text:
Chargers have perfect opportunity to give Philip Rivers a send-off like Big Ben
Los Angeles Chargers v Kansas City Chiefs / Peter G. Aiken/GettyImages
Fans of the LA Chargers are spoiled as they went from a Hall of Fame quarterback in Philip Rivers to one of the best and most exciting young quarterbacks in Justin Herbert. Herbert is already breaking some of Rivers' records and is making his mark in the history books through just two seasons.
With there being only one game in-between a Rivers and Herbert start, Charger fans have not really gotten the chance to slow down and appreciate Rivers' departure. Rivers' future was unclear at the end of the 2019 season and he did not receive much of a send-off from Charger fans while the team played in a soccer stadium.
All of this became more disappointing after watching the Week 17 Monday Night Football showdown between the Cleveland Browns and Pittsburgh Steelers. Ben Roethlisberger played what is likely going to be his last game at Heinz Field and he got the kind of send-off that he deserved. As bad as Ben played, it was a fantastic moment for both him and every Steelers fan.
Philip Rivers deserves this kind of send-off from the LA Chargers
Philip Rivers is still the greatest quarterback in Chargers history and he deserves his flowers from Charger fans. There was speculation of the team signing him to a one-day contract in the offseason but that never happened as Rivers left the door open to returning to a team this season.
However, the New Orleans Saints reportedly reached out to Rivers to come back against the Miami Dolphins and Rivers did not return as he wanted to stay home for Christmas.
That opens the door for Rivers to do it this offseason. If he did not return to play in the 2021 season, it is hard seeing him return in the 2022 season. However, the problem with doing it in the offseason is that it might not generate the kind of crowd that Rivers deserves. Sure, there will be Charger faithful that show up, but the logistics of booking out SoFi Stadium for a Rivers retirement ceremony in May just does not make a lot of sense.
Rivers deserves the same halftime ceremony that LaDainian Tomlinson received in 2015 when he retired. Luckily for the NFL and the Chargers, the perfect situation is possible. The first week of the NFL season will take place on the weekend of September 11th. Rivers made his first career NFL start for the Chargers all the way back on September 11, 2006.
The Chargers have started the season on the road in each of the last two seasons. They are due to start the season at home, which potentially puts their first home game of 2022 on September 11, exactly 16 years after Rivers made his debut with the Chargers.
MORE: Brandon Staley would never allow the Chargers to purposefully tie the Raiders
That is the day to give Rivers his roses and give him the kind of send-off that Big Ben received on Monday night. He deserves it and Charger fans deserve it.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Foodie's Corner
Gas-Buzzlers
Join Stinger
January 3Looking for new recipes? Apple Pie? Cookies? Lemon Cheesecake Bars? Chocolate Cakes? More? We've got you covered
December 21Which Combination of Hinsdale South Staff Are You? Take the quiz to find out!
November 30Feeling bored? Click here!
How A Pandemic Brought About Financial Uncertainty
Photo courtesy of Pharmaceutical technology
Keioko Haynes, Staff Writer
As many of us know, earlier this year, the world was sent into a pandemic. With over 6 million cases in the US alone, this global issue is nothing to take lightly. Because of this, millions across the globe have lost their jobs due to the failure of being deemed as essential or of the fear of contracting the virus and potentially infecting their family members.
According to an article written by Lucas Moyon and Laura Dawson Ulrich, the unemployment rate started at 3.5% in the US, descending at a steady rate in early March. That, however, changed as soon as the virus started to take effect; Drastically changing the unemployment rate to 14.7% in April. These percentages only take into account those who actually filed for unemployment and not including those individuals who didn't.
The federal government decided to give a stimulus package that accumulated to roughly $2 trillion dollars. However, this only provided those without a job around $1,200, which is not enough to pay for the average monthly bill.
Small businesses were deemed as the most vulnerable during these times. The Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences of The United States of America (PNAS) conducted a study, in late March, that concluded "The results suggest that the pandemic had already caused massive dislocation among small businesses just several weeks after its onset and prior to the availability of government aid through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. Across the full sample, 43% of businesses had temporarily closed, and nearly all of these closures were due to COVID-19." Additionally, when stores did reopen, there was a huge decline in the number of employees. Approximately the reduction amounted to 39%-50% of workers when compared to the previous months. In the same study, the researchers say that while job seekers will eventually find work again,
"These projections suggest that the scale of job dislocation could be larger than anything America has experienced since the Great Depression and larger than the impact of the 1918 influenza epidemic."
Hi there! My name is Keioko Haynes and I am a current senior at South. I am so excited to be apart of Stinger this year! I am glad to have the ability...
Pro-Trump Loyalists Storm the Capitol
Georgia Swings Blue
Why Georgia is On Our Minds
The Uyghur Issue
Hinsdale South Hosts "Joey's Afterglow" Toy Drive
France's Fight Against Police Brutality
Who's Cheating?
Nebraska Repeals Slavery Loophole
Harris Makes History
#EndSARS: How the Nigerian Youth Fight For Justice
Student News Site of Hinsdale South High School
7401 Clarendon Hills Rd,


Rated 5 out of 5 by CupcakeMamma from Best value & quality! Used these lilac wrappers for an engagement party & the entire crowd loved them! Made my cupcakes look beautiful.
Do you have these in mini size and in white?
We apologize, we do not carry mini size cupcake wrappers or liners.


