text:
OVERVIEW: What every practitioner needs to know
Are you sure your patient has conjunctivitis? What are the typical findings for this disease?
Conjunctivitis is arguably the most common pediatric eye disease seen in practice. Most cases will resolve without intervention. Children will typically experience a number of episodes throughout childhood. Although many cases are self-limited, some will require timely diagnosis and treatment. Vision is rarely affected and the associated pain is generally mild. Causes of conjunctivitis are viral, bacterial, allergic, chemical, and toxic. Viral conjunctivitis is highly contagious. The key symptoms follow:
Conjunctival redness
What other disease/condition shares some of these symptoms?
A corneal foreign body, corneal infection, or corneal/conjunctival abrasion may induce redness and copious tearing, although vision is not usually affected. Pain is superficial. Examination with magnification and a fluorescein drop can be instrumental in the diagnosis. These conditions are typically unilateral.
Nasolacrimal duct obstruction may produce a discharge, but usually the eye is not red. The discharge ranges from watery to mucopurulent. In addition, nasolacrimal duct obstruction is a chronic condition and history of previous episodes is typical. There is usually little pain unless it is associated with a purulent collection in the lacrimal sac. There is often a history of bilaterality, even if the current symptoms are unilateral.
A key consideration is infantile or juvenile-onset glaucoma. There will be redness and watery discharge, vision will be reduced, and there will be extensive conjunctival injection especially on the surface of the eye. There is often photosensitivity and clouding of the cornea. This does need urgent evaluation. Nausea and vomiting may be associated. This glaucoma may be unilateral or bilateral.
Much less common are iritis and endophthalmitis. Iritis is inflammation in the interior of the eye.
What caused this disease to develop at this time?
Predisposing factors and clinical signs depend on the type of conjunctivitis.
Allergic conjunctivitis typically has a history of eye irritation or respiratory symptoms (e.g., hay fever) with an exposure to pollen or a pet. Chronicity is typical.
Viral conjunctivitis has a history of family or school episodes of "pink eye," which is essentially epidemic viral conjunctivitis. Symptoms are acute.
Bacterial conjunctivitis is associated with a history of nasolacrimal obstruction that leads to bacteria being continuously refluxed into the tear film. Also consider the use of soft contact lenses to be a common cause among users, both with and without good lens hygiene practices. Lastly, contaminated eye make-up is often implicated.
Chlamydia-associated conjunctivitis may be seen among newborns and in older sexually active patients in whom there has been hand-to-eye transmission of genital secretions. Usually it is chronic and has not responded to antibiotics.
Toxic conjunctivitis (also called chemical conjunctivitis) implies some exposure to a foreign substance introduced into the tear film. History is key to the diagnosis. There may be use of home remedies or over-the-counter medications.
Contact lens–associated conjunctivitis occurs from poor lens hygiene or reaction to protein on the surface of the lens, producing an allergic reaction.
What laboratory studies should you request to help confirm the diagnosis? How should you interpret the results?
In most cases, laboratory studies are not performed. In infants or very serious-appearing cases, conjunctival cultures may be obtained. For infants it is crucial to exclude Neisseria gonorrheae with culture and history of onset 2-4 days after delivery. Swab for DNA.
Gram staining can be helpful in limited circumstances.
In some instances to delay transmission in the health care or school setting, viral conjunctivitis needs to be excluded. A polymerase chain reaction–based test of the tear for adenoviral presence is performed.
Chronic or persistent conjunctivitis includes the consideration of eyelid or meibomian gland infection. Chlamydia trachomatis may with the need to swab for DNA.
Typical viral infections are not cultured or tested, as the appearance is typical. However, new rapid screening tests of the conjunctiva for adenovirus are being developed to obviate the need for empirical antibiotic treatment.
Would imaging studies be helpful? If so, which ones?
Imaging studies are not necessary.
Confirming the diagnosis
The symptoms and nature of the discharge can be key to clinical diagnosis. There are no published preferred practice patterns.
Allergic conjunctivitis: Irritation and itching are in excess to the signs, with only slight redness and no to scant discharge. Usually both eyes are affected and there is a history of multiple episodes in a seasonal distribution. There is no preauricular lymphadenopathy. With a handlight, the conjunctival surface of the lower lid will have many small bumps, typically <1 mm, termed papillae. There is a history of chronic symptoms. The symptoms are typically in excess of the findings.
Viral conjunctivis: The tearing is watery and copious. Severe cases will show photosensitivity. The bulbar conjunctiva is usually unaffected, so the eye is not particularly red. The palpebral conjunctiva is very injected; if the lower lid is everted, that conjunctival surface will be very red, and a cobblestone pattern of larger bumps will be visibile with side illumination and without magnification (>2 mm). They are called follicles. There is a nontender enlarged preauricular lymph node. Viral conjunctivitis typically spreads from one eye to the fellow eye in 3-4 days. It will last from 3-14 days.
Bacterial conjunctivitis: The eye is red, there is no lymphadenopathy, and the discharge is mucoid or purulent. The palpebral conjunctiva is inflamed and there are much smaller bumps on the surface compared with viral conjunctivitis. They are like those seen in allergic conjunctivitis.
Chlamydia: In the United States, Chlamydiais seen in the perinatal period and in adolescents and adults. Both groups may have follicles. Newborns will have significant discharge, whereas adults will have minimal discharge.
If you are able to confirm that the patient has conjunctivitis, what treatment should be initiated?
Viral conjunctivitis: cool compresses, systemic decongestants, topical antihistamines, topical nonsteroidal antiinflammatory agents, surface lubricants (e.g., artificial tears)
Bacterial conjunctivitis: topical antibiotics—for intial treatment, older classes of antibiotics are recommended.
Neisseria gonorrheae: neonatal—determine whether it is localized or disseminated; ceftriaxone 25-50 mg/kg daily for 7 days
Chlamydia: topical erythyromycin ointment along with a single dose of azithromycin. Longer courses of tetracycline and erythromycin were used in the past.
Allergic conjunctivitis: topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilizers, artificial tears, oral antihistamines. Nasal treatment has been shown to improve the ocular course.
What are the adverse effects associated with each treatment option?
Antibiotics are associated with nausea and vomiting.
What are the possible outcomes of conjunctivitis?
Most cases resolve without therapy. Viral conjunctivitis, including acute Herpes simplex conjunctivitis, runs a 7- to 14-day course. These cases may develop corneal involvement, scarring, and visual loss.
The most important consideration is bacterial conjunctivitis caused by Neisseria gonorrheae, which can infrequently cause a corneal perforation if not recognized and managed quickly.
What causes this disease and how frequent is it?
Allergic conjunctivitis: exposure to allergens. Reduce the exposure and try to not rub eyes. Most children with allergic conjunctivitis have allergic rhinitis.
Viral conjunctivitis: hand or droplet transmission from infected tears to patient. Prevented by hand hygiene and cleaning infected surfaces.
Contact lens use
Infection of eyelid glands
Bacterial conjunctivitis: both endogenous and exogenous. Transmitted by genital secretions.
What complications might you expect from the disease or treatment of the disease?
Most forms of conjunctivitis typically have no adverse sequelae.
Neisseria gonorrheae may damage the corneal surface with scarring.
Recurrent herpes simplex conjunctivitis can become keratitis, which can cause scarring of the cornea with a reduction in vision.
How can conjunctivitis be prevented?
Viral conjunctivitis may be prevented by mandating sound hand hygiene when working with affected children or adults. Disinfect surfaces that affected patients have touched.
Prenatal care must be given for gonorrhea and neonatal chlamydial infections.
Bacterial conjunctivitis can be reduced by clearing any nasolacrimal duct obstructions and asking contact lens users to be scrupulous in their adherence to best lens handling practices.
Allergic conjunctivitis is reduced by avoiding exposure to known pathogens and bathing after an exposure.
What is the evidence?
Naclerio, R. "Intranasal corticosteroids reduce ocular symptoms associated with allergic rhinitis". Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. vol. 138. 2008. pp. 129-39. (A review article that shows that intranasal corticosteroids in patients with allergic rhinitis show improvement in their ocular symptoms. Mechanism of action is uncertain.)
Gigliotti, F. "Acute conjunctivitis of childhood". Pediatric Ann. vol. 22. 1993. pp. 353-6. (A review of causes of conjunctivitis in childhood. The epidemiology has not changed since this survey.)
Copyright © 2017, 2013 Decision Support in Medicine, LLC. All rights reserved.
No sponsor or advertiser has participated in, approved or paid for the content provided by Decision Support in Medicine LLC. The Licensed Content is the property of and copyrighted by DSM.
- OVERVIEW: What every practitioner needs to know
- Are you sure your patient has conjunctivitis? What are the typical findings for this disease?
- What other disease/condition shares some of these symptoms?
- What caused this disease to develop at this time?
- What laboratory studies should you request to help confirm the diagnosis? How should you interpret the results?
