Home Page Company Clients Reports CallWeb SampleCalc EPlanCalc French
Don't confuse movement with progress.
Every year, a consortium of federal government departments join efforts to put together a conference dealing with issues related to the presence of the federal government on the Internet. In 1999, the GovNet organizing committee wanted to assess the position of the conference among its clients and to determine the level of satisfaction of the various clienteles. Circum Network conducted a telephone survey of 150 conference participants and 150 members of the target groups who did not attend, compiled the views of exhibitors at the conference and collected in situ information in the form of 1,500 session-based report cards. The findings were positive overall with clear indications for improvement.
155 pages, 940k [PDF format]
This report presents the results of an evaluation of the Government on the Net 03 Conference. It is based on participant comments gathered through more than 1,200 session-specific feedback report cards and some 88 post-conference Web questionnaires; exhibitor comments collected through self-administered questionnaires; and, views of some 372 non-participants who are members of the target groups and who completed a Web survey.
30 pages, 317Kb [PDF format]
The Canada Accelerator and Incubator Program (CAIP) is a 100 million, 5-year, non-repayable contribution program aimed at establishing a critical mass of outstanding business incubators and accelerators that can develop innovative, high-growth firms, which themselves represent superior early-stage investment opportunities.
Conducted by Circum in 2016, the evaluation of CAIP focused on the first two years of operation of the program: 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. Because the evaluation took place early in the program life, the study focused on relevance and implementation of the program. The evaluation included multiple lines of evidence and complementary research methods:
The evaluation found CAIP to be relevant to the NRC and federal government mandates. It is complementary to other innovation support initiatives although potential for overlap is present. However, the limited empirical evidence on the quantitative impact of A/Is on individual firms and on the innovation ecosystem more broadly is not conclusive.
The central program delivery issue is the balance between maintaining various oversight controls with reduced administrative burden requested by recipients. While recipients express the desire for fewer controls, program representatives point to the need for oversight given that the average CAIP contribution is approximately $6 million. The evaluation found that a rebalancing in favor of less stringent claims processing could yield a net benefit without undue risk. It is also evident that NRC-IRAP required a longer than anticipated timeframe to adapt its systems and processes to the needs of CAIP. This is due largely to key differences in the delivery structure of regular NRC-IRAP programs compared to CAIP. Evidence shows that NRC-IRAP has demonstrated adaptability and improvements to delivery systems continue to be made.
Finally, the evaluation showed that NRC-IRAP was late in collecting performance measurement (PM) data for year-one. Further, once collection was implemented, data provided by recipients was incomplete. The PM outlook for year two is concerning given this reluctance of recipients to share information. NRC-IRAP should ensure that the recipients provide all the data necessary for the mandatory impact evaluation.
703K [PDF format]
To reach us:
General address : firstname.lastname@example.org
Benoît Gauthier : email@example.com, @BGauthierCEEQ
Tel. : +1 819 775-2620, Fax : (no more fax; sorry)
238 Fleming Road, Cantley, Québec J8V 3B4