A documentary about the legendary rock n' roll music super fans, Dennis and Lois.
373 backers pledged $46,992 to help bring this project to life.
On their first date they went to a little known, down and dirty music venue on the Bowery with the letters "CBGB'" printed on the awning. On the stage inside, four dudes with black leather jackets played three-chord melodies at 200 mph. Standing amongst just a handful of people, they fell in love with this band and, by way of a spiritual-musical menage-a-trois, with each other.
The band was, of course, the now legendary Ramones, the most influential punk rock band of all time, and the couple, Dennis and Lois.
The following week Dennis and Lois got into a beat up station wagon and traveled hundreds of miles to go see the Ramones play at a pizzeria in Pittsburgh. Joey Ramone was so freaked out to see them there in the sparse crowd, that he said over the microphone, "Wow...no one has ever gone more than three blocks to see us."
This was the moment Dennis and Lois became accepted as part of the Ramones inner circle, and the start of a 40-year journey that would become the stuff of legend. Many more bands and thousands of sleepless miles later, Dennis and Lois have come to epitomize the punk rock ethos.
The Happy Mondays would immortalize them in song. SPIN Magazine published a comic strip celebrating their "Rocking War Stories." They've been to over 10,000 gigs and now into their sixties continue to serially attend shows, sometimes spanning the globe and spending every last dollar they have just to be in the house at certain concerts they deem important to a favorite artist.
Some would call them fans, some might call them "super fans," but to their friends, a veritable who's who of the most significant and iconic punk and indie rock performers of the last four decades, they are simply known as 'Dennis and Lois' the coolest couple around.
DENNIS AND LOIS is a documentary about two quirky New York City characters who came together over their fervent fanhood of fringe bands in the 70's, fell in love, and embarked on a lifelong quest, fueled by love and gratitude, to selflessly serve the creators of the music they believe keeps them alive. If you're in a band and you see them turn up a second time to one of your shows prepare yourself for a very long ride. They seem to have that effect.
DENNIS AND LOIS will change the way you look at going out to see music forever.
Dennis and Lois at one of the Ramones shows in the 1970's!
There are bands, there are fans, and then there's Dennis and Lois.
I met Dennis and Lois seven years ago at Mekons' show and knew immediately that I wanted to make a film about these two unique people and their incredible journey. Many road trips and lots of footage later, the project is finally coming close to reality.
Until this point, I have funded this project entirely on my own. In order to get the film completed, I am asking for support from music lovers, film buffs, and anyone else interested in seeing the story of this unique couple reach a wider audience.
Merch Booth Pack: For the FANS of the SUPERFANS! Pick up your swag!
Vintage 1970's Ramones shirts from Dennis and Lois!
Custom Lego's of Dennis and Lois used in the film!
Customized bobble heads of DENNIS AND LOIS used in the film!
3. Follow Us Online: Be sure to check out our official website, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram accounts for more information including behind the scenes photos, clips, and anecdotes!
4. Connect With Us: If you have any questions (or would like to contact us for press), send us an e-mail at denlo.kickstarter@gmail.com!
We're committed to reaching our completion date. But, as we've learned, things happen that you never see coming—and that can slow your roll at times. We see the biggest potential stumbling block being the music licensing of what needs to be a loud, fist-pumping, rowdy soundtrack. However, our team of licensing pros are good at what they do, and we're confident that we'll be able to pull off what promises to be the biggest single expense of our production budget.
Join us! Access to updates with behind the scenes content, videos, and more! Plus, we'll give you a shout out on our Facebook!
Get exclusive digital artwork from DENNIS AND LOIS (desktop, tablet, and phone wallpaper with original art from the film), as well as a special sneak peek video!
A list of Dennis and Lois' top 10 tracks, scanned into a PDF, and a link to the playlist.
Plus, a digital download of DENNIS AND LOIS and an exclusive Kickstarter-only bonus video (the download will be delivered at a point in time AFTER the film's theatrical release).
ONLY AVAILABLE on KICKSTARTER! Get the DVD of the film!
Plus, Dennis and Lois' playlist and an exclusive Kickstarter-only bonus video! (the DVD will be delivered at a point in time AFTER the film's theatrical release).
Fan pack! Get a t-shirt, buttons, and an art card!
Plus: Dennis and Lois' playlist, a digital download of the film, and an exclusive Kickstarter-only bonus video.
You'll be listed as a production supporter in the film credits, along with receiving the Merch Booth pack!
A limited edition art print of the official movie poster.
A limited edition art print of Dennis and Lois' top ten tracks playlist.
A limited edition art print of the backstory of Dennis and Lois.
Get the customized Legos of Dennis and Lois used in the film!
Get the custom bobble heads of Dennis and Lois used in the film!
His and Hers! Two original Dennis and Lois Ramones T-Shirts from the 1970's! Don't miss out on these one of a kind items!
TAKE IN A SHOW in MANCHESTER!
TAKE IN A SHOW in NYC!
You'll receive an ASSOCIATE PRODUCER credit on DENNIS AND LOIS, a private link to the current rough cut, and four passes to to a preview, premiere, festival, or theatrical screening of the film (does not include travel or accommodation). Plus, you'll be looped into our Producers' Circle updates and be invited to any advance screenings prior to the festival run.
COME JOIN US! You'll receive a CO-PRODUCER CREDIT on the film, DINNER WITH THE FILMMAKERS, INVITATIONS FOR 4 to a preview, premiere, festival, or theatrical screening of the film (does not include travel or accommodation). You'll also be included in our PRODUCERS' CIRCLE updates and receive a private link to the current rough cut.


text:
Q: RFC 7239 - Difference between 'by' and 'host' Im in the process of implementing a RFC 7239 compatible forwarded header in an internal reverse proxy. In brief, the specification states that the values of the host and by components should be as follows:

*

*host - the value of the host header as received by the proxy

*by - the user agent facing interface of the proxy

Whats the difference between these two? If i have a proxy server facing the internet on the address http://myexampleserver.com, as i understand it both host and by would have the same value?

A: No, the original request will contain the requested site's DNS address as host header, not the proxy's DNS address.
The RFC mentions this host value's intended use:

This can be used, for example, by the origin
server if a reverse proxy is rewriting the "Host" header field to
some internal host name.

So, for example:

*

*User agent requests http://example.com/foo through proxy http://yourexampleproxy/. Request will contain GET / http://example.com/foo and Host: example.com.

