LISD1 Case Study
The results of PELISD1 showed the fact that LISD1’s shortage of the input resources, in particular, dividing LISD into sub-projects, namely, LISD1, hinders LISD1’s performance. To unleash LISD1’s capabilities, the government should have approved and allocated the full amount budget for LISD1. The results of PELISD1 illustrated that LISD1 was incomplete. In the one hand, it delivered its intended outputs at stated in the term of reference (TOR), but in the other hand it failed to deliver the complete intended outcomes and impacts. It was foreseen that if LISD1 was extended in to LISD1, the nation would experience its outcomes and impacts on economic growth, social benefits and land-related policy effectiveness. The results were summarized
…show more content…
The development of DOL’s personnel was based on training courses which were detailed, clear and appropriate for the target groups. There were post training evaluation, no pre training evaluation.
3.3. Process Evaluation
There were some delays in the execution of Project. With time extension of the project, the contract was able to manage to complete all the Project activities and deliverables. Conclusions are as follows:
3.3.1. Import land data and database procedures were clear.
3.3.2. The expansion of the computer center and land information systems computer delivered by the contractor in terms of computer system and network installation were successful and complete.
3.3.3. The development of computer systems was clearly meets the TOR requirements.
3.3.4. The migration of data from the previous systems, the determination of the procedures for the implementation and monitoring of data from previous systems were clear. However, there were some interpretations of the TOR of the inspection committee were different from the TOR determination committee.
3.3.5. The process of development of the land personnel was considered effective and adequate. But there was no satisfaction evaluation from the participants.
3.4. Product …show more content…
Data migration from the previous systems to the new ones was found some differences in terms of procedure, structure, systems. And the problems made the project a delay.
3.4.5. The development of the DOL’s staff had resulted in a quantifiable number of people, including the number of days and the number of courses completed. But the quality was not met, in other words, many DOL’s staff still lack the knowledge to use and improve the system.
Result evaluation summarized by the CIPP model showed that, according to the results of documentary and field studies, the contractor was able to deliver the complete system and relevant equipment with some delays. However, the program was able to migrate data to a great extent, but also needed to be further improved to suit the application. If the data migration system can do a perfect job with a higher standard and the information was accurate, the system would meet the needs of the people. It was also expected that the system was in line with government policy, information systems could be viewed immediately, which was convenient, fast and accurate service to satisfy the public, the information was easy to find
The development of DOL’s personnel was based on training courses which were detailed, clear and appropriate for the target groups. There were post training evaluation, no pre training evaluation.
3.3. Process Evaluation
There were some delays in the execution of Project. With time extension of the project, the contract was able to manage to complete all the Project activities and deliverables. Conclusions are as follows:
3.3.1. Import land data and database procedures were clear.
3.3.2. The expansion of the computer center and land information systems computer delivered by the contractor in terms of computer system and network installation were successful and complete.
3.3.3. The development of computer systems was clearly meets the TOR requirements.
3.3.4. The migration of data from the previous systems, the determination of the procedures for the implementation and monitoring of data from previous systems were clear. However, there were some interpretations of the TOR of the inspection committee were different from the TOR determination committee.
3.3.5. The process of development of the land personnel was considered effective and adequate. But there was no satisfaction evaluation from the participants.
3.4. Product …show more content…
Data migration from the previous systems to the new ones was found some differences in terms of procedure, structure, systems. And the problems made the project a delay.
3.4.5. The development of the DOL’s staff had resulted in a quantifiable number of people, including the number of days and the number of courses completed. But the quality was not met, in other words, many DOL’s staff still lack the knowledge to use and improve the system.
Result evaluation summarized by the CIPP model showed that, according to the results of documentary and field studies, the contractor was able to deliver the complete system and relevant equipment with some delays. However, the program was able to migrate data to a great extent, but also needed to be further improved to suit the application. If the data migration system can do a perfect job with a higher standard and the information was accurate, the system would meet the needs of the people. It was also expected that the system was in line with government policy, information systems could be viewed immediately, which was convenient, fast and accurate service to satisfy the public, the information was easy to find