- Would imaging studies be helpful? If so, which ones?
- Confirming the diagnosis
- If you are able to confirm that the patient has conjunctivitis, what treatment should be initiated?
- What are the adverse effects associated with each treatment option?
- What are the possible outcomes of conjunctivitis?
- What causes this disease and how frequent is it?
- What complications might you expect from the disease or treatment of the disease?
- How can conjunctivitis be prevented?
- What is the evidence?


text:
The election of a minority federal government under Justin Trudeau doesn't change B.C.'s position on oil and natural gas projects, B.C. Environment Minister George Heyman says.
Commenting Tuesday on the re-election of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's Liberals with a minority mandate, Heyman said B.C. continues its opposition to twinning the Trans Mountain oil pipeline from Alberta to the B.C. coast.
"We will be continuing to do what we've been doing for two years, standing up for B.C.," Heyman said.
The B.C. NDP has supported the LNG Canada pipeline and export facility at Kitimat, extending tax incentives to help the $40 billion plan come to fruition. Heyman said he doesn't expect federal NDP leader Jagmeet Singh to attempt to stop it in a minority government, and the province's CleanBC plan focuses on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
"I don't see any change," Heyman said. "Mr. Singh has said he sees a long-term future of moving away from fossil fuels. LNG Canada has been approved, it fits within CleanBC, and it currently being constructed in terms of the work camp and other plans are underway."
The Edmonton-based Progressive Contractors Association of Canada, representing the majority of contractors on the Trans Mountain expansion project, congratulated Trudeau on his re-election.
"After a distracting and divisive campaign, it's time for Canadians to get back to building this country's future," association president Paul de Jong said Tuesday. "We're urging the Liberal government to demonstrate its commitment to 'choosing forward' by delivering quickly on its commitment to rebuild Canada's aging infrastructure across all regions."
The Trudeau government green-lighted the Trans Mountain project for a second time this past summer, and on the eve of the federal election campaign in late August, the now-federally owned Trans Mountain Corp. gave notice to its main construction contractors that it had 30 days to begin "hiring workers, procuring goods and services and developing detailed construction work plans."
The project has faced more than a dozen legal challenges, nearly all of which were rejected by courts, and more may come forward as individual property owners along the pipeline route dispute the disturbance to their land.
Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Government Performance and Results Act
5 U.S.C. § 306; 31 U.S.C. §§ 1105(a)(29), 1115–1119, 3515(a), 9703–9704; 39 U.S.C. §§ 2801–2805; enacted by Pub. L. No. 103-62, 107 Stat. 286, Aug. 3, 1993. Added 31 U.S.C. §§ 1120-1125, as amended by Pub. L. No. 111-352, 124 Stat. 3866, Jan. 4, 2011. Amended 5 U.S.C. § 306(a)(8) and added 5 U.S.C. § 306(a)(9); Pub. L. No. 115-435, 132 Stat. 5529, Jan 14. 2019.
Lead Agencies:
Office of Management and Budget
U.S. Government Accountability Office, General Government Division
- 1 Overview
- 1.1 Background
- 1.2 Coverage
- 1.3 Main Features
- 1.4 Purposes
- 1.5 Agency Strategic Plans (ASPs)
- 1.6 Annual Performance Plans
- 1.7 Performance Goals
- 1.8 Agency Priority Goals (APGs)
- 1.9 Annual Performance Updates (APUs)
- 1.10 Chief Operating Officer
- 1.11 OMB Agency Oversight
- 1.12 Performance Improvement Council
- 1.13 Performance.gov
- 1.14 Federal Government Performance Plan (FGPP) and Priority Goals (FGPGs)
- 1.15 Waivers to Promote Management Flexibility
- 1.16 Pilot Projects
- 2 Legislative History
- 3 Bibliography
- 4 GAO Documents
- 5 Statutory Provisions
Concerns with government efficiency and shrinking dollars are stimulating federal agencies to improve the performance of their programs. The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) provides a pathway for addressing these challenges and is intended to bring about a fundamental transformation in the way government programs and operations are managed and administered. GPRA places greater emphasis within the government on what programs are actually accomplishing and how well the accomplishments match programs' objectives.
The law requires federal agencies to develop strategic plans describing their overall goals and objectives, annual performance plans containing quantifiable measures of their progress, and performance reports describing their success in meeting those standards and measures. Enacted during the first year of the Clinton Administration, GPRA could loosely be viewed as part of the Administration's larger "Reinventing Government" initiative.
In January 2011, President Obama signed the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA), a substantial modification to the 1993 law. Among other things, GPRAMA revised several existing GPRA mechanisms and codified creations and ideas of both the Bush and Obama Administrations. The law also created new agency positions and methods of cross-agency collaboration with the hopes of constructing a more synergistic structure to better effect the goals of GPRA.
Within the federal government, GPRA applies to all federal entities defined by 5 U.S.C. § 105 as being an "agency," with few exceptions. It covers 14 Cabinet departments, virtually all independent establishments (agencies), and all government corporations. The U.S. Postal Service is covered by the GPRA under a special provision designed to recognize its special status. Certain provisions in GPRAMA, however, only apply to the 24 so-called CFO Agencies, i.e., those with Chief Financial Officers.
Main Features
GPRA's features, as amended by GPRAMA, include:
- A requirement for federal departments and agencies to prepare agency strategic plans which operate on a four- (fiscal) year basis, beginning with the President's budget proposal in fiscal year 2015.
- A requirement that federal departments and agencies prepare annual performance plans setting out specific performance goals for each fiscal year.
- A requirement that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) prepare annual federal government performance plans based on the agency annual performance plans, develop federal government priority goals, and establish a single, performance-related website. The governmentwide performance plan is to be a part of the President's budget and transmitted to Congress. In the agency and governmentwide performance plans, the levels of program performance to be achieved is to correspond with the program-funding level in the budget.
- A requirement that OMB determine whether agencies have met their performance goals and recommend that Congress take certain corrective measures if agencies fail to meet goals for three consecutive years.
- A requirement that federal departments and agencies submit an Agency Performance Update (APU) to the President and Congress which compares actual performance with the goal levels that were set in the annual performance plan. The annual report is due 150 days after the end of a fiscal year.
- A requirement that certain federal agencies establish high-priority, near-term objectives every two years, otherwise known as "agency priority goals," and establish a goal leader to attain such goals.
- A requirement for agencies to provide Congress annually with a list of all plans and reports mandated by statute or directed in congressional reports. From this list, the agency must identify a minimum percentage of the products as "outdated" or "duplicative."
- A requirement that agencies establish Chief Operating Officers to serve as overseers and managers of an agency's strategy and goals.
- A codification of the Performance Improvement Council (PIC) (established by Executive Order 13450, Improving Government Program Performance), which is responsible for facilitating agency coordination, resolving any "crosscutting" performance issues, and advancing federal government priority goals.
- Provisions giving managers greater flexibility in managing by allowing the waiver of various administrative controls and limitations. In return, managers are expected to be more accountable for the performance of their programs and operations.
According to GPRA's proponents, it will help restore the public's confidence in government; agency management will be able to articulate and communicate missions, goals, and accomplishments better; and the President and Congress will be better able to decide which government efforts are worth continuing, expanding, or both, and which are best left to state and local government of the private or nonprofit sectors. GPRA's explicit goals are to:
- Initiate program performance reform by:
- requiring the creation of strategic plans with program goals,
- measuring program performance against those goals, and
- reporting publicly on progress.
- Improve federal program effectiveness and public accountability:
- by promoting a new focus on reporting publicly on progress,
- helping federal managers improve service delivery by requiring the development of plans to meet program objectives,
- providing information about program results and service quality, and
- improving congressional decision making and internal management of the federal government by providing more objective information.
The desire to strengthen the American people's confidence in government also propelled GPRAMA's supporters. The driving justification of GPRAMA was concisely synopsized in H. Rep. No. 111-504 (2010):
Weaknesses in established management processes pertaining to the use of information about the performance of Federal agencies undermine the confidence of the American people in the Government and reduce the Federal Government's ability to adequately address public needs. To restore the confidence of the American people in its Government and to increase the Federal Government's ability to adequately address vital public needs, the Federal Government must continually seek to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and accountability of Federal programs.
The same report also expressed the bill's primary purposes:
- identify clear priorities and set outcome-focused, measurable, ambitious targets for those priorities;
- establish regular goal-focused, data-driven performance assessments to measure progress and adjust strategies;
- set accountability expectations that encourage managers to innovate; and
- deliver transparent, coherent, and candid communication of results.
The retooling of strategic plans, creation of agency and governmentwide priority goals, codification of the PIC, institutionalization of performance improvement officers, focus on synergizing agency and crosscutting goals and strategies, and the establishment of performance.gov became the principal means to realize these objectives.