*Your proxy translates, by configuration, the Host: example.com header to Host: some-internal-foo, and adds the Forwarded: host=example.com;by=yourexampleproxy header, so the origin server can inspect it.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Science fiction becomes fact for engineering students through 3D printer
Senior Gunnar Schmidt works with a gear he printed for a project. Photo by Sandy Iyer.
By Elizabeth Sims
Enterprise Editor
Centimeter by centimeter, the printer produces the small black gear to match the model glowing on a nearby computer screen. However, this is not a simple picture of the model. This is a very real, fully usable gear coming out of the printer.
While this may seem like the substance of science fiction, it is a reality for Coppell High School's engineering department. Near the end of last year, it acquired a MakerBot Replicator 1 three-dimensional printer from their booster club and spent that time working out all the bugs and learning Solid Works, a 3D modeling program, so it would be fully functional.
"It works a lot like an inkjet printer where it will print a layer out on the table and move the table down a little bit and put the other layer on top of that, That's how it makes it three dimensional," STEM Academy lead Mike Yakubovsky said.
Now, the printer is used for nearly every project and prototype the students create and generates the product in a fraction of
The engineering department received this MakerBot Replicator 1 3D printer from its booster club last year. Students use this printer for both projects and engineering competitions. Photo by Sandy Iyer.
"We teach the students how to do prototyping, and now they are learning how to print their designs rather than making it out of cardboard or Styrofoam," Yakubovsky said. "Making it out of foam might take three to four days working five or six hours a day, in this case we can print in about four hours and if there is a mistake I can just print it again."
The engineering clubs also utilize this technology to prepare and run tests for competitions.
"For solar car, people have been printing parts to test out, and if any changes need to be made they just print them again. The competitive robotics team is actually printing a lot of the robot," junior Aaron Maynard said.
The students are able to take risks with this equipment as it has provided them more creative freedom.
"This 3D printing technology is pretty amazing because you can design anything you want and just send it to the printer," Maynard said. "We are more risky with our designs now because we can actually test them out. "
Senior Gunnar Schmidt has even used the printer to realize his goal of creating a mechanical turtle that can walk.
"Last year, I designed a 3D model of a mechanical turtle with moving legs that let it walk. Now I have been printing parts to start building it. I have found a few errors and I can just go back and plug new numbers into the computer and print it again," Schmidt said. "It's really helpful to have the 3D printer because if I make mistakes I can go back and fix them."
This single piece of technology has opened a world of opportunity for the engineering students as they push the limits of their creativity. Now, they are working to raise more funds to buy more printers to increase their productivity.
elizabeth sims


Our Collectibles category is the premier place to find popular and hard-to-find items on the web. Complete your Disneyana collection with Mickey Mouse and Tinkerbell items, Disney pins, porcelain Minnie Mouse, Piglet phone strap, Disney snowglobe, Disneyland viewmasters and more. Add to your collection a vintage Star Wars lunchbox, Spider Man thermos, Flintstones pin, He Man Lunchbox, Napolean Dynamite button or a Popeye bobble head. Or outfit your house with a classic arcade style game - Golden Tee, Donkey Kong Jr, Super Mario Bros, Lord of the Rings arcade game, Atari Pole Position, Ms Pac Man arcade game, The Simpsons, Tekken Tag, Star Wars, Mortal Kombat, or Area 51. eBay Collectibles also has an unmatched selection of Pinball Machines and Jukeboxes. Are you an avid collector of lamps and fixtures? eBay has rare and one of a kind candle holders, ceiling fixtures and neon lights for you to choose from. Expand your collection of Pez Dispensers, Keychains, and Promo Glasses. Find a Muppets keychain or Power Puff Girls pez dispenser today!
We feature the "cream of the collectibles crop" including Lladro, Swarovski, Department 56, Waterford, Pandora Jewelry, Brighton, Vera Bradley and many other top collectible lines. We're very proud to say that we have been honored with Premier Dealer Status in all of these lines, enabling us to serve you better.
We hope you find our web site enjoyable and informative and that we can be of service to you. Thanks again for the visit!


When you invest in mutual funds, you may quit worrying about where and how to invest. Let your fund managers take a call based on thorough market research, monitoring and experience.
Mutual funds can also invest in other assets like bonds, cash, or commodities like gold and other precious metals. This is called diversification and it allows you to reduce the risk of investing in one particular stock or sector. Additionally, it gives you a broader exposure to various stocks and sectors.
Mutual funds are more or less classified as liquid investments; unless guided by a pre-specified lock-in period. This means, as an investor you can redeem your unit holdings at any point (subject to exit load, if any) -- giving you any time access to your money. Further, funds are well integrated with the banking system -- which means that most funds can transfer money directly to your bank account.
You can invest in mutual funds either directly or through a financial advisor. A mutual fund allows you to start with small investments. For instance, a SIP lets you invest small amounts of money (as low as Rs. 500) at regular intervals – helping you achieve your financial goals through disciplined and systematic investing.
When you invest in mutual funds through the SIP investment route, you can benefit from "rupee cost averaging". This means you buy a larger number of units when markets are low and a smaller number of units when markets are high. This averages out your total cost while safeguarding you from the ups and downs of the market.
Mutual Funds offer multiple scheme options depending upon your financial goal, risk appetite and time horizon.
Investors can stay updated on information pertaining to the markets and schemes by logging on to our website or calling our customer care. They can view factsheets, offer documents, annual reports, etc.
Mutual funds in India are regulated and monitored by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI). The body protects the interests of investors. This helps mutual funds to be a safer means of investment. Mutual funds are required to provide investors with standard information about their investments, in addition to other disclosures like specific investments made by the scheme and the quantity of investment in each security.


