: The lack of an effective M&E process is a significant omission, not least in terms of more efficient use of resources and the lack of baseline data with which to measure impact, and must be rectified.  Reinforcing Recommendation 1, an effective M&E system initially directed towards baseline studies must be implemented.  Transaction costs may be reduced through bilateral projects, which are seen as more cost effective than W1/W2 where transaction costs are disproportionately higher. Recommendation 4: To improve communication and coordination within the CRP, and with a broader audience:  There is a priority need for a central database containing, names of staff associated with Grain Legumes and their time commitments, their responsibilities, and involvement in CRP activities, their progress and achievements, their publications, plans of training, travel, and other opportunities for interaction.  Regular global meetings of staff involved in managing PLs, the entire CRP management staff and the IAC are essential for effective coordination of all activity within Grain Legumes.  The website must be given a complete overhaul and improvement and then regular maintenance must be provided to keep it current. Quality of Science Recommendation 5: It is essential to continue investment in good science and to institute a change from gradualism in research output and outcomes to an expectation of innovative and concrete achievements that can be attributed clearly to people, centres and core facilities.  A cost:benefit analysis and subsequent strategic planning must be undertaken to justify further investment in the genomics and phenotyping facilities at ICRISAT especially as such technologies advance rapidly. Strategic planning and coordination must also be implemented for capitalising on the investment in crop simulation modelling. (The phenotyping facility of ICRISAT needs to focus on delivering some outcomes, not only outputs.)  PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. The CCEE recommends special recognition of high quality collaborative papers, thereby encouraging increased quality of the research programmes and widening the penetration of research impacts.  More importance should be placed on the quality of publication, rather than quantity of outputs and there should be recognition of other types of outputs from Grain Legumes. The CRP Director must be party to this.  If staff are engaged in activities that relate more to impact than publication then this needs to be monitored and recorded and a clearer understanding developed of what constitutes a pathway to impact and how success of such activities can be evaluated. A system must be devised and incorporated into the M&E to enable recognition of other types of outputs (non- publication based) from Grain Legumes, e.g. varieties for breeders. Effectiveness Recommendation 6: To develop greater synergy, Grain Legumes should review management processes and the direction of research activities. In particular, far more extensive integration of research and knowledge exchange should take place across both African and Asian continents so that the best aspects of both can be shared. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended that considers processing solutions, as well as breeding solutions, to capitalise upon the nutritional benefits of the grain legume crops. We recommend:  A better collaboration with social scientists at the design stage of experiments in order to improve the utility of the work carried out and to understand its reach.  Supporting3 the adoption of best practice electronic data collection, central storage and open access, particularly of genomic data, for public use.  Given the focus on the link between phenotyping and genotyping, we note that there is a lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped, and therefore these could be better aligned within each species.  Concentrating investment external to Grain Legumes on scaling up production of varieties with the most promising trait profiles to meet the basic seed requirement.  Developing a more holistic approach that coordinates an understanding of the disease pathology and epidemiology, and of new chemicals before they become commercially available, together with agronomic practice such that recommendations can be made for growers. Continuing work to establish whether agronomic factors hold true in different environments and to assess GxE effects within breeding programmes. Such rigorous trial practices should be used to inform the evaluation of breeding lines and to provide phenotype data to associate with markers for traits such as heat, drought and herbicide tolerance.  Considering grain legumes as if they were vegetable crops in terms of the strategy for intensification of production, both from the management perspective and for seed systems, will be a useful development objective into the future. This will bring about more rapid intensification and is likely to increase farmer returns from investment. Recommendation 7: The CGIAR centres should focus in on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral) it is less so for a research institute, and should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres in a CRP).  Collaborative approaches should be explored within Grain Legumes, e.g. similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella. Similarly better alignment is needed to address the lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped.  Despite positive impacts from research in genomics, plant breeding and seed systems, the lack of an effective M&E, already mentioned elsewhere, has reduced the ability to monitor impact pathways. This must be addressed.  