Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Social Audit× | Citizen Report Card× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied | Development Studies | Development Studies |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 2005 | 2002 |
| Grondlegger≠ | Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), Rajasthan, India; institutionalised in India's MGNREGA | Samuel Paul and the Public Affairs Centre, Bangalore, India |
| Type≠ | Public accountability and verification method | Sample-survey-based public-service feedback method |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Centre for Good Governance (2005). Social Audit: A Toolkit - A Guide for Performance Improvement and Outcome Measurement. Hyderabad: Centre for Good Governance. link ↗ | Paul, S. (2002). Holding the State to Account: Citizen Monitoring in Action. Bangalore: Books for Change. ISBN: 9788187380474 |
| Aliassen | Social Audit, Public Social Audit, Jan Sunwai, Community Social Audit | CRC, Citizen Report Card Survey, Public Service Report Card, User Satisfaction Report Card |
| Verwant | 4 | 4 |
| Samenvatting≠ | A Social Audit is a method of public accountability in which citizens collectively examine official records of public spending and works and verify them against physical reality, culminating in an open public hearing where discrepancies are confronted in front of officials. Forged by the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) in Rajasthan, India, in the 1990s and later embedded in law through India's national employment guarantee programme (MGNREGA), the social audit turns the right to information into a tool for exposing corruption and securing redress. | The Citizen Report Card (CRC) is a social-accountability method that uses a representative sample survey to gather systematic feedback from the users of public services, producing comparative 'report card' ratings of satisfaction, access, reliability, and corruption. Pioneered by Samuel Paul and the Public Affairs Centre in Bangalore, India, in the mid-1990s, it provides an aggregate, quantitative, citywide or regional measure of service quality — distinguishing it from the local, qualitative Community Scorecard — and uses public dissemination and media advocacy to pressure agencies to improve. |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|