Shen SB180 hybrid bass, sold and set up by Mark Carlsen. I bought it as a spare. Mark told me the Shen would become my first bass. He was right!
Ugly early 20th century flatback acoustic bass, possibly Czech or German. Based on some scribbling at the base of the neck, I guess that it spent part of its wretched life in a high school. I rescued it from the attic of a music junk store outside of Peabody Conservatory in Baltimore (Ted's Musicians Shop?) and got it restored by Bill Gailes around 1980. Usually strung with Thomastic Spirocore Weichs.
Ehrlund Acoustic Pickup (EAP) Linear Microphone. This is an amazing cross between a pickup and a mic. It sounds more like an actual bass than any other pickup I've used, but a bit light on the low end. It is very sensitive to placement, including the thickness of the goop. It also can feed back. I also have two Fishman Full Circle pickups, and a K&K Double Big Twin pickup that I don't use much.
Czech Juzek cello, circa 1930.
Braided carbon fiber French bass bow bought for about $90 (!) from YouBow.com. Unfortunately they no longer seem to sell it.
Greenboy Fearless F112 speaker cabinet built by Don Barry of Greenboy Audio.
My current amp is an an Acoustic Image Ten2 Series III. Years ago I wrote a review of its predecessor, an original Acoustic Image Coda, which is still a great amp and which I still use.
Tiny binaural mics from Core Sound. Sometimes I use them as a piano mic using my Core Sound piano mic hack. I also use their musical instrument mic for recording my bass. These mics are physically tiny and they sound just like the music they hear . Listen to some recordings.
Zoom LiveTrak L-12 digital recorder/mixer. Better for my purposes than the Zoom F8, mostly because of the extra tracks. So far I've only used it as a recorder, not a mixer.
Audacity, an excellent, free, open source software package for audio editing and recording.
VLC, an excellent, free, open source media player. When I need to slow a tune down to transcribe it, I usually use this.
LAME, an excellent, free, open source mp3 encoder.
Impro-visor, my practicing partner. An open-source Band-In-A-Box-like program with some amazing abilities, most of which I don't use. With The Imaginary Book, changes to lots of tunes in Impro-visor format.
iReal♭, the successor to the iReal Book, a multiplatform chord-changes-only fake book/accompanist that works on iEverything, Android, Mac and Kindle Fire.
iGigBook for my iPhone, but the screen is really too small. One day I'll root my old Samsung Galaxy Note 10" tablet and install the latest Android so I can run iGigBook on that.
MuseScore, a free open source program for creating sheet music that works well for jazz lead sheets.
My 1971 Fender Precision fretless bass is now one of Bob Gollihur's "eclectic basses"
Zoom F8 Field Recorder. I splurged and got this to replace my Zoom R16. This is much smaller, 7"x5.5"x2.1". It has much better mic preamps, optional phantom power on all 8 inputs, records at up to insane resolutions (up to 192 kHz×24 bit), and can be controlled via iOS over bluetooth. So far neither SD card I bought passes both its compatibility tests, but both work fine at 44.1kHz×24 bit.
Zoom R16 recorder/interface/controller. Records 8 simultaneous tracks, combo inputs. Not as flexible as I'd hoped, and not always able to get enough from some dynamic mics, but looks like it will do the job, and an amazing piece of technology for the money.
Edirol R-1 portable solid state recorder. This was one of the first recorders in that genre. It does a wonderful job of recording audio to a CompactFlash card (remember those?) in .wav or .mp3 formats. This model and brand are no longer made but you can find lots of portable recording devices at Sweetwater Sound.


text:
Expats in Berlin: Why they like living here
"Ich bin ein Berliner" – These Expats have tips for you!
New city, new feeling! Berlin is a place with a unique atmosphere: cosmopolitan, full of stories and history, with people who are sometimes blunt and direct, sometimes charming, but always distinctive. But moving to a new life also presents you with challenges. How do you really get settled in a new city when you don't know anyone yet? These expats tell their stories and have some good advice for you.
Ashish is originally from Hyderabad, India. Early in his career he moved to the United States to study biology, then to Norway for his doctorate – and finally to Frankfurt. "For me, the U.S. wasn't much of a challenge in terms of culture. But Europe is different, and it takes a while to understand how people tick here. Once you get settled in, though, it's very rewarding!"
Ashish fetched up in Berlin two and a half years ago, where he found a job as a team leader at the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment.
He loves the lively Berlin environment. Only an international metropolis, with people from all over the world and the most diverse economic backgrounds, can develop this special feeling in him.
"Exploring the city on my own during lockdown gave me a strong sense of belonging. I love the food culture, the street culture and the many green oases throughout the city. I really feel at home now." Ashish has just received his permanent residence permit.
Head of microscopy and pathology at the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment
Tips for the transition phase
I didn't have a problem finding a bank. I looked on a comparison portal and found that Berliner Sparkasse was the best fit for me. I have a dedicated and very smart advisor who provided me with everything I needed and with whom I have a good connection.
Bureaucracy takes time, so be patient. When you finally get an appointment, make sure you prepare some time in advance and bring all the necessary documents with you. It's always a good idea to bring a little too much. The best system is to combine different sources of information on the Internet to prepare accordingly. Or you can send an email to ask a specific detail of one of the officials.
If you have trouble understanding certain terms or phrases, you can use the DeepL translator, which works much better than Google. If you're looking for a flat, try using your personal connections, and it's good to make direct contact with the owner. Expand your search area – there are cosy places outside of Neukölln, Prenzlauer Berg and Kreuzberg!
Focus on the things you love to do and find like-minded people near you. For example, I joined a cooking club that is really fun, and I joined a jogging group. There are also various groups on Facebook, Reddit and Meetup on every topic imaginable and for every nationality.
Favourite places in Berlin
The Wall Trail extends 160 km around half the city. It gives an impressive sense of Berlin's recent history as a city divided by political systems. It is also ideal for hiking and walking in and around Berlin.
Botanical Garden: a muted and quiet place to visit. Look out for themed exhibitions throughout the year.
Maria and Jorge
Maria and Jorge have been living in Berlin for quite a while. Coming from Italy and Ecuador, for them moving to Berlin above all meant a move to a liberal, cosmopolitan city with an open mentality and great prospects for their careers. Maria and Jorge met through friends, fell in love and have been married for two years. With the help of their advisor at Berliner Sparkasse, they were able to buy their own apartment in the Waidmannslust district of northern Berlin.
"For people who used to live in smaller villages, Berlin can be surprising and sometimes even shocking. It is the city's very own charm and once you get to know it, you don't want to be without it anymore. You can be who you want to be, and there are always free-spirited people around you. Berlin is the place we keep coming back to. We chose Berliner Sparkasse because it's just a great bank and it has the most ATMs in the entire city. Our advisor is helping us plan our financial future for our little family. I trust him completely."
Jr. sous chef at RUTZ Berlin, campaign manager at eBay
Ecuador/Italy
Don't be afraid of long, complicated technical terms about paperwork, contracts and so on. After a while you learn how the cookie crumbles, and sometimes it's good to be persistent. If you have the opportunity, get help from a native speaker or someone who has experience with how the German authorities work.
There is an institution called Tandem where you can learn languages with native speakers from Germany and other nations.
The Berlin Underground tour is great for getting a whole different perspective on the city. And Grunewald is great for long and quiet walks, with the dog or without. On Paul-Linke-Ufer you can relax and enjoy the unique and chilled Kreuzberg vibes in the afternoon or early evening.
Sophie is originally from London and moved to Berlin in 2012. She works as a freelance TV journalist in news and current affairs and is also the creator and host of an educational series called Sophie and Friends, a well-being show for preschoolers. She came to Berlin looking for an adventure and found a place that she now calls home. "The sense of being at home in Berlin is something that I feel on a daily basis, and particularly in the summer, when a lot of people are out in and around the city."
Some years ago, Sophie joined a project called Über den Tellerrand, an NGO that creates opportunities for people of different backgrounds to meet and connect through activities like cooking together or making music. It was originally founded in 2013 to help refugees integrate and is now active in 35 cities across Germany and beyond. "A fabulous way of giving back and creating new friendships."
Freelance TV journalist and broadcaster
British/German
Finding a flat in Berlin can be quite a challenge, especially when you're new in the city. My advice is to get all your documents together and look as much as you can in as many places as possible, spreading the word far and wide that you're apartment-hunting. It can take a while, but keep at it, something will come up!
Speaking some basic German might help you with your apartment search too – as well as with some of the other bureaucratic tasks there are to do when moving to a new country. Having said that, there are an increasing number of tools (online and offline) that can help you if you don't yet speak the language, and often kind new friends will be more than willing to support you too!
One thing that coincidentally really helped me was volunteering. Working with an organisation that helps other people for me really gave me a sense of belonging, purpose and community.
Tempelhofer Feld has a great atmosphere and an urban beauty to it, all year round. You can go there to do sports, hang with friends or even ski if there's enough snowfall in the winter! I also love getting out of the city and exploring some of the surrounding nature. There are some stunning lakes! One of my favourite spots to take a dip is Liepnitzsee, just north of Berlin. You can search any lake online ahead of time to check the water quality. Another favourite activity when the weather's nice is soaking in some culture at one of the many open-air cinemas all over the city.