The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. Responsibilities of the different actors in the whole value chain must be considered and identified when developing impact targets, and the pathway leading to them, for individual projects. People with socio-economist skills must be part of the team from project inception so that appropriate frameworks are incorporated for measuring and influencing sociological and economic changes brought about by Grain Legumes research. Impact Recommendation 8: PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases in which impact is strongly evidenced, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding.  Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment.  It is essential that Grain Legumes provides training to staff on what constitutes impact and how it can be recorded.  Specific, rather than generalised, potential impacts arising from activity within Grain Legumes should be defined at the time of justifying the programme of work and a pathway to impact should form part of the documentation prepared ahead of a piece of research commencing. . In other words, centres should submit work plans to Grain Legumes before they are undertaken using W1/W2 funds Recommendation 9: The reporting activity must be streamlined to a single (brief) format that can be used to report to Grain Legumes, Centres and to donors for special project activities4. Sustainability Recommendation 10: As Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Zeigler (Director General of IRRI) states “…time and effort would be better spent … making tough decisions about which programs deserve the precious support.”  The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2 and there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. To prevent this outcome it is necessary to significantly reduce the fixed costs of the centres and/or refuse to accept W3 and bilateral funding without an adequate overhead component.  In the absence of long term certainty, the scale of the budget allocated to each of the new CRPs should be very conservative, a feature that can only be achieved by restricting/reducing the scope, probably quite significantly. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Recommendation 11: The challenge for Grain Legumes is to achieve pro-active gender mainstreaming, which facilitates opportunities for gender diversity within all activities, from employment processes through research to end users.  Strategic measurable gender indicators need to be embedded in research design, for instance, through specific IDOs for each of the flagships projects. Accurate baseline data are also required to facilitate M&E reviews of progress.  Implementation of the Gender Strategy is the responsibility of everyone, not solely the Gender Team. Thus, ownership could be encouraged by setting personal development for key personnel objectives with specific outcomes, e.g. employment practices or research outcomes.  Recognising the positive gender initiatives in progress or planned, feedback must be communicated and integrated into broader research planning to share opportunities, methods and outcomes.  In addition to promoting gender equity in research, Grain Legumes also needs to ensure that working environments are gender sensitive and that recruitment processes, including promotion opportunities are equitable. Gender imbalance in management should be actively examined to identify further opportunities for developing female leadership. Recommendation 12: It is recommended that a training plan be devised to ensure that capacity building efforts are more clearly aligned with the research mandate, delivery and timeframe of Grain Legumes. Moreover, we recommend that ICRISAT develop a strategy to treat their new cohort of researchers more equitably in the future. Recommendation 13: To develop a more coherent strategic programme designed to eliminate overlap and promote synergy between programmes with common aims, Grain Legumes should hold a meeting with a range of partners. Governance Recommendation 14: Governance processes should be re-assessed and the structure altered to ensure that the Grain Legumes Director has the authority and budget control to drive the execution of strategy.  The ISC should be truly independent and given the power to influence strategic decisions before they become final. We also recommend that PLCs are provided with the authority to manage the direction and finances of their PL; and that ring-fenced funds are provided for the promotion of collaboration, coordination and staff training5. The way ahead In our view, having seen the ineffectiveness of much of the attempts [or lack of attempts] to harness synergies between multiple centres, and of the strength in few or sole centre partnerships, we believe that there is little to justify a full retention of the 8 legume species and 4 CGIAR centres in a CRP. TL I and II and PABRA have shown to be reasonably good cross-centre and single centre integrated programmes, but even they suffer from incomplete value chain approaches to increasing rural incomes while increasing food and nutritional security; they both need multi-faceted solutions which are not immediately forthcoming from Grain Legumes. It is important to embed Grain Legumes research within the agri-food systems these crops serve. Figure ES1 broadly shows the perceived current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and species, and is discussed more in the text. It is clear that the value chains for individual species from trait determination to nutritional impact have more cohesion than do the individual