MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883362074 · doi:10.17722/ijrbt.v10i3.495

Effect of Revenue Collection Process Innovations on Financial Performance of Selected County Governments in Kenya

2018· article· en· W2883362074 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Research in Business and Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicBusiness Strategies and Management Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessRevenueFinanceProcess (computing)County governmentComputer sciencePublic administrationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most of the county governments in Kenya lack enough finances to fund their recurrent and development budgets which has led to stalling of projects. In order to meet their financial obligations, county government should devise innovative ways to increase revenue collection. County governments in Kenya are faced with a number of tax collection challenges which include; a narrow tax base which reduces potential revenues and makes the county more dependent than it could be on a small section of society. The general objective of the study was to investigate the effect of revenue collection processes innovations on the financial performance of selected county governments in Kenya. The study adopted a descriptive research design. The target population consisted of all the employees in the county revenue collection department. Clustered random sampling technique was used in this study to select the respondents. The total sample in this study was 124 respondents. Data was primarily collected to provide information regarding a specific topic. Primary data was gathered by use of a semi-structured questionnaire and captured through a 5-point type Likert scale. The collected primary data was analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 20. A linear regression analysis was conducted on the data set. The Pearson Product Moment was used to analyze the data in which correlation coefficient (R) and the coefficient of determination (R 2 ) of the variables was established. The findings revealed a strong positive relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable. The study recommends that all the staff that is in revenue department in all county governments should be trained on revenue collection.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.687

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.385 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it