EXAMINING THE DIFFERENT FACTORS OF THE MID-TERM PERFORMANCE OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS IN VERY POOR COUNTRIES
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main purpose of this paper is to examine the factors of performance in the development projects of the very poor countries in general and in particular in the context of Burkina Faso. It is about the identification of the internal and external factors that explain the level of mid-term performance of the development projects. The methodology is focused on a quantitative approach with a limited sample of 35 respondents due to some professional and technical problems. The research results show, first, that there are two internal factors to project management namely the planning variable and the Human resources management variable that positively and significantly influence mid-term performance of development projects in Burkina Faso. Second, with con identified external factors, the variable environment or area of project intervention influences positively and significantly the mid-term performance of development projects in Burkina Faso. The recommendation is that these factors should be considered by development project managers and governmental authorities. Keywords: Mid-term performance, Project, Development Project, World Bank, Burkina Faso.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it