Agency Strategic Plans (ASPs)
Agency strategic plans (ASPs) provide the foundation for carrying out all other GPRA requirements. The strategic plan states an agency purpose (i.e., why an agency and its programs exist, what will be accomplished and when), defines the long-range course of the agency with sufficient precision to guide the short-term actions of agency managers, and describes how any of the agency's general goals and objectives will contribute governmentwide priority goals. GPRAMA adjusts the timing of an agency's strategic plan to coincide with presidential terms and budget proposals. Thus, an ASP must be updated every four years and must cover four fiscal years. When working on an ASP, GPRAMA also requires agencies to confer with Congress "periodically," including majority and minority members of "appropriate" committees. Agencies, however, only have to consult with nonfederal stakeholders once every four years when developing an ASP. Agencies also must confer with "appropriate" congressional committees every two years, irrespective of their work on an ASP.
Annual Performance Plans
Performance plans are to be released annually by agencies and posted on their public websites. They are tools that discuss comparisons of actual performance achieved with a performance level specified for each performance goal; explain why a goal was not met and future plans for achieving it; offer summary findings of any program evaluations done that fiscal year; identify "goal leaders" responsible for achievement of each performance goal (see immediately subsequent section); identify "low-priority program activities" and provide "evidence-based justification" for the low-priority designation; and explain use of any waiver of administrative requirements and the effectiveness of these waivers in achieving performance goals.
Performance Goals
A fulcrum of annual performance plans is an agency's performance goals. A performance goal is a target level of performance expressed as a quantifiable objective against which actual achievement can be compared. If the Director of OMB determines that an agency is unable to articulate a goal or goals quantitatively, the agency shall either provide a description of a minimally-effective program and a successful program or a description of goals with "sufficient precision" to make them amenable to independent and accurate assessment. Plans must also contain performance indicators or values that will be used in measuring outputs and outcomes; a description of the means to be used to verify and validate measured values; and a description of operational processes, skills and technology, and human capital, information, or other resources required to meet the performance goals.
Under GPRAMA, the plans now cover the forthcoming fiscal year and the current year in which the plan is submitted. Fiscal year 2013 was the first year agencies were required to establish priority goals.
Agency Priority Goals (APGs)
Modeled after the Obama Administration's high-priority performance goals released with the President's FY2011 budget proposal, agency priority goals are a small, discrete subgroup of agency performance goals that should represent an agency's "highest priorities" within a two-year time frame. In other words, agency priority goals (APGs) are salient near-term objectives that further the longer-term, outcome-oriented strategic goals in an agency's strategic plan. Annual performance plans must contain one or more priority goals for each of the major programs and operations covered in the strategic plan.
Setting APGs is not a responsibility of every agency, however. GPRAMA requires that APGs be produced only by the 24 CFO agencies, and any additional agencies OMB may select. Those agencies that are required to establish APGs must designate an agency official as a "goal leader" who is charged with accomplishing the APGs. The agency head is tasked with determining what will be an agency's "highest priorities" based on its consultations concerning its strategic plan and OMB-developed federal priority goals.
Finally, under GPRAMA, an agency head and deputy head must conduct quarterly priority progress reviews. While agencies must post some information contained in these reviews on OMB's website, GPRAMA does not mandate that the agencies make the reviews themselves accessible or transparent to the public.
Annual Performance Updates (APUs)
Annual performance updates (APUs) should contain a comparison of the actual performance achieved, with the performance levels specified for each performance goal and performance indicator in the agency performance plan. If a performance goal was not met, it must have an explanation of why the goal was not met, along with either the plans and schedules for achieving the performance goal in the future or a statement that the performance goal as established is impractical or infeasible, and expressing the agency's intention to modify or discontinue the goal. Agencies are to submit updates no later than 150 days after the end of each fiscal year. Under GPRAMA, an agency also must provide, with greater frequency, "updates of actual performance on indicators that provide data of significant value to the Government, Congress, or program partners at a reasonable level of administrative burden." Performance updates are supposed to cover the same duration of agency activity as the performance plan.
Chief Operating Officer
GPRAMA designates the deputy head of each agency, or its equivalent, as the Chief Operating Officer (COO). The COO is responsible for (1) improving the agency's management and performance and (2) providing systematic organization management to enhance performance and further the agency's mission and goals through the use of strategic and performance planning, measurement, analysis, regular assessment of progress, and use of performance information to improve results.
OMB Agency Oversight
Under GPRAMA, OMB must submit an annual report on "unmet goals" to every agency, two congressional committees, and the Government Accountability Office (GAO). If OMB finds that an agency has failed to meet its performance goals for one fiscal year, that agency must submit a performance improvement plan to OMB. If such failure persists for two consecutive fiscal years, the "Administration" is required to provide Congress with a prescription for improvement. In cases of failure for three consecutive fiscal years, the GPRAMA requires OMB to submit to Congress its recommendations for punitive or corrective action, including budget reduction and statutory restructuring.
Performance Improvement Council
An interagency council originally established by President Bush's Executive Order 13450, Improving Government Program Performance, in 2007, PIC was officially codified by GPRAMA and mainly comprises performance improvement officers: career or politically appointed senior executives at an agency who largely serve as advisers within a given agency and report directly to an agency's COO. PIC is designed to harmonize any crosscutting performance issues and assist OMB in achieving federal government priority goals. GPRAMA also authorizes OMB to create a cadre of performance-monitoring personnel by hiring up to two people for each CFO agency to serve at the direction of OMB's Deputy Director for Management. OMB's Deputy Director for Management also chairs PIC, determines its agenda, and directs its work. PIC is primarily tasked with assisting the Director of OMB in achieving federal government priority goals. There appears to be nothing in the new legislation that expressly requires PIC's activities to be publicly or even congressionally transparent.
Finalized in February of 2014 and concurrent with the President's 2015 budget, Performance.gov is the OMB-run website that consolidates and publishes "readily accessible" information on cross-agency priority goals, agency priority goals, agency strategic plans, annual performance plans, and annual performance updates (31 U.S.C. § 1122(b); OMB Circular A-11 (2021)). The site's URL and infrastructure predated GPRAMA's effectuation date. The Obama Administration launched it on August 25, 2011, in part, to "provide a window" into the Administration's own executive improvement plan—the Accountable Government Initiative.
Federal Government Performance Plan (FGPP) and Priority Goals (FGPGs)
Under the direction of OMB, federal government performance plans (FGPP) determine performance goals for the next fiscal year and update federal government priority goals (FGPGs) for the current fiscal year. Previously unspecified under GPRA, GPRAMA requires the content of FGPPs to include executive-wide goals themselves and "common" federal government performance indicators that gauge progress across agencies toward shared goals. GPRAMA mandates that OMB submit FGPPs to Congress with the President's budget proposal, beginning with fiscal year 2013 and continuing each year thereafter.
Under GPRAMA, OMB must develop and update federal government priority goals at least every four years and make them available during the President's budget proposal at the beginning of the second year of a President's term. Interim FGPGs were required to be submitted beginning with the President's budget proposal for fiscal year 2013. Required to be long-term in scope, the goals are of two types: (1) outcome-centric goals that are designed to be crosscutting in nature and cover certain policy areas (these are also referred to as mission-oriented or cross-agency priority goals (CAP goals)), and (2) goals for management improvement in areas such as financial management and procurement (mission-support goals). In crafting these goals, OMB must consult with specific committees listed in GPRA and any other committees "as determined appropriate." Like agency-level performance goals, each federal government goal is required to have a goal leader and is subject to "quarterly priority progress reviews" each fiscal year.
Waivers to Promote Management Flexibility
In addition to strategic planning and performance measurement, GPRA is intended to promote greater flexibility for managers in return for greater accountability for results. This flexibility is introduced by permitting waiver of selected non-statutory requirements and controls in return for achieving greater program results than would otherwise occur. These administrative and procedural requirements are prescribed by agency rules and directives, or are imposed across the government by an agency that has a central management role, and cover areas such as financial management, personnel, supply, and buildings.
Pilot Projects
Pilot projects have been employed under GPRA to demonstrate whether agencies can prepare annual performance plans that meet GPRA requirements and to identify any difficulties agencies are encountering in plan preparation. Pilot projects were officially designated in all 15 Cabinet departments and an equivalent number of other agencies. The pilot projects range from the very large—the entirety of the Social Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service—to the very small.
Legislative History
GPRA's antecedents can be traced back over 30 years; most of its predecessors largely failed to take root. The first was the Program, Planning, and Budgeting System (PPBS), which was introduced in the 1960s and sought to extend the program management and budgeting scheme then being used by the Department of Defense to the government-at-large. PPBS was succeeded in the 1970s by Management by Objective (MBO) and then by Zero-Base Budgeting (ZBB). Within the federal government, both MBO and ZBB soon became artifacts, although an evolved form of PPBS continues to be used in the Department of Defense. During the 1980s, several initiatives—including productivity improvement, quality management, and a short-lived resurrection of MBO—were featured.
