Evaluation of Critical Factors Influencing Framework Agreement in Public Procurement: Evidence from Administrative Offices in Ethiopia
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 purpose of this study is to determine the factors influencing framework agreement in public procurement in the case of Siltie Zone Administrative offices, Ethiopia. To achieve this objective, this study used explanatory research design and quantitative research approach. The study used a survey questionnaire as a tool for data collection with the use of census sampling technique and applied multiple linear regression analysis for the data analysis. The results of the study found that corruption and organizational factors have a significant positive impact on framework agreement. On the other hand, the social factors found to be insignificant in the study. By looking at the influence of independent variables on framework agreement, the study ensures the core issues in public procurement offices which affect the government budget. The researchers recommend that government needs to work on the troubled agency involved in the wastage of a large portion of the government budget. The study adds to the current body of knowledge in framework agreement research. Furthermore, concerned bodies can utilize the findings of this study as a guide to comprehend the significance of framework agreement in taking appropriate measures.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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