|
Implementing Mandated Evaluation Research: Case Studies of Federally-Mandated Evaluation Projects
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| David Laverny-Rafter,
Minnesota State University at Mankato,
lavernyrafter@earthlink.net
|
| Abstract:
The importance of evaluation in analyzing the impacts of light rail transit (LRT) systems has been reinforced by the recent U.S. Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) issuance of its Final Rule on Major Capital Investment Projects (2006). This rule requires that project sponsors who obtain Full Funding Grant Agreements for “New Starts” projects (e.g. LRT) submit a complete plan for collection and analysis of information to identify the impacts of their projects and the accuracy of their forecasts. The FTA has provided a template for implementation of these “before and after” evaluation studies which calls upon local sponsors to assemble information in the following areas:
• Transit service levels
• Capital, operation and maintenance costs
• Ridership patterns generated during planning and project development
• Ridership patterns prior to, and shortly after, implementation and operation of the project.
This paper will present case studies of three FTA-mandated before and after evaluation studies conducted by local transit authorities (e.g. Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN, Portland, OR, San Diego, CA) and compare and contrast the purpose, research design, data gathering methodology, and utilization of findings. The conclusion will identify lessons learned from these cases in relation to evaluation theory and practice of mandated evaluation studies..
|
|
Enhancing Peer Review at the National Institutes of Health
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Andrea Kopstein,
National Institutes of Health,
kopsteina@csr.nih.gov
|
| Abstract:
The Center for Scientific Review (CSR) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) receives nearly 80,000 research applications a year and recruits over 18,000 external experts to review its portion in study sections. For nearly 60 years, the peer review system has enabled NIH to fund cutting-edge research. The expanding breadth, complexity, and interdisciplinary nature of modern research as well as increases in the number of new research applications creates challenges for the NIH system used to support biomedical and behavioral research. In 2007 and 2008, NIH is involved in a peer review self study to identify the most significant challenges to this system and to propose solutions to enhance peer review in the most transformative manner. Each recommendation implemented is evaluated to ensure NIH maintains the core values for peer review: scientific competence, fairness, timeliness, and integrity. This paper will present some of the evaluations related to implemented peer review enhancements.
|
| |