GPRA, by comparison, was created as a law, unlike its predecessors, which were presidential directives. Its origin can primarily be traced to two separately conceived proposals. One proposal was described in the Management Report (Jan. 1989) of President Reagan; his report contained a chapter, prepared by OMB staff, titled "Government of the Future," which outlined the basic structure of what would become GPRA four years later. Another proposal came from Senator William Roth, who in 1990 first introduced the legislation that would eventually become the GPRA. In addition, the Chief Financial Officers Act (Pub. L. No. 101-576) became law in 1990. Several features of the Chief Financial Officers Act also helped lay a foundation for GPRA.
On October 3, 1990, Senator Roth introduced S. 3154, the Federal Program Performance Standards and Goals Act of 1990, which was referred that same day to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. No hearings were held on the bill, but it was discussed by Senator Roth and witnesses at October 3 and 11 hearings on OMB's Response to Government Management Failures held by the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
On January 14, 1991, Senator Roth introduced S. 20, the Federal Program Performance Standards and Goals Act of 1991, which was referred that day to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. The legislation differed from the version introduced in October 1990 only by the addition of a Findings and Purposes section.
The Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs held hearings on S. 20 on May 23, 1991, and May 5, 1992. The Committee considered S. 20 on August 5, 1992. It adopted by voice vote an amendment in nature of a substitute offered by Senators Roth, John Glenn, and William Cohen, retitling the bill the Government Performance and Results Act of 1992, providing for initiation of implementation with a set of three-year pilot projects before government-wide application, and making other changes, and voted to report the bill favorably by voice vote. The Committee on Governmental Affairs reported S. 20 as amended on September 29, 1992. S. Rep. No. 102-429 (1992). The Senate passed the bill on October 1, 1992, under unanimous consent, but the House of Representatives took no action during that Congress.
On January 21, 1993, Senator Roth (with Senators Glenn, Bob Graham, Howard Metzenbaum, John McCain, Daniel Akaka, Charles Robb, and Richard Lugar as cosponsors) reintroduced the bill as S. 20, the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993. That same day, it was referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. The legislation was very similar to the version passed by the Senate the preceding year. In early 1993, President Clinton gave early and strong support for the proposed legislation. The Administration expressly endorsed S. 20 at a hearing on March 11, 1993, before the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs. On March 24, 1993, the Committee voted to report S. 20 as amended.
GPRA was subsequently passed by both the Senate and House of Representatives without objection and was promoted and supported by members of both political parties.
Eighteen years later, Congress substantially overhauled GPRA when it passed the Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA). The GPRMA's passage was largely due to the efforts of Representative Henry Cuellar and Senators Tom Carper and Mark Warner. GAO's 2004 report on the state of GPRA, however, was the legislation's genesis. In that report, the GAO identified structural shortcomings undermining GPRA's intended effect, including "mission fragmentation" that inhibited intra- and interagency goals and strategies. In response, Representative Todd Platts introduced the Program Assessment and Results Act (H.R. 3826 and H.R. 185) in the 108th and 109th Congresses. Neither bill went anywhere after being reported out of committee.
Nevertheless, building off Representative Platts's legislative foundation, in April of 2009, Representative Cuellar introduced the Government Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Performance Improvement Act of 2010 (H.R. 2142), which was referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and then to the Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement. On June 14, 2010, the Committee reported H.R. 2142 as amended. H. Rep. No. 111-504 (2010). It was placed on the union calendar that same day. Two days later, on a motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, the House agreed by voice vote. The next day, the Senate received the bill and referred it to the Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. On December 7, 2010, Senator Lieberman reported the bill with an amendment. S. Rep. No. 111-372 (2010). On December 16, the Senate passed the bill by unanimous consent. The following day, the House's attempt to suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment failed to secure the requisite two thirds majority (212-131). Following a series of parliamentary actions, the House finally agreed to the Senate amendment on December 21, 2010.
By the time H.R. 2142 passed both houses, it had undergone a significant evolution. The original version was relatively skeletal in scope and content. In essence, as introduced, Representative Cuellar's bill required each agency head to conduct performance reviews of each agency program in conjunction with the Director of OMB, required the Director to provide Congress annually with corresponding information and a performance improvement plan, and codified agency performance improvement officers and PIC. After it had been reported from committee and by the time it passed the House, the bill, among other things, mandated that each agency head develop near- and long-term "priority goals," detailed the duties of the new performance improvement officers, and instructed OMB to construct a mechanism for interested persons to comment on agency goals. It was not until the Senate committee report that the bill resembled its current iteration, providing for a much more expanded supervisory role for OMB, designating the deputy head of each agency as the COO, and requiring the creation of a new website (that would become Performance.gov) and the development of a federal government performance plan and crosscutting priority goals. Senator Tom Coburn also added the amendment that assigned a punitive function to OMB (recommendations for budget reduction or elimination) vis-à-vis agencies that have failed to meet goals for three consecutive years. Finally, the Senate also reduced the legislation's authorizing funds by half, from $150 million to $75 million.
Despite the strong bipartisan support for GPRAMA, Representative Darrell Issa remained a forceful opponent of the bill. Representative Issa primarily objected to it on the grounds that it was duplicative and wasteful, arguing that it cost taxpayers $75 million to codify much of what the President already intended to do through executive order.
President Obama did not share Representative Issa's concerns and backed the bill because, in part, (1) it shifted away from a controversial metric system implemented by the Bush Administration (Performance Assessment Rating Tools) and (2) it meshed well with his Accountable Government Initiative, which aimed to reduce government waste, increase transparency, and create "open government plans."
On January 4, 2011, President Obama signed H.R. 2412, which became Pub. L. No. 111-352.
Source Note
Several executive and legislative agency documents lay out requirements for most federal agencies' activities to fulfill the GPRA's provisions. These include OMB Circular A-11, Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget (2021), and Cong. Research Serv., R42379, Changes to the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA): Overview of the New Framework of Product and Processes (2012).
GAO has had a longstanding interest in improving government management through the use of strategic planning and performance measurement. Since 1973, GAO also has produced over 70 reports on performance measures and currently has nearly a dozen ongoing efforts to assess measurement in specific agencies. GAO has published an executive guide on implementing GPRA and GPRAMA, as well as numerous reports discussing various aspects of agency implementation.
Optimizing government performance is also the defining mission of ACUS. Accordingly, ACUS has commissioned a report and issued Recommendation 2013-7 on improving GPRAMA's implementation.
Several entities have regular commentary regarding GPRA, strategic planning, and performance evaluation, including the Center for Effective Government and the IBM Center for Improving Government Performance.
Legislative History and Congressional Documents
- S. Rep. No. 102-429 (1992).
- S. Rep. No. 103-58 (1993).
- Government Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Performance Improvement Act of 2010, H. Rep. No. 111-504 (2010).
- GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, S. Rep. No. 111-372 (2010).
- Roadmap for a More Efficient and Accountable Federal Government: Implementing the GPRA Modernization Act, J. Hearing Before the Oversight of Gov't Mgmt., the Fed. Workforce, and the D.C. Subcomm. and the Fed. Fin. Mgmt., Gov't Info., Fed. Servs., and Int'l Sec. Subcomm. of the S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. and Gov'tal Affairs, 112th Cong. (2011).
Executive Orders and OMB/OIRA Documents
- Primer on Performance Management (1995).
- Executive Order 13807, Establishing Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and Permitting Process for Infrastructure Projects (Aug. 15, 2017).
- Circular A-11, Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget (rev. 2022).
ACUS Recommendations
- 2013-7 GPRA Modernization Act of 2010: Examining Constraints To, and Providing Tools For, Cross-Agency Collaboration
GAO Documents
- GAO/T-GGD-95-193, Managing for Results: Status of the Government Performance and Results Act (1995).
- GAO/GGD-96-118, Executive Guide: Effectively Implementing the Government Performance and Results Act (1996).
- GAO/T-GGD-96-79, Managing for Results: Achieving GPRA's Objectives Requires Strong Congressional Role (1996).
- GAO/GGD/AIMD-98-52, Managing for Results: The Statutory Framework for Performance-Based Management and Accountability (1998).
- GAO-04-38, Results-Oriented Government: GPRA Has Established a Solid Foundation for Achieving Greater Results (2004).
- GAO-11-617T, GPRA Modernization Act Implementation Provides Important Opportunities to Address Government Challenges (2011).
- GAO-14-268, Reexamining Regulations: Agencies Often Made Regulatory Changes; but Could Strengthen Linkages to Performance Goals (2014).
- GAO-13-356, Managing for Results: Agencies Have Elevated Performance Management Leadership Roles, but Additional Training is Needed (2013).
- GAO-13-518, Managing for Results: Executive Branch Should More fully Implement the GPRA Modernization Act to Address Pressing Government Challenges (2013).
- GAO-13-517, Managing for Results: Leading Practices Should Guide the Continued Development of Performance.gov (2013).
- GAO-17-740R, Managing for Results: Selected Agencies' Experiences in Implementing Strategic Review (2017).
