Download
Download eBook for Free
Format | File Size | Notes |
---|---|---|
PDF file | 2.3 MB | Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience. |
Purchase
Purchase Print Copy
Format | List Price | Price | |
---|---|---|---|
Add to Cart | Paperback59 pages | $23.00 | $18.40 20% Web Discount |
This Note describes a proposed research design to evaluate certain changes developed by the Environmental Protection Agency for operating and managing the Superfund remedial program to clean up uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The Note outlines considerations in designing an appropriate pilot evaluation framework, including site selection and performance criteria for two of the proposed Superfund remedial program improvements. Based on current information, the findings suggest that any effort to evaluate pilot changes in the remedial program should (1) develop a better understanding of the factors (e.g., site characteristics, management policies) driving project outcomes (e.g., cost, cost growth, schedule slippage); (2) draw a sample of sites representative of the population of sites for which inferences are needed; and (3) within strata, assign sites randomly to pilot or control groups.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Note series. The note was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1979 to 1993 that reported other outputs of sponsored research for general distribution.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.