SMART Board in all classrooms kindergarten through eighth grade.
Laptops for student use in each classroom grades 4-8.
Ipad carts for grades K-4.
Ipad cart for grades 5-8.
Chromebooks designated for the science room, grades 6-8.
Chromebook cart for student use grades 5-8.
Sphero robots for use with iPads. These robots teach programming skills to students of all ages.


text:
Home > Milk Means More Blog > Amp Up Your Plant-Forward Foods with Dairy
Amp Up Your Plant-Forward Foods with Dairy
Milk Means More | Food & Nutrition, Health benefits of dairy, Nutrition, Recipes, Registered Dietitians
This article by Stacey Winconek appears in the March 2020 issue of Metro Parent and can be found in its original form here.
Plant-based diets can be healthy, but without careful planning, key nutrients can be missing. But, by simply adding dairy to a plant-focused meal, you've got a superfood power couple. Here, personal chef and dietitian Jenn Fillenworth of Grand Rapids offers insight.
As a personal chef, dietitian and culinary school instructor at Grand Rapids Community College, Jenn Fillenworth knows a thing or two about food trends.
She's tailored menus to meet various dietary restrictions and is no stranger to the different diets people adopt – including the plant-based diet, which has gained momentum in recent years.
However, without the addition of dairy, people are falling behind in the nutrition department. With plant-based diets alone, it's very hard to get high quality protein, calcium and vitamin D – which are found in cow's milk.
"When you're pairing dairy with your plants, you're going to have increased protein quality, because a lot of the protein that's found in those vegetables isn't a complete protein," Fillenworth says. "It's missing an amino acid that really helps us form building blocks and helps build all the things that we need in our bodies."
Nutrient shortfalls
Dairy is particularly important for children and teens.
Growing children need the nutrients found in milk, especially because it's hard to get them to sit still and eat a balanced meal, Fillenworth says. Real milk is a nutrient-dense, easy option that provides 9 essential nutrients to build strong muscle and bone.
In addition to improved bone health, healthy eating patterns – which include low-fat or fat-free dairy foods – are linked to reduced risk of chronic diseases in adults, including cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes.
Adding dairy to your diet
Convinced of the importance of adding dairy into your plant-based diet? Aim for three servings of dairy each day, which could be 8 ounces of milk (regular or lactose-free), 8 ounces of yogurt and 1 1/2 ounces of hard cheese (such as Cheddar, Swiss, Colby, etc.), Fillenworth notes.
"The easiest way to consume your dairy servings is to have a glass of milk at each meal," she says.
Tips in the kitchen
After five years of working as a dietitian, Fillenworth decided it was time for a career switch.
"I had always worked in the food service industry, so I was always cooking, always in the kitchen. I kind of missed that while working in a clinical setting – and I didn't have that hands-on creativity anymore," Fillenworth says. "So I left my job and went to culinary school, and from there I created my own business, Jenny with the Good Eats."
In Fillenworth's kitchen, dairy is a staple and is a base for one of her go-to sauces: bechamel sauce, which is a basic white sauce with a combination of butter, flour and milk.
Get our basic White Sauce recipe here.
"It has milk's essential nutrients while creating a delicious sauce," she says. It's an easy and flavorful sauce that can complement vegetables and can even be used for macaroni and cheese.
"It makes it more palatable because it's familiar," she says. "Kids are used to creamy mac and cheese."
For even more nutrition, consider adding pureed vegetables to your child's macaroni and cheese. They won't even notice the addition, she says.
Use yogurt for marinades, too, in place of mayonnaise and to make tzatziki sauce. And add cheese as an accent your plant-based dish, she says.
Try more recipes that include plant foods, such as vegetables, grains and fruits.
The professional team from Milk Means More created this information for your learning pleasure. Dietitians, farmers, teachers, writers, designers - all work together to bring you up-to-date dairy information!
Tweets by MilkMeansMore
@MilkMeansMore on Instagram