- GAO-17-775, Managing for Results: Further Progress Made in Implementing the GPRA Modernization Act, but Additional Actions Needed to Address Pressing Governance Challenges (2017).
- GAO-18-609SP, Managing for Results: Government-wide Actions Needed to Improve Agencies' Use of Performance Information in Decision Making (2018).
Other Government Documents
- Chief Fin. Officers Council, Streamlining Governmentwide Statutory Reports (1995).
- Chief Fin. Officers Council, Implementation of the Government Performance and Results Act (1995).
- Chief Fin. Officers Council, Guiding Principles for Implementing GPRA (1995).
- Congressional Consultations on the Implementation of the Government Performance and Results Act (1996).
- Cong. Research Serv., Performance Measure Provisions in the 105th Congress: Analysis of a Selected Compilation (1998).
- Clinton T. Brass, Cong. Research Serv., R42379, Changes to the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA): Overview of the New Framework of Product and Processes (2012).
- U.S. Dep't of Energy, Guidelines for Strategic Planning (1996).
- U.S. Dep't of Energy, Guidelines for Performance Measurement (1996).
- U.S. Dep't of the Navy, Archester Houston & Steven L. Dockstader, Total Quality Leadership Office, Total Quality Leadership: A Primer (1997).
- Internal Revenue Serv., Office of Econ. Analysis, Best Practices: The IRS Research Project on Integrating Strategic Planning, Budgeting, Investment and Review (1996).
- Nat'l Aeronautics and Space Admin., Strategic Planning and Strategic Management within NASA: A Case Study (1996).
- Nat'l Aeronautics and Space Admin., NASA Strategic Management Handbook (2000).
- Nat'l Highway Traffic Safety Admin., The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Case Study: Strategic Planning and Performance Measurement (1996).
- Office of Pers. Mgmt., Government Performance & Results Act: A Multimedia Orientation & Toolkit (1997).
Books and Articles
- Jane Fountain, The GPRA Modernization Act Of 2010: Examining Constraints To, And Providing Tools For, Cross-Agency Collaboration (Dec. 5, 2013) (report to ACUS).
- Jody Freeman & Jim Rossi, Agency Coordination in Shared Regulatory Space, 125 Harv. L. Rev. 1331 (2012).
- Seth D. Harris, Zealous Advocacy for Social Change: Managing for Social Change: Improving Labor Department Performance in a Partisan Era, 117 W. Va. L. Rev. 987 (2015).
- Mary L. Heen, Reinventing Tax Expenditure Reform: Improving Program Oversight Under the Government Performance and Results Act, 35 Wake Forest L. Rev. 751 (2000).
- John M. Kamensky, GPRA Modernization Act Explained, IBM Ctr. for the Bus. of Gov't.
- Donald Moynihan, The New Federal Performance System: Implementing the GPRA Modernization Act, IBM Ctr. for the Bus. of Gov't (2013).
- Nat'l Acads., Comm. on Sci., Eng'g, and Pub. Policy (COSEPUP), Implementing the Government Performance and Results Act for Research: A Status Report (2001).
- Sidney A. Shapiro & Rena Steinzor, Capture, Accountability, and Regulatory Metrics, 86 Tex. L. Rev. 1741 (2008).
- Paul R. Verkuil & Jane E. Fountain, The Administrative Conference of the United States: Recommendations to Advance Cross-Agency Collaboration under the GPRA Modernization Act, 74 Pub. Admin. Rev. 10 (2014).
Statutory Provisions
Government Performance and Results Act, Pub. L. No. 103-62.
U.S. Code
- Title 5
- Title 31
- § 1105. Budget contents and submission to Congress
- § 1115. Federal Government and agency performance plans
- § 1116. Agency performance reporting
- § 1117. Exemption
- § 1118. Pilot projects for performance goals
- § 1119. Pilot projects for performance budgeting
- § 1120. Federal Government and agency priority goals
- § 1121. Quarterly priority progress reviews and use of performance information
- § 1122. Transparency of programs, priority goals, and results
- § 1123. Chief Operating Officers
- § 1124. Performance Improvement Officers and the Performance Improvement Council
- § 1125. Elimination of unnecessary agency reporting
- § 3515. Financial statements of agencies
- § 9703. Managerial accountability and flexibility
- § 9704. Pilot projects for managerial accountability and flexibility
- Title 39


text:
Evaluators/High-Level Evaluation
From Joomla! Documentation
< Evaluators
There are several resources that can help you to get a high-level view of the overall capabilities of Joomla!.
Web sites running Joomla[edit]
One way to evaluate a CMS package is to look at Web sites that run on it. It is impossible to say exactly how many Web sites run Joomla, but we do know that over 80 million copies of the software have been downloaded since March 2007. Joomla is the world's most popular full-featured Content Management System (CMS) and powers approximately 3.2% of the largest 2,000,000 Web sites in the world. [1]
Joomla maintains The Joomla! Community Showcase that allows you to look at a number of sites running on Joomla. Obviously, these only represent a tiny fraction of the total number of Joomla sites worldwide.
A simple demonstration site is available for viewing. This site contains a lot of useful information about Joomla features and its community.
If you are evaluating Joomla for a school, university, or non-profit organization, you might want to look at the Schools and Universities forum.
And, of course, don't forget to include all of the Joomla.org sites as examples of what can be done with Joomla, since they of course are all run on our favourite CMS package.
An important feature of Joomla is the ease - by design - with which its core functionality can be increased by installing 'Extensions'. This extensibility is a major strength of Joomla and a large and active third-party developer community has helped create over 8,000 extensions that are currently available, with more being added daily. Most, like Joomla, are Open Source, whilst the others are offered as commercial software. To get an idea of the variety of extensions available, visit the Joomla Extensions Directory(JED). It should also be noted that the JED does not include templates within its catalogue and there are many thousands of these available for free or commercially.
The developer community is just one part of a larger Joomla community. For example, there are over 700,000 active registered users on the various Joomla forums, with over 150 new participants every day. These forums are very active, with over 1,200 posts per day, and they provide a high level of free support to Joomla users. This support is given voluntarily by other community members. To get an idea of the types of questions answered in the forums, visit the Joomla! General Questions forum or the Joomla! General Questions forum.
An important question when evaluating any software package is the quality of support available. In addition to the support forums, Joomla has a large community of skilled Web professionals and consulting organisations who use Joomla to create and maintain a wide variety of Web sites. Take a look at the Professional Services forum to get a view of this community. There are also a growing number of local Joomla user groups.
Independent market studies[edit]
A 2009 report by the independent consulting firm water & stone concluded that "Joomla is the Web's most popular Open Source content management system". Click here to read the complete report.


text:
Order with Confidence on our Secure Shopping Site!
You can shop at allMATS.com online with confidence. We have partnered with Authorize.Net, a leading payment gateway since 1996, to offer safe and secure credit card transactions for our customers.
The Authorize.Net Payment Gateway manages the complex routing of sensitive customer information through the credit card and electronic check processing networks (see an online payments diagram). The company adheres to strict industry standards for payment processing, including:
- 128-bit Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) technology for secure Internet Protocol (IP) transactions.
- Industry leading encryption hardware and software methods and security protocols to protect customer information.
- Compliance with the Payment Card Industry (PCI) Data Security Standard.
- Masked credit card numbers to the vendor.
For additional information regarding the privacy of your sensitive cardholder data, please read the Authorize.Net Privacy Policy.
If you prefer, we can process your transaction by phone, fax or mail. Visit our Contact Us page for our phone and address information.
allMATS.com is registered with the Authorize.Net Verified Merchant Seal program.


text:
The Kronolog isn't Crankbrothers' first foray into the dropper seatpost market, the Joplin (which they inherited from Maverick) was released some five years ago but was plagued by reliability issues. With the new Kronolog they've gone back to the drawing board and in doing so have created a dropper post that has delivered reliable and smooth service in the two months I've been testing it.
Unlike the Joplin, a hydraulic dropper post, the Kronolog has simpler mechanical internals. It has 127mm (5in) of infinitely adjustable travel, operated by a cable remote lever (as opposed to a hydraulic system). The cable enters the front of the lower section of the seatpost which makes for dramatically tidier cable routing – no huge loop of cable hanging out behind the frame here. The potential pitfall is that the module sitting on the front of the post where the cable enters limits how low the post can be inserted into the frame. I have less than a centimetre showing on my large Santa Cruz Tallboy frame. Riders with short legs will therefore need to be aware the Kronolog might not fit their frame..
Despite the fact that it's a mechanical design, the Kronolog feels like a hydraulic post. It returns at a reasonable speed, quick enough certainly that you don't need to stand up for too long. The last inch of travel is further damped so the saddle doesn't smack into your undercarriage (there have been nasty results with other posts..). The downside is there's little feedback that the saddle has returned to full extension. Here an audible sound would be appreciated, so you know the saddle is full up before you sit down again. An air valve on the bottom of the post lets you add or release pressure. Maximum is 100psi so you can, in effect, adjust the speed of return by adding more air.
