<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://www.european-services-strategy.org.uk/outsourcing-library/procurement-and-commissioning-best-practice/essu-research-report-no-2-options-appraisal-cr/">
<title>ESSU Research Report No 2: Options Appraisal Criteria Matrix by Dexter Whitfield</title>
<link>http://www.european-services-strategy.org.uk/outsourcing-library/procurement-and-commissioning-best-practice/essu-research-report-no-2-options-appraisal-cr/</link>
<description>This ESSU Research Report focuses on appraisal criteria, which are a fundamental part of the options appraisal process. It outlines out the key stages in the appraisal process. As options appraisal becomes a more common tool in public management there is evidence that &#x2018;appraisal bias&#x2019; is leading to pre-selected options and construction of particular outcomes by the selective use of evidence and narrow evaluation criteria. Yet a rigorous and investigative approach can be very productive, directing attention to longer-term needs rather than short- term interests. The Options Appraisal Criteria Matrix has twelve sections, which cover the full range of issues that should be taken into account in appraising options (June 2007).</description>
<dc:language>en</dc:language>
<dc:rights>Copyright &#xA9; 1998-2008 European Services Strategy Unit</dc:rights>
<dc:date>2008-03-28T19:13:56Z</dc:date>
<dc:publisher>European Services Strategy Unit, Duagh, Camp, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland.</dc:publisher>
<dc:creator>Dexter Whitfield</dc:creator>
<dc:subject>procurement, commissioning, market testing, offshoring, outsourcing, evaluation, options appraisal, PPP, PFI, affordability, refinancing, democratic accountability, risk, public sector, reconfiguring services, public services, best value, privatisation, value for money, public investment, procurement, facilities management, in-house services, two-tier workforce, public assets, corporate welfare, public goods, transaction costs, public sector comparator, public private partnerships, private finance, private finance initiative,</dc:subject>
<syn:updateBase>2001-04-13T12:00Z</syn:updateBase>
<syn:updateFrequency>1</syn:updateFrequency>
<syn:updatePeriod>daily</syn:updatePeriod>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
</channel>
</rdf:RDF>