text:
On the TV screen as elsewhere, there is often more than meets the eye. For decades, television has offered not just entertainment, but observations—subtle and otherwise—on society. This book examines the cultural commentary contained in Buffy, the Vampire Slayer, a show that ran for seven seasons (1997–2003) and 144 episodes. On the surface, Buffy is the marriage of a high school drama to gothic horror. This somewhat unusual vehicle is used to present, via the character of Buffy, fairly typical views of late 20th century culture-teenage problems; issues regarding a broken home; and the search for meaning and validation. In addition, subtler themes, such as cultural views of knowledge, ethnicity and history, are woven into the show's critique of popular culture. Organized into two sections, this volume offers an in-depth examination of the show: first, through the lens of Buffy's confrontation with culture, and second, from the complex perspectives of the individual characters. Issues such as values, ethical choices and the implications of one's actions are discussed—without ever losing sight of the limitations of a medium that will always be dominated by financial concerns. The final chapter summarizes what Buffy has to say about today's society. An appendix lists Buffy episodes in chronological order.
Get it on Amazon.
The Aesthetics of Culture in Buffy the Vampire Slayer


Walnut Woods, located only minutes southwest of Des Moines, provides shaded picnic areas with fireplaces and tables and peaceful spots for river fishing. The park is open year-round and is perfect for hiking, snowshoeing, and cross-county skiing with 2 1/2 miles of trails. A pleasant equestrian trail is also located in the park. Walnut Woods encompasses 260 acres of wooded bottomland along the Raccoon River. Within the park lies a large surviving natural stand of black walnut trees. More than 90 species of birds have been identified along the numerous foot and bridle trails throughout the park and along the river.
There is a 1-mile loop starting at the playground and ending at the bird blind that is perfect for young walkers. The trail is sand for the first half and then dirt for the second half. The sand can make it difficult to navigate strollers. The trail follows the Raccoon River for most of it, providing beautiful views and several spots that allow you to walk down to the river and play in the sand and/or water. During the loop, you will come to two trail junctions. Take a right for both of them to make this a 1-mile loop. It will end at the bird blind and you can easily walk back to the playground from here. If you take a left at the first junction, you will see the access point to one of the sandbars and the perfect place to building sand castles. If you take a left at the second trail junction this will put you onto the longer trail system that encompasses the park.
There are several places to access the river from the trail and play on sandbars. We have done several sand castle building hikes here and the kids love being able to play in the water and sand after hiking.
This park also has a small campground which is perfect if you want a camping experience that feels like you're in the middle of a forest, but is only minutes from town and needed amenities.
This park is operated by our local DNR program. In the summers there is a park naturalist there who regularly schedules hikes and other fun educational events at the park.
There is a parking lot loop at the playground, across from the lodge. You can park here to start the hike and end back at the playground (which is fun for kids!). You can also park at the bird blind which also has a parking lot loop and hike the opposite direction.
My name is Katy Severe and I am one of the Branch Ambassadors for Hike it Baby Des Moines. Our branch has been active since 2015 when I helped start it with another mama. I grew up in Eugene, Oregon where I got into hiking and the outdoors in high school when I joined my local Search and Rescue group. Hiking has continued to be a favorite hobby of mine ever since then. We moved to Iowa in 2011, our son was born in 2014, and hiking took on a new meaning for us a family. We wanted our son to grow up appreciating nature and getting outside in it. We love Hike it Baby and all that is has done to help encourage families with young children to get outside.