The shaft of the post has a unique keyed quill design with flat sides. This stops any rotational movement from occurring, a factor that can happen to some dropper posts as the bearings wear out. There's no play at the nose of the saddle at all. The locking mechanism locks the post in both directions, with the upshot that you can hang the bike from racks by the saddle, or just pick the bike up by the saddle without affecting saddle height.
Norglide bushings limit lateral play and it's a well sealed unit. In the two months I've been testing it in the depths of the British winter, it's proved to be adequately sealed. I've had no problems at all, it's still working as smoothly as the first ride. The fact that every ride has been one that has seen the bike caked in mud and slop requiring a full wash afterwards, is good evidence that post can survive such abusive conditions. I'll report back again in a few months time and let you know how it's getting on.
Setting the Kronolog up couldn't be easier. It's supplied with the remote lever cable already attached so it's simply a case of inserting the post into the frame, fixing the lever to the handlebar and zip-tying the cable to the frame. The one-bolt clamp is easy to use and it couldn't really be any simpler to fix the saddle rails into place. Once there the saddle is kept nice and securely in place.
The Kronolog weighs in at 556g for the complete system, including the remote lever, putting it in the same ballpark as the RockShox Reverb.
The RockShox Reverb is the undisputed king of dropper posts, but it's very pricey. I reckon the Kronolog is a good match for the Reverb, with its smooth operation and (so far) extremely reliable service. Yes the Reverb's hydraulic remote feels that bit nicer than the cable and is less susceptible to dirt and grit, but the Kronolog's lever is ergonomic and doesn't require too much force at the finger and, so far, is still working smoothly.
At £250 (though it can be picked up for £225) it's a good deal cheaper than the Reverb. I suspect many will save up a little longer and go for the Reverb, but so far, two months in, the Kronolog has proven to be nearly every bit as good.
It's available in 30.9mm and 31.6mm sizes.
The Crankbrothers Kronolog is a well designed dropper post that works reliably and simply, offers infinite adjustment and is reasonably light. After two months of solid use it's had no hiccups, but time will tell how it fares in the long term. So far it's easily the best mechanical cable operated dropper post I've ever tested.
Smooth operation
Cheaper than a Reverb
Infinite adjustment
Reliable – so far
It's not light
The housing for the cable limits post insertion
Price: £249.99
More information: Crankbrothers Kronolog Seatpost
What Crank Brothers says:
All new adjustable seatpost from Crank Brothers – 125mm of infinite adjustment. Mechanical design – hydraulic feel.
Crank Brothers Kronolog Seatpost Specifications:
- Material: aluminum.
- Post length: 405mm.
- Weight: 465g 28g (30.9mm remote*) / 477g 28g (31.6mm remote*).
- Adjustment range: 125mm / 5in.
- Adjustment type: standard shift cable.
- Diameters: 30.9mm and 31.6mm.
- Colour kits: clamp & lever color kits available in gold, blue, orange (sold separately).
- Warranty: 2 years with proper maintenance.
Relevant links
RockShox Reverb first ride here.
Dropper post article on BM here.


text:
'Québec libre' graffiti on a building in Quebec (the city). You'll notice that the tagger has included the acute accent on the first 'E', which is strictly unnecessary on capital letters. This is the only significant indication of a desire for an independent Quebec which I saw during my week in the province.
(First in my unplanned series of the doors and windows of Quebec.)
AutumnBuildingCityDoorFrenchGraffitinorthamericatravelQuebecQuebec IndependenceSloganWallWindowrhjf200910030086
As I walked through Quebec on the afternoon I arrived, it was so cold and damp that I thought it felt like Christmas (in the northern hemisphere…). Just as I began to think this, I turned the corner and saw this 'Boutique de Noël' opposite the basilica.
AutumnBuildingChristmasChristmas LightsChristmas TreeCitynorthamericatravelRainShopStreetUmbrellarhjf200910030087
It appears that French-Canadians use the phrase 'cul-de-sac' to mean 'dead end'; we were always taught that it's a nonsense phrase only used by the English.
American football players from a local team along the sideline in their match against an Irish school ('ethnically' Irish, from elsewhere in Canada) at the southern end of the Plains of Abraham.
American FootballAutumnAutumn ColoursBallCityIrishnorthamericatravelSportTreesrhjf200910040103
Members of the St Pat's American football team playing a Sunday-afternoon match against a Quebec school side.
American FootballAutumnAutumn ColoursBallCityIrishnorthamericatravelSportTreesrhjf200910040107
A house for sale by auction in the Montcalm neighbourhood of Quebec.
AutumnAutumn ColoursBuildingCityHousenorthamericatravelTreesrhjf200910040124
In the Montcalm neighbourhood of Quebec.
Looking down the rue St-Jean towards the old town of Quebec, the only remaining walled city in North America, on an especially wet day.
The redoubt in the Parc de l'Artillerie in Quebec has different rooms laid out in the different ways the building was used over the years, under French, British, and later Canadian occupation. At the top is this British officer's drawing room from the 1930s.
In the basement of the redoubt of the Parc de l'Artillerie in Quebec the layout is that of French men's quarters of the 18th century.
This scale model of the city of Quebec was originally put together in 1806–8, and was subsequently added to and later restored. It is now in the museum of the Parc de l'Artillerie in Quebec itself.
A street in Quebec.
A campaign advertisement before the local council elections for a candidate for the Renouveau municpal de Québec (RMQ).
Second in my unplanned series of the doors and windows of Quebec.
Third in my unplanned series of the doors and windows of Quebec.
Fourth in my unplanned series of the doors and windows of Quebec.
Looking across an inlet of the St Lawrence river to some of Quebec's heavy industry.
AutumnAutumn ColoursCityCity ViewsFactorygeotaggednorthamericatravelRiverSt LawrenceStreetTreesrhjf200910050176
Houses in Lower Quebec.
AutumnAutumn ColoursCitygeotaggedHousenorthamericatravelStreetTreesrhjf200910050178
Looking across Lower Quebec to the Norwegian Jewel cruise liner moored along the St Lawrence.
AutumnBoatBuildingCityCity ViewsCruise ShipgeotaggednorthamericatravelRiverSt Lawrencerhjf200910050187
Autumn leaves in Quebec.
AutumnAutumn ColoursCitygeotaggedLeavesnorthamericatravelTreesrhjf200910050197
Shops and shoppers in Quebec.
AutumnBuildingCityCity ViewsgeotaggednorthamericatravelpeoStreetrhjf200910050210
Statue of Jacques Cartier in Quebec. The inscribed quotation reads is remarkable in its vacuousness: 'Dans un pays comme le nôtre, il faut que tous les droits soient sauvegardés, que toutes les convictions soient respectées.'
Another campaign poster for a candidate in the forthcoming Quebec municipal elections.
AutumnCitygeotaggednorthamericatravelPoliticalRiverSignSt Lawrencerhjf200910050218
Last year Quebec celebrated its 400th anniversary. I also took this photo because I was surprised to see an oversized cannister of 35mm film still being used to denote a camera shop.
The sanctuary of Notre Dame des Victoires in Quebec. The inscription on the rear wall reads, 'Deus Provideat Kebeka Liberata' ('May God produce a liberated Quebec'), which seems a rather contentious prayer.
A restaurant in Quebec.
Looking up at the Château Frontenac hotel.
AutumnAutumn ColoursBuildingCityCity ViewsgeotaggednorthamericatravelTreesrhjf200910050242
The Queen Victoria moored along the St Lawrence river at Quebec.
AutumnBoatCityCruise ShipgeotaggedLetteringnorthamericatravelRiverSt Lawrencerhjf200910050250
A helicopter of the Canadian coastguard at Quebec.
AutumnCitygeotaggedHelicopterLetteringnorthamericatravelPeopleRiverSt Lawrencerhjf200910050261
The northern end of the Plains of Abraham, which were named not (directly) for our father in faith but rather the original owner of the land, a farmer called Abraham Martin.
A tank on display inside the Quebec Citadel, which is the base of the Royal 22è Régiment of the Canadian Army. It is the only entirely Francophone unit in the army (although all officers throughout the army must be bilingual in both official languages), which is why in 1928 George V approved the French name for the regiment.
One of two official residences of the Governor General of Canada, in the Quebec Citadel. The other is Rideau Hall in Ottawa.
AutumnBuildingCitygeotaggedGovernment Buildingnorthamericatravelrhjf200910060286
The Château de Frontenac, as seen from the Quebec Citadel.
AutumnCityCity Viewsgeotaggednorthamericatravelrhjf200910060290
The Canadian ice-breaker Pierre Radisson moored on the St Lawrence at Quebec.