activities (e.g. trait deployment) across species. For this reason we believe that the future for research in Grain Legumes is best addressed by focusing on each of the species separately, and within an ecosystem framework; any synergy for research across species can be effected through communication and not necessarily through obligatory cooperative research. The ecosystem framework will allow for strengthening of agronomy type systems research, the arguments for benefits of inclusion of grain legumes in cropping systems, which is notable by its absence in much of what Grain Legumes currently undertakes. Figure ES1. Current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and crop species We therefore agree with the innovation in agri-food systems approach of the CG, and believe that Grain Legumes rightly belongs in the Dryland Cereals and Legumes Agri-food Systems. We believe that the option of combining the crops of dryland cereals and legumes in the cereal-legume-livestock systems of subsistence farming communities for whole-farm productivity is closest to the best way forward. Indeed the inclusion of grain legumes may not warrant even a CRP alone, rather the legume components should fit in with the major crops that determine the production systems. Legumes will always be subservient to the major cereals, as necessary adjuncts to the whole production system, providing both nutritional diversity and environmental services, neither achievable from cereals alone. Figure ES2. Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP, which  Incorporates ex-Dryland Systems, Dryland Cereals, Grain Legumes, some HumidTropics, some ex-Livestock &Fisheries into a new CRP  Will cover full agri-food system VC for all 8 legumes in all ecologies, but must interact (dock) with the relevant AFS-CRPs for the dominant cereal in the relevant ecology  Hence, will need to negotiate with other Agrifood Systems-CRPs on who does what for legumes  In addition, responsible for sorghum and millet in the mixed dryland crop-livestock agro-ecologies For major game changers to be effected, we believe that the game has to change, and there is little evidence of this. The direction of CRPs is the correct route, but the journey has not yet come to its destination. A major change of game [such as the adoption of a Flagship Project approach as exemplified by the Australian CSIRO – where flagships contract services from centres of research excellence] would be painful to implant. The CGIAR system is going down the right pathway but it has not gone far enough.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This paper is concerned with the modern theory of social cost-benefit analysis in a dynamic economy. The theory emphasizes the role of a comprehensive, forward-looking, dynamic welfare index within the period of the project rather than that of a project's long-term consequences. However, what constitutes such a welfare index remains controversial in the recent literature. In this paper, we attempt to shed light on the issue by deriving three equivalent cost-benefit rules for evaluating a small project. In particular, we show that the direct change in net national product (NNP) qualifies as a convenient welfare index without involving any other induced side effects. The project evaluation criterion thus becomes the present discounted value of the direct changes in NNP over the project period. We also illustrate the application of this theory in a few stylized examples.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

A pneumonia nosocomial é a principal causa de infecção nosocomial em unidades de tratamento intensivo e possui alta morbi/mortalidade. A incidência cumulativa varia, conforme os autores, entre limites amplos desde 8% até 51%, dependendo do tipo de paciente e do uso de instrumentação das vias respiratórias. Nos casos específicos das pneumonias de má resolução e da pneumonia associada à ventilação mecânica, o diagnóstico é problemático devido à ausência de uma padronização definitiva, decorrente não só da grande variabilidade fisiopatológica como também da pouca acurácia dos critérios clínicos, microbiológicos e radiológicos. Estes fatos ensejaram a utilização progressiva de técnicas invasivas sofisticadas para coleta de amostras respiratórias endobrônquicas. Entretanto, a validação dessas técnicas para uso sistemático depende ainda de estudos que avaliem não só o seu custo/benefício em cenários clínicos diversos como também a comparação de seu desempenho para o diagnóstico com um padrão-ouro histopatológico. Além disso, o rendimento das técnicas invasivas é freqüentemente limitado quando são aplicadas em pacientes sob antibioticoterapia, que constituem a maioria dos casos em unidades de cuidados intensivos. A otimização desses testes, discutindo suas indicações e avaliando sua capacidade técnica para a confirmação ou exclusão de pneumonia, é justificada pela necessidade da instituição precoce e correta do tratamento, pois disto resulta menor mortalidade, redução de custos e permanência no hospital. Entre os testes que podem auxiliar no diagnóstico encontra-se o exame direto do lavado broncoalveolar, que proporciona resultados precoces e úteis para a tomada de decisão, mas não suficientemente testados em diferentes situações clínicas ou experimentais. Com o objetivo de avaliar o rendimento diagnóstico do exame direto precoce e das culturas quantitativas obtido por lavado broncoalveolar, estudou-se sua utilização em um modelo experimental de pneumonia provocada através de inoculação bacteriana intrabrônquica em ratos. O estudo comparou a acurácia do exame direto e dos exames culturais em três grupos de animais: Grupo A com pneumonia pneumocócica (37 animais); Grupo P com pneumonia por P. aeruginosa (26 animais) e Grupo B controle (10 animais), utilizando a histopatologia dos pulmões como teste de referência para o diagnóstico. Os Grupos A e P foram ainda randomizados em dois subgrupos cada, para tratamento ou não com antibióticos, usando penicilina no grupo pneumococo e amicacina no grupo Pseudomonas. Como resultado, observou-se que nos animais com pneumonia e ausência de antibióticos a pesquisa de bactéria fagocitada (BIC) no exame direto mostrou um rendimento elevado para o diagnóstico, sendo superior ao das culturas quantitativas. No grupo com pneumonia pneumocócica a BIC mostrou: S:94,4% a 100%, E:100%, VPP:100% e VPN:100%; e as culturas quantitativas mostraram: S:77,8%, E:100%, VPP:100%, VPN:40%. Nos com pneumonia por Pseudomonas a BIC obteve: S: 69%, E:100%; VPP:100% e VPN:71,4%); e as culturas quantitativas mostraram valores muito baixos: S:28,6%, E:100%, VPP:100% e VPN:50%). Nos animais com pneumonia pneumocócica sob tratamento antibiótico havia uma queda acentuada de sensibilidade das culturas quantitativas (S:21%) e, em menor grau da BIC (S:57,9%), mas sem perda da especificidade de ambos os exames. Ao contrário, nos animais com pneumonias por Pseudomonas sob tratamento não havia alteração no rendimento dos dois exames, cujos resultados foram semelhantes aos dos animais sem tratamento. Não havia diferenças de leitura da BIC para o diagnóstico, contando a sua positividade em macrófagos ou em neutrófilos infectados. A avaliação global dos casos estudados, reunindo todos os grupos (tratados e não-tratados) em ambos os modelos de pneumonia, mostrou que a acurácia do exame direto, representado pela pesquisa da BIC, foi superior (66%) ao das culturas quantitativas (53%). As conclusões principais do estudo foram: 1) o exame direto do lavado broncoalveolar (LBA) mostrou-se um teste útil e de alto rendimento para o diagnóstico de pneumonia quando realizado na ausência de antibióticos; 2) o LBA feito na vigência de antibióticos efetivos para a pneumonia perde mais de 50% de sua acurácia, mas não é afetado quando o antibiótico for ineficaz ou houver resistência ao mesmo; 3) a pesquisa de BIC no LBA é um exame de resultado precoce, de alta especificidade e com melhor rendimento do que as culturas quantitativas.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

O trabalho buscou identificar e avaliar a escolha do Imip à luz da teoria neoinstitucional, mediante os mecanismos isomórficos que caracterizam o campo das organizações de saúde. Trata-se de um estudo de caso, tendo o Imip como objeto de análise, voltado especificamente para dois modelos de informatização da operação e da gestão, a fim de verificar qual o mais adequado para as especificidades da instituição, incluindo o aspecto financeiro, custo/benefício. O primeiro modelo se refere a um sistema próprio de informatização; o segundo a um modelo de sistema de gestão já existente, comercializado por empresa especializada nesta tecnologia. A metodologia abrangeu pesquisas bibliográficas, documentais e de campo. O referencial teórico foi a teoria neoinstitucional e o trabalho de campo constou de uma pesquisa incluindo observação simples, visando compor variáveis dos dois modelos avaliados, e coleta de dados realizada por meio da aplicação de dois questionários: um questionário aberto, com os dirigentes do Imip, e um questionário misto, com cem colaboradores, utilizadores do sistema, escolhidos aleatoriamente, por sorteio. Entre os achados se identificou claras referências ao isomorfismo, principalmente o mimético, nas percepções dos indivíduos respondentes. Ao final da pesquisa, foi possível concluir que a contratação de um sistema de gestão hospitalar, já existente no mercado, concebido e comercializado por empresa de tecnologia especializada no segmento da saúde, justificou-se como a melhor escolha para a organização, pois, as semelhanças existentes entre os processos do Instituto e aqueles contidos no sistema eram muito mais relevantes que suas particularidades. Outro fator relevante levou em consideração os elevados custos para uma única instituição desenvolver e manter sozinha um sistema atualizado segundo as exigências normativas e técnicas necessárias às organizações de saúde e os padrões de qualidade da informação estabelecidos pelo SUS.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Objectives: To analyze the healing of autogenous onlay bone grafts in three different situations, focusing on the interface area.Material and methods: Sixteen rabbits underwent autogenous bone graft surgeries in the calvaria. The block bone grafts were positioned in three different situations: direct contact between bone graft and receptor bed, graft interposed by particulate bone, and graft interposed by platelet-rich plasma (PRP). After 7, 15, 30, and 60 days, the specimens were retrieved for histological and morphometric evaluation.Results: All groups healed uneventfully and presented incorporation of the grafts after 30 days. A slightly more evident new bone formation could be observed in the PRP group in the first analyzed period, and an earlier maturation of bone in the last period, although no statistically significant differences were achieved.Conclusion: the use of additional material between the bone graft and the receptor bed when using the onlay technique must be carefully considered, taking into account the size of the reconstruction and the cost/benefit relation. The addition of PRP in between autogenous bone blocks and the receptor bed did not confer significant benefit for the new bone formation and healing on the calvaria of bone of rabbits.