text:
Identifying Trustworthy Experts: How Do Policymakers Find and Assess Public Health Researchers Worth Consulting or Collaborating With?
Abby S. Haynes ,
* E-mail: abby.haynes@saxinsititute.org.au
Affiliations Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia, The Sax Institute, Haymarket, New South Wales, Australia
Gemma E. Derrick,
Affiliation Institute of Public Goods and Policies, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, Madrid, Spain
Sally Redman,
Affiliation The Sax Institute, Haymarket, New South Wales, Australia
Wayne D. Hall,
Affiliation University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia
James A. Gillespie,
Affiliations Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia, Menzies Centre for Health Policy, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
Simon Chapman,
Affiliation Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
Heidi Sturk
Affiliation School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia
Abby S. Haynes,
Abby S. Haynes Gemma E. Derrick ... Heidi Sturk
This paper reports data from semi-structured interviews on how 26 Australian civil servants, ministers and ministerial advisors find and evaluate researchers with whom they wish to consult or collaborate. Policymakers valued researchers who had credibility across the three attributes seen as contributing to trustworthiness: competence (an exemplary academic reputation complemented by pragmatism, understanding of government processes, and effective collaboration and communication skills); integrity (independence, "authenticity", and faithful reporting of research); and benevolence (commitment to the policy reform agenda). The emphases given to these assessment criteria appeared to be shaped in part by policymakers' roles and the type and phase of policy development in which they were engaged. Policymakers are encouraged to reassess their methods for engaging researchers and to maximise information flow and support in these relationships. Researchers who wish to influence policy are advised to develop relationships across the policy community, but also to engage in other complementary strategies for promoting research-informed policy, including the strategic use of mass media.
Citation: Haynes AS, Derrick GE, Redman S, Hall WD, Gillespie JA, Chapman S, et al. (2012) Identifying Trustworthy Experts: How Do Policymakers Find and Assess Public Health Researchers Worth Consulting or Collaborating With? PLoS ONE 7(3): e32665. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0032665
Editor: David W. Dowdy, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, United States of America
Received: September 3, 2011; Accepted: February 2, 2012; Published: March 5, 2012
Copyright: © 2012 Haynes et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: This study was funded by a grant from the Australian Government's National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), grant ID: 570870. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Journal articles, reports and government briefs are not the only sources of research used in policy development. Policymakers often prefer face-to-face consultations with researchers, or 'experts', in lieu of reading research [1], [2], particularly when policy must be formulated under tight time constraints. Policymakers also benefit from researchers serving on government committees and advisory groups, contributing to public and stakeholder forums, conducting research in partnership with policymakers, and disseminating relevant research through strategically developed policy networks [3]–[5]. Good interpersonal relationships between researchers and policymakers are consistently identified as key facilitators of research-informed policy development [6]–[9], yet little is known about how these relationships are formed or about the ways that policymakers identify researchers whom they invite into the 'inner circle' of policy development. We know that policymakers' research requirements differ according to the type of policy on which they are working and the phase of its development [10]. Similarly, their use of researchers varies in response to changing policy contexts [2]. This suggests that different researcher characteristics will be sought for different policy activities. Knowing if policymakers use the same criteria to select researchers for exploratory agenda-setting dialogue as they do for supporting legislation-focused consensus building or for evaluating interventions would enable researchers to use their expertise more effectively to pursue their goals of influencing policy.
Trust is considered to be a critical factor in researcher-policymaker relationships [7], [11], [12], and a facilitator of research utilisation [13]. Trustworthiness, comprising competence/ability, benevolence, and integrity [14], [15], reduces uncertainty and perceptions of risk in relationships where one party is relying on another [13]. Policymakers, for example, rely on researchers when they act on their advice; when they use them in the public sphere; and when they bring them into confidential behind-the-scenes deliberations [2]. Yet we know little about how policymakers assess researchers' trustworthiness.
Empirical studies have shown relationship-based strategies to have some effect on the use of research in policy making [7], [16]–[18], but our understanding of activities that are independent of researcher-policymaker relationships is less clear. Many researchers appear in the media as commentators and advocates [19] in order to inform the general public and influence policymakers—politicians in particular—who are known to be "dedicated media-watchers" [20], but there is scant information about how researchers' media roles affect policymakers' awareness of and response to them or their work.
We previously conducted an interview-based study of relationships between policymakers and researchers [2], [4]. We found that researchers were used to galvanise policymakers' thinking, to clarify research and provide independent advice, to persuade colleagues and stakeholders, and to defend research-informed policy [2]. Here, we expand on those findings by presenting novel data from the interviews describing how research-engaged Australian civil servants, parliamentary ministers and ministerial advisors identify and assess researchers with whom to consult (or avoid), and how different policy activities affect these processes. We reflect on the critical role of trustworthiness, and comment on the implications for policymakers, and for researchers who wish to have more policy influence.
This paper focuses on explicating policymakers' self-reported views and behaviours regarding their selection of researchers. For more theoretical analyses of the relationship between researchers and policymakers in this study, see Haynes at al. 2011a [4] (which considers strategies that researchers use to influence policy) and Haynes et al. 2011b [2] (which focuses on the ways in which policymakers use researchers).
Policymaker participants were identified from policy case examples described by researchers interviewed in a previous study. This earlier study comprised a national survey of Australian public health researchers [21], followed by semi-structured interviews with 36 researchers who had been peer nominated in the survey as 'most influential' [4]. In interviews, researchers were asked (a) to nominate examples of public health legislation in the past five years where they had personally observed policymakers utilise research and/or researcher advice, and (b) to name the policymakers (civil servants, ministers and ministerial advisors) concerned. These policymakers were contacted and invited for interview, during which other significant players were also identified (see table 1).
Table 1. Categories of study invitees and participants.
The civil servants were middle- to high-ranking staff in Departments of Health and health related regulatory or central agencies in the two most populous Australian states: New South Wales and Victoria. All were engaged in state-wide policy formation including the development and implementation of legislation, mandatory guidelines, and intervention programs. Seven of the 18 had roles with briefs to foster innovation and inform policy by collating or commissioning research. Six had or were undertaking PhDs and three had extensive clinical experience. The ministers and advisors were currently or previously associated with Health portfolios and/or Premierships (heads of government) in NSW or Victoria. One minister had clinical experience and two of the advisors had worked as civil servants.
Semi-structured interviews with these participants addressed broad questions about the relationship between research and policy. The questions about how researchers were identified and assessed were approached from three angles. First, we asked, how did the interviewees came to work with the researchers involved in the policy example under consideration, and what was their assessment of the researchers' contribution? Second, how did the policymakers and their colleagues identify and assess researchers in the course of their day-to-day work (that is, if they ever sought researchers)? Third, if the policymakers were required to consult with a researcher in a field that was new to them, how would they go about finding that person and assessing their suitability? This combination of generalised and specific questioning, together with "tracing" from a known policy example [22], was intended to capture a spectrum of behaviours and minimise idealised accounts of the process.
The first phase of coding used simple categories and subcategories stemming from the interview questions. How did policymakers:
Identify researchers/experts: (a) in general, (b) in new circumstances, and (c) in relation to the policy example?
Assess researchers/experts: (a) in general, (b) in new circumstances, and (c) in relation to the policy example?