AutumnBoatCitygeotaggedIcebreakernorthamericatravelRiverSt Lawrencerhjf200910060296


text:
sewing, quilting, crocheting and by spending too much time
on my computer when I told my husband he said:
it's because we are getting older!
but until last year i could do all those things with no problem
mmhhh not convinced,
what, you reach 45yo and you start to deteriorate?
I added few new items in my shop, the props will be there in few days.
thank you for your visits here, my pinterest, fb, tumblrs, and web-shop.


text:
Despite its leadership position in most enterprise security product areas, Cisco faces a number of technological and competitive challenges to stay out in front.
For example, the overarching security plan Cisco outlined two years ago known as SecureX remains very much a work in progress. The basic idea behind SecureX is to give customers a broad view of what computer and mobile device users are doing on the network.
The SecureX architecture has been called over-complicated and perhaps too dependent on having a Cisco-based infrastructure, but the basic idea is that by collecting real-time information about the individual's network usage and applications, device make, location and other variables, appropriate security policies can be established for network authorization.
[ RELATED: Dell: We can beat Cisco in enterprise and cloud security
MORE ON SECURITY: 13 of the biggest security myths busted ]
Originally spearheading SecureX was Tom Gillis, a former vice president and general manager for the Cisco technology group who departed in 2011 and is now CEO of startup Bracket Computing. But Cisco says the importance of the SecureX initiative remains the same.
Support for SecureX has come first in the Cisco ASA CX Context-Aware Security Next-Generation Firewall. Dave Frampton, vice president of security at Cisco, says it's now on to "the next phase of SecureX," which will be the "routing and switching infrastructure," though he offers no specific time frame for completion.
Frampton emphasizes that "SecureX conveys our entire approach to security." He says about 3,000 Cisco customers have adopted SecureX security components, which include the older Cisco Identity Services Engine and TrustSec tagging methodology. He says tens of thousands more are indicating a high level of interest in SecureX.
Beyond SecureX, Cisco faces other challenges from analysts and enterprise IT security managers alike.
Gartner -- the consultancy whose thumbs-up or thumbs-down opinions on information technology are often a strong influence on enterprise managers and vendors -- has been critical of Cisco, especially in terms of its firewalls. For example, Gartner says that so-called next-generation firewalls (NGFW) that are application-aware rather than simply port-based are the direction that firewalls should be going. So while lavishing praise on other Cisco competitors -- Palo Alto Networks for its NGFW and Check Point Software Technologies for its array of firewalls and their management for complex environments, putting these two vendors in the Gartner firewall "leaders" category -- Gartner's report calls Cisco merely a "challenger."
While giving Cisco kudos for having a good support network and reputation analysis capabilities for its firewall customers, Gartner indicates that Cisco at this time does not seem to be displacing Palo Alto or Check Point on "vision or feature" and Cisco "does not effectively compete in the NGFW field that is visible to Gartner."
According to Cisco spokesman David Oro, "Cisco customers would say differently." He notes that the Cisco ASA CX firewall only shipped last July, and it would only be fair to give it time in the market. He says Cisco consider Gartner's research in this case "outdated," perhaps because it takes considerable time to put together this kind of lengthy Gartner report.
But Gartner says it sees Cisco winning most procurements through sales/channel execution or "aggressive discounting for large Cisco networks where firewall features are not highly weighted evaluation criteria (that is, as part of a solution sell in which security is one component)."
Gartner also notes that Gartner clients often find Cisco's security strategy, nomenclature and product descriptions "confusing." Gartner cites by way of example that Cisco uses the terms "context-aware" and "CX" rather than "application control" or "NGFW," and says Gartner clientele will out of confusion exclude Cisco in comparing its offerings to competitors' offerings.
Terms like "SecureX" and Cisco's marketing campaign "Internet of Everything," referring to how many devices are coming online, are confusing, says Erik Devine, information security manager at Riverside HealthCare, based in Kankakee, Ill. Devine says he has huge respect for Cisco as a network provider but simply "doesn't believe they're a strong security firm." He says that, like Juniper, Cisco should "stick to switching and routing."
Devine, who not only directs security but also networking decisions that include wireless and mobility for the healthcare organization, chose to migrate away from what was a Cisco-based network to an HP-based one, in part because licensing proved more attractive. In the course of that change, Riverside also moved away from Cisco-based ASA firewall modules. Instead, Riverside went with a variety of Fortinet firewall, SSL/VPN, encryption and messaging protection gateways that include wireless control for the core network.
Though he did look at Palo Alto and Cisco gear as part of the evaluation process, in the end Devine felt the Fortinet firewalls had sufficient application-level control for what the healthcare organization needed and were technically sound and cost-effective. In his own experience over the decades, Devine says he's found Cisco's licensing models to be overly complicated and expensive.
Palo Alto Networks, which Gartner considers the front-runner firewall maker technically in application-aware capability (though perhaps a bit pricey), says it sees Cisco as a worthy competitor.
"They are an impressive company. They have tremendous presence in the customer base," says Chris King, director of product marketing at Palo Alto, adding Cisco seems to have something akin to "absolute dominance" in the networking organization and remarkable sway with networking managers, who may have budgets for firewalling security, too. (Cisco doesn't disclose what portion of its firewall sales come from blades in switches and routers or as stand-alone firewall appliances.)
Because Cisco and Juniper alike stress that security should be part of the networking infrastructure and be integrated into it, the challenge for a firm such as Palo Alto is to get potential enterprise customers to understand the advantage of application-aware controls. King argues Cisco firewalls are simply stateful inspection with some application controls, and Palo Alto has to win acceptance by proving its NGFW functionality is worth it. According to its latest SEC filing, Palo Alto had 6,000 end-user customers at the start of last year and about 11,000 today.
Cisco faces a broad competitive field in IT security, according to IDC. Its main competitors in network security include Check Point, Juniper, Fortinet, McAfee, HP, Palo Alto Networks, IBM, Dell SonicWall and Sourcefire. In messaging security, Symantec, McAfee, Trend Micro, Websense, Barracuda, Sophos, EMC, Microsoft and F-Secure. In Web security, Websense, Trend Micro, McAfee, Barracuda, Sophos, Check Point, Symantec, F-Secure and IBM, among others, keep the pressure on Cisco. Cisco is not considered a major player in the endpoint security market, dominated by Symantec, Intel's company McAfee, Trend Micro, Kaspersky Lab and others.
"Cisco is No. 1 in network security, No. 2 in Web security and No. 3 in messaging security," notes IDC analyst Charles Kolodgy. According to IDC, Cisco's IT security revenue bounced back to $1.834 billion by the end of 2012 after sinking the year before to $1.735 billion, and Cisco's fiscal statement last month indicates continuing modest growth in its sales of its IT security products and services, which include firewalls, intrusion-prevention systems, IronPort secure Web gateway and cloud-based ScanSafe service.
Cisco hasn't won every match. Cisco edged away from its own denial-of-service mitigation technology, Anomaly Guard and Anomaly Detector Modules, announcing "end of sale" back in 2010. Just this month, Cisco announced an alliance with Arbor Networks -- they had teamed together in the past -- that involves embedding Arbor anti-DDoS technology directly in Cisco routers.
And acquisitions remain a way to gain technologies that are seen as important for the future. For example, Cisco just acquired Prague-based Cognitive Security for its behavior-based threat analysis. Cisco's Frampton says this will play a role in identifying threats, especially targeted mobile devices.
Frampton does acknowledge that Cisco could be doing a better job in one area: uniting the security products it has acquired over the years so that they have a more unified policy and management platform. An integrated system, says Frampton, "will happen over the next several years."
Ellen Messmer is senior editor at Network World, an IDG publication and website, where she covers news and technology trends related to information security. Twitter: @MessmerE. Email: email@example.com.


text:
XIII Century is a real-time strategy game driven by an epic storyline torn from the pages of history.
Players control European kings and dukes, Russian princes and boyars, and Mongolian khans and noyons.
XIII Century features large-scale battles with thousands of soldiers clashing on detailed, realistic
battlefields. This historical simulation recreates actual conditions of these glorious battles, taking
into account the effects of terrain and weather.
Wage war through 30 battles across 5 campaigns for the nations of England, France, Mongolia, Germany,
and Kievan Rus' (Russia). Recreate great battles that changed the course of medieval history, including
the battle of Bouvines (July 27, 1214), the battle of Falkirk (July 22, 1298), the battle of Las Navas
de Tolosa (July 16, 1212), and the battle on Lake Peipus (April 5, 1242). Many of the conflicts in XIII
Century have never been featured in any PC game before, including the battle of Gelheim (July 2, 1298),
battle of Taillebourg (July 22, 1242), and the siege of the stronghold Salvatierra (1211).


text:
Sherman wins appeal, eligible for playoffs
RENTON, Wash. — Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman has won his appeal of a four-game suspension for use of performance enhancing substances, making him eligible for the NFL playoffs.
Sherman posted "I won," on his Twitter account Thursday morning, Dec. 27, followed by teammates tweeting their congratulations. Sherman added, "Thank you @nfl for upholding the truth! To the 12s Thank you your faith is rewarded! Thank you lord."
