Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/jobs-for-evaluators-13975/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/jobs-for-evaluators-13975/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/jobs-for-evaluators-13975/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/jobs-for-evaluators-13975/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 13852,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jobs for evaluators&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Searching for independent assessments of govt work
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 27 March, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/jobs-for-evaluators/469081/&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jobs-for-evaluators-13975&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 13975,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 13852,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jobs for evaluators&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;transparency,NREGS,NREGA&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Business Standard





Searching for independent assessments of govt work





The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Searching for independent assessments of govt work&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 13852,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jobs for evaluators&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Searching for independent assessments of govt work
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 27 March, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/jobs-for-evaluators/469081/&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jobs-for-evaluators-13975&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 13975,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 13852
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jobs for evaluators&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;transparency,NREGS,NREGA&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Business Standard





Searching for independent assessments of govt work





The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Searching for independent assessments of govt work&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/jobs-for-evaluators-13975.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jobs for evaluators | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Business Standard





Searching for independent assessments of govt work





The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Jobs for evaluators</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div style="text-align: justify">-The Business Standard</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Searching for independent assessments of govt work</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &ldquo;independent evaluation office&rdquo;, or IEO.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Naming a body &ldquo;independent&rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 13852,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jobs for evaluators&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Searching for independent assessments of govt work
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 27 March, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/jobs-for-evaluators/469081/&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jobs-for-evaluators-13975&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 13975,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 13852,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jobs for evaluators&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;transparency,NREGS,NREGA&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Business Standard





Searching for independent assessments of govt work





The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Searching for independent assessments of govt work&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 13852,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jobs for evaluators&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Searching for independent assessments of govt work
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 27 March, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/jobs-for-evaluators/469081/&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jobs-for-evaluators-13975&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 13975,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 13852
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jobs for evaluators&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;transparency,NREGS,NREGA&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Business Standard





Searching for independent assessments of govt work





The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Searching for independent assessments of govt work&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/jobs-for-evaluators-13975.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jobs for evaluators | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Business Standard





Searching for independent assessments of govt work





The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Jobs for evaluators</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div style="text-align: justify">-The Business Standard</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Searching for independent assessments of govt work</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &ldquo;independent evaluation office&rdquo;, or IEO.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Naming a body &ldquo;independent&rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr680ef25ad06ee-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 13852,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jobs for evaluators&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Searching for independent assessments of govt work
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 27 March, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/jobs-for-evaluators/469081/&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jobs-for-evaluators-13975&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 13975,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 13852,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jobs for evaluators&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;transparency,NREGS,NREGA&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Business Standard





Searching for independent assessments of govt work





The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Searching for independent assessments of govt work&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 13852,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Jobs for evaluators&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Searching for independent assessments of govt work
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;
Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 27 March, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/jobs-for-evaluators/469081/&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;jobs-for-evaluators-13975&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 13975,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 13852
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jobs for evaluators&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;transparency,NREGS,NREGA&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Business Standard





Searching for independent assessments of govt work





The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Searching for independent assessments of govt work&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;The rural development ministry recently proposed &amp;ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&amp;rdquo; of the government&amp;rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &amp;ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&amp;rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &amp;ldquo;independent evaluation office&amp;rdquo;, or IEO.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Naming a body &amp;ldquo;independent&amp;rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify&quot;&gt;Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&amp;rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &amp;mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&amp;rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &amp;mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/jobs-for-evaluators-13975.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jobs for evaluators | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Business Standard





Searching for independent assessments of govt work





The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Jobs for evaluators</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div style="text-align: justify">-The Business Standard</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Searching for independent assessments of govt work</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &ldquo;independent evaluation office&rdquo;, or IEO.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Naming a body &ldquo;independent&rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 13852,
		'title' => 'Jobs for evaluators',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify">
-The Business Standard
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
Searching for independent assessments of govt work
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &ldquo;independent evaluation office&rdquo;, or IEO.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
Naming a body &ldquo;independent&rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.
</div>',
		'credit_writer' => 'The Business Standard, 27 March, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/jobs-for-evaluators/469081/',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'jobs-for-evaluators-13975',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 13975,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 13852,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jobs for evaluators',
	'metaKeywords' => 'transparency,NREGS,NREGA',
	'metaDesc' => '
-The Business Standard





Searching for independent assessments of govt work





The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its...',
	'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify">-The Business Standard</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Searching for independent assessments of govt work</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &ldquo;independent evaluation office&rdquo;, or IEO.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Naming a body &ldquo;independent&rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.</div>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 13852,
	'title' => 'Jobs for evaluators',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify">
-The Business Standard
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
Searching for independent assessments of govt work
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &ldquo;independent evaluation office&rdquo;, or IEO.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
Naming a body &ldquo;independent&rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify">
Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.
</div>',
	'credit_writer' => 'The Business Standard, 27 March, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/jobs-for-evaluators/469081/',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'jobs-for-evaluators-13975',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 13975,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 13852
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Jobs for evaluators'
$metaKeywords = 'transparency,NREGS,NREGA'
$metaDesc = '
-The Business Standard





Searching for independent assessments of govt work





The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its...'
$disp = '<div style="text-align: justify">-The Business Standard</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Searching for independent assessments of govt work</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The rural development ministry recently proposed &ldquo;independent, real-time evaluation&rdquo; of the government&rsquo;s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry&rsquo;s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a &ldquo;concurrent evaluation network&rdquo;, to be controlled by another new body, the &ldquo;independent evaluation office&rdquo;, or IEO.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Naming a body &ldquo;independent&rdquo; does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister&rsquo;s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits &mdash; which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry&rsquo;s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes &mdash; but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.</div>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

Jobs for evaluators

-The Business Standard Searching for independent assessments of govt work The rural development ministry recently proposed “independent, real-time evaluation” of the government’s flagship social welfare and development programmes, a suggestion that deserves attention not just for its pros, but also for its cons. It is true that given the explosive growth in social sector spending, effective monitoring and evaluation are ever more important. The constant hum of charges that extra money is being misspent or stolen serves to politically discredit these social sector schemes, and they need proper investigation. Yet, the ministry’s proposed mechanism looks less like a method for genuine, independent investigation than a way to increase, even further, government employment opportunities for programme evaluation experts. The ministry has suggested a “concurrent evaluation network”, to be controlled by another new body, the “independent evaluation office”, or IEO. Naming a body “independent” does not, however, make it so. Although the IEO is supposed to be registered as a society, it will function under the rural development ministry. It is difficult to imagine that any such arrangement will be independent to any noticeable degree; it will end up being, in all probability, an appendage of the ministry itself. Meanwhile, the twin premises on which the ministry has built up its case for an instantaneous scrutiny appear to have problems too. The argument is that concurrent evaluation is more useful than post-mortems, since it helps policy makers intervene on a real-time basis. Such monitoring was, in fact, an integral part of most development programmes in the late 1970s and 1980s. It was given up because it was observed to be impractical as development work scaled up in size. In addition, the reports ongoing reviews generated seem to wind up doing little, since they did not have the sort of content that could lead to worthwhile remedial action. Even today, there is no dearth of reviews and reviewers of government schemes. The ministries concerned conduct periodical internal evaluations. The Plan co-ordination division of the Planning Commission examines the outcome of most programmes. The fiscal accounts are scrutinised annually by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for Parliament. And the Prime Minister’s Office keeps tabs on some selected flagship programmes to assess their impact. In addition, some programmes are open to social audits — which seem to have worked well in some cases and in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, for example, social audits identified several irregularities, especially in the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Part of the misspent money was recovered, even. That said, these monitoring mechanisms, individually and collectively, have largely failed to prevent corruption and improve targeting. The rural development ministry’s proposal is an example of compounding the problem, by creating another body capable of interfering in schemes — but incapable of actually evaluating them independently. What is needed is a structure that provides for unbiased evaluation, both quantitative and qualitative, and can come up with result-oriented suggestions to improve outcomes. New bodies controlled by ministries will expand bureaucratic and policy empires, but do little for government effectiveness.