The decision was made by former NFL executive Bob Wallace.
Sherman was steadfast since news broke of his pending suspension that he believed he would win on appeal. Sherman's appeal was based on errors in the chain of custody of his sample and that there were mistakes made by the tester. Sherman made his appeal late last week.
Sherman is now eligible for the Seahawks' season finale against St. Louis and the playoffs.


text:
Another Dodger no True Blue collector should be without is Maury Wills. His speed and guile were an important part of the team in the 60's. Heck, it's doubtful the Dodgers could have won as many games as they did without him.
Here is my 2005 Donruss Diamond Kings autographed card of him. It is a scarce variation that includes a unique green frame. It is numbered 7 out of 10.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Auto Collection: Maury Wills Diamond King
2 comments:
Awesome card!ReplyDelete
I wasn't around to see him play... a little before my time. But... for some reason, I always wanted to pick up one of his vintage cards. I'm still looking to pick one up... however I did manage to pick up an on-card autograph from the Topps Retired series for $5 on COMC... crazy that his autos are this reasonable.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
There's this idea floating around. I'm sure you've heard it. It comes in many forms, most of them obnoxious.
- "Japanese role-playing games are archaic and obsolete."
- "They're driven by nostalgia, not innovation."
- "They really suck nowadays."
- "lol JRPGs."
It's all crap.
See, the common consensus among a great deal of gaming fans, critics, and scholars seems to be that the era of Japanese role-playing games is over. Kaput. Gone are the triumphant days of insta-classic masterpieces like Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy VII. Today, it's all about whiny protagonists and level grinding and those wacky Japanese tropes and cliches.
As my colleague Mattie Brice writes over at PopMatters:
"...That's how [Japanese role-playing games] feel to me now, a weight that I constantly rationalize carrying. I just feel too old for them now, grown past the usual tropes and mechanics. This is because JRPGs only earn such a title and standing by including a large amount of conventions from a niche of games, and if you mess with that formula too much, a game drops outside of the tastes of the fanbase... In a sense, JRPGs represent a lot of what's wrong with video games. Namely, things being there just because. Many of these titles advertise 60+ hours of gameplay, but a lot of that time is spent grinding levels and includes other filler tactics."
Sweeping generalizations aside, what about the ones that don't do things "just because"? What about the funky, beat-driven romps through a twisted version of Japan in the inimitable The World Ends With You? Or the surprisingly fun genre-ribbing of Half Minute Hero? Or the heavy cloud of melancholy that hangs over every moment of hack-and-slash bullet hell in the surreal, morbid Nier?
Today's Japanese role-playing games take more risks than any other genre.
And no, those aren't exceptions. In fact, it's easier to find innovative JRPGs than trope-filled ones nowadays. Sure, you have your old-fashioned stalwarts, your Dragon Quests and Golden Suns, games that cling onto the addictive turn-based formulas that made RPGs so popular in the first place. But the majority of today's offerings—particularly in the genre's most popular series, Final Fantasy—look nothing like the RPGs you might have seen 10 or 20 years ago.
Today's Japanese role-playing games take more risks than any other genre. Look at Valkyria Chronicles, a game that takes the Rock-Paper-Scissors strategy mechanic of a game like Fire Emblem and puts it on a real-time battleground with destructible environments and lovely cel-shaded obstacles. And it's all set during a twisted take on World War II.
What about Inazuma Eleven, a JRPG that is also a soccer game? Or Mother 3, a case study in bouncy, rhythm-fueled gameplay and stirring, poignant narrative? Or Shin Megami Tensei: Devil Survivor, a game that blends turn-based and grid-based combat systems in fiendishly difficult fashion? Or the countless other unique JRPGs released in Japan (and often only released in Japan) on a monthly basis?
Of course, not all of these innovations are great—I've never fallen in love with Eternal Sonata's Chopin-inspired dream-world or Disgaea's number-driven chaos. But almost every current-gen JRPG I've played is strange and unique and often quite smart, in its own way. Some, like The Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky, are just damned good at making you feel like you're on an adventure. Others, like Radiant Historia, take old-school aesthetics and spruce them up a bit, grafting on new mechanics and narrative devices so you enjoy more than just nostalgia.
But stack all these games up next to Western blockbusters. This year's sure-fire AAA hits include the likes of Mass Effect 3, Assassin's Creed III, a new Call of Duty, Halo 4, and maybe a few more big titles that haven't been announced yet. Before even picking up any of these games, you know exactly how they're going to work. They will all likely be excellent, but few will be innovative. Few will be as strange or as different as the average modern JRPG.
So why is the JRPG the victim of so many sweeping generalizations and belittling insults here in the U.S.? Maybe it's just an easy target in an industry where we love to shoot things down. But I think the real issue is that there's this idea entrenched in many peoples' heads of what a JRPG looks like—this idea of a spiky-haired protagonist with a huge sword fighting a 60-hour, grind-filled journey that ends with a fight against several gods and a sanctimonious lesson about the power of friendship. And yes, there are JRPGs made today that paint that exact picture. But not all of them. Not even a lot of them.
It's sad, don't you think? I shouldn't have to stand on the bully pulpit, shouting at the world that it's probably a bad idea to sweep an entire genre under the rug because you didn't enjoy level-grinding in that one Dragon Quest or you hated the anime cut-scenes in the latest Tales game. But there seems to be an unprecedented level of ignorance in the gaming industry when it comes to this subject.
Just look at all the people who claim the recently-released Xenoblade "revitalized" the genre. Xenoblade didn't revitalize the genre. It never needed to be revitalized. JRPGs are as alive and wonderful as ever.
This Week in JRPG News
- Monkeypaw Games has added a new gameplay video to their Class of Heroes 2 Kickstarter, established for the deluxe physical edition of the upcoming JRPG. Although it doesn't seem likely to hit its goal, we'll still get to see a digital version of the game.
- Here's a lovely new trailer for the lovely Ni no Kuni, which will hit the U.S. next winter.
- Lots of new info on Pokémon Black and White 2, courtesy Andriasang.
- Square Enix has released its own music channel, chock full of tunes from games like Final Fantasy and Xenogears.
- The Legend of Dragoon, which I remember enjoying quite a bit when I played it (back in the day), is hitting the PlayStation Network next month.
What To Play This Weekend
Persona 3 Portable, which I just started playing for the first time ever. (I know. Don't judge.) It's really, really good. There's just something about the day-by-day schedule, which involves jabbering during the daytime and dungeon-crawling at night, that's compulsive and addictive. It's great. Except for Kenji. Screw that guy.
Your Questions Answered
Every week, I post several reader questions about JRPGs. Want to see your question featured in an edition of Random Encounters? Send it to me: email@example.com
Reader Kyle writes:
Are companies like NISA and Atlus truly doing justice to the JRPG scene in the US by not advertising and pushing the JRPG scene as much as say EA, Activision, and other big companies?
Sadly, companies like NISA and Atlus don't have EA and Activision levels of money. They can't advertise and push the JRPG scene as much as those giant publishers can. It's just not possible. On the flip side, companies like EA and Activision are doing a disservice by not picking up Japanese role-playing games. Because, really, why shouldn't Electronic Arts stand behind games like Hyperdimension Neptunia?
Kyle also writes:
Do you think that companies should take a page from NISA and Atlus and release all the extras that Japan gets with game launches (cds, art books, figures, playing cards, ect.)? The stuff that they release with their games is awe inspiring; compared to a free map pack or a skin, that comes with most new games anymore?
This is a good question that I'll leave to reader discussion. I've never cared much for collectible packages—I'm perfectly fine with just getting a game. But maybe that's just me. What do you think?
Random Encounters is a weekly column dedicated to all things JRPG. It runs every Friday at 3pm ET.


text:
The two-volume set The Debate on the Constitution contains the speeches, newspaper articles, pamphlets, and letters that relate firsthand the struggle that created what ultimately became the world's oldest working national charter. Here are over a hundred voices, including Franklin, Madison, Jefferson, Washington, Patrick Henry—as well as many additional participants not as well known today. You'll find the case against the new charter by Virginian George Mason and the still-unidentified "Federal Farmer"; the essential Federalist Papers by Madison and Hamilton in their original dramatic context; and the crucial compromise forged by John Hancock and Samuel Adams in Massachusetts. The volumes also include complete texts of the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, and Constitution (with all amendments); detailed biographical profiles of all authors in the set; informative notes; and a full historical chronology.
Plus – FREE
Thomas Jefferson: Writings
Clothbound, slipcased edition • 1,600 pages
The most comprehensive one-volume selection of Jefferson ever published, all in a handsome, 1,600-page edition. Includes more than 250 letters, his Autobiography, and public writings about politics, education, science, botany and gardening, religion, literature, architecture, the habits of his fellow citizens, and his beloved home, Monticello.