Each category was then subcategorised to accommodate for differences in attitudes and behaviours between civil servants (employees in health-related government departments) and politicians (ministers and their advisors). The data were divided in this manner during coding because the research needs and behaviour of civil servants and politicians differed in important ways. Although ministers and advisors also have distinct roles and responsibilities their research needs and goals were considered sufficiently similar to be grouped together in this paper. Any differences are described. A second phase of coding explored the data for themes relating to the strategies that researchers in our earlier study reported using to increase policymakers' awareness of research and uptake of research-based advice [4].
The study was approved by the Behavioural and Social Sciences Ethical Review Committee of the University of Queensland, protocol number 2009000340. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study. All participants have been de-identified.
Civil servants' identification of researchers
Civil servants in research-related roles (nearly two fifths of the civil servant interviewees) were confident that they had sufficient knowledge of Australia-based and international researchers to be able to identify experts with whom to engage:
We actually do approach researchers because we have a high skilled policy team across a number of areas who are always reading, doing literature reviews, doing evidence reviews and so on….So we'll start making our own judgements about people that we want to speak to, and we'll engage them.
The remaining three fifths who did not have research-specific roles were less confident, but they felt able to identify a few leading Australian researchers from their familiarity with "key papers" and via their personal or organisational contacts with researchers.
When asked how they did or would identify new researchers, over four fifths of civil servants said the primary route was through their networks. Foremost in these networks were departmental colleagues and policymakers in other jurisdictions: "The number one strategy would be using our policy colleagues to see if they have any recommendations". Other network members were researchers and other "experts" already known to the department within academia, NGOs, knowledge brokerage organisations, senior health service management or professional associations: "It's like pyramid selling. You have a researcher who's very key and understands policy interaction but that person also has their own networks and so they bring with them the wealth of their own networks, not just themselves."
A third of civil servants used conferences and research forums: "Whenever I go to a meeting or to an annual forum or to a conference…you're on the lookout for people who have got an interesting perspective". Two departmental branches engaged researchers primarily through open tendering processes, but the civil servants frequently encouraged researchers with whom they had already worked to apply. Researchers were also known to self-identify: "they contact us and ask why aren't they on a committee" or "they come to us…through another mechanism [for example] it's on the back of some research they've done and then that opens the door".
Senior civil servants took advice from the Chief Health Officer, their director general or minister about where to obtain expertise and who to include on taskforces, working parties and committees. Scanning names from previous committees and taskforces was another option. A civil servant explained that she could establish a committee membership within a few days using this method.
Methods for identifying researchers appeared ad hoc, and there was a sense that this process differed not only between departments and branches, but also from person to person. None of the interviewees mentioned a formal procedure and one fifth believed that this was problematic: "I don't think it's a very good systematic way to get the best for both sides." This concern was based on the desire for a spectrum of views: "Diversity is important – everyone has an opinion and it can get fixed. It's good to hear different opinions, to get the breadth of an issue and consider the different ways of seeing it." Yet the pool of researchers was considered to be stagnant in several branches, including branches that used open tendering processes:
… often it's the same old researchers, and I think that's detrimental to the research community because it's the same message…. You constantly see the same people sitting on committees at whatever level they are, and I'm quite sure they're not the only people who are the experts in that field.
This accords with Ritter (2009) [1] who found a similar use of "the same small group" of researchers by Australian policymakers engaged in drug policy development.
Representative diversity may have also been limited by the noticeable tendency to work with researchers in the same locality: "It's just the way it generally happens…we also do engage with people outside of X… but naturally you tend to deal with the people that are in proximity with you." Interviewees observed this tendency in other departments too:
you do tend to go to the same people quite often and you'll find that each jurisdiction will have their favourite people…. Our colleagues in [an Australian state] had their people, and [another state] had their people, so you are a bit narrow in terms of your own state quite often.
Despite acknowledging the importance of personal connections, some interviewees cautioned against over-emphasising their influence. One-to-one relationships increased dialogue, but no matter how effective or how senior the connections were they were not a panacea for advancing research-informed policy: the nature of the bureaucratic machine involving multiple branches, departments and strata of government meant that policy proposals had to be deemed acceptable by an aggregation. For example, when asked if a single researcher-advocate could leverage their relationships to affect departmental decision-making, a civil servant told us:
Not really. I mean if it was a small piece of work. But in large scale public policy it's just not going to happen because there are so many gates along the way for it to be screened out, where that particular advocate won't have a level of influence whatsoever.
Politicians' identification of researchers
Politicians tended to see researchers as a subgroup in the pool of "experts". They made little distinction between experts who were prominent clinicians, senior health services managers, leaders of professional associations, NGO executives or university professors.
Like civil servants, politicians found researchers through their professional networks but primarily via departmental staff and their immediate colleagues—advisors and other ministers: "My chief of staff met somebody who told them about somebody who said look at X and Y's work…". Six of the eight commented that external contacts in NGOs, academia and stakeholder groups were also important starting points for building a network of expertise: "… it's the ripple effect. One person tells you about another person, that person tells you about another couple of people and so it's an arithmetic progression".
Unlike civil servants, three quarters of the politicians relied on media profile as a means of identifying researchers: "We approached X because she was recognised by the media as a top authority". In some cases, media presence alone was considered to be commensurate with expertise: "… the media is used as a proxy for being an expert in the area. So a high media profile is worth more than 10 pages of publications". For one advisor, it was the only means of identifying experts: "I have absolutely no idea how I would go about identifying someone if there wasn't an obvious expert prominent in the media".
Politicians talked about being aware of researchers with high profile reputations for contributing to policy: "There are some researchers who have in the past had played important roles in the structure of the current health system. People like X helped create [a national health administration scheme]. Their reputation precedes them". A virtuous circle of influence was evident for this elite group of well-known, policy-effective researchers: "We just knew X was a public health guru, so I think it was just probably the fact that he was known that we sought him out for his opinion…". It was not possible to disentangle the route of identification for these experts; they were very well known at departmental level and may have been brought to politicians' notice through that route, but their association with significant policy reform, or their high media profile, may have endowed them with an independent "stellar reputation": "I think you know them yourself. You read about them. You see them somewhere else or somebody tells you about them."
Like their departmental colleagues, politicians also reported being 'cold canvassed' by researchers on occasion. But when these researchers secured a face-to-face meeting, their credibility was assessed by the civil servants and/or advisors who provided a background briefing. Direct contact between ministers and experts was seen by one civil servant as a frustrating complication: it required retrospective planning, second-guessing the researcher's agenda or chasing the researcher in order to provide a meaningful brief. It was also perceived as a missed opportunity to utilise departmental expertise:
Quite often you'll find people think that "Well if I've got in the Minister's ear I'm fine…". It's actually more irritating to have a public health researcher who's gone straight to the Minister rather than via an advisor. Extremely frustrating. Because what happens is if they're lucky enough to have got an appointment with the Minister we will have had to brief the Minister about what we think this person's going to talk about… It's much better to strategise with the department about how you use that opportunity.
Two advisors said that they avoided unsolicited meetings with researchers. One suggested that without a personal recommendation or knowledge of the researcher, there would be no basis for discussion:
If somebody who I had never heard of from a university called me up to discuss an issue that was within my remit as an advisor, I wouldn't know how to handle that…. I mean if I'd never heard of them I wouldn't know "Who are you? What standing do you have? Do I trust your advice?"
Assessing researchers
There was a high level of congruence between civil servants and politicians about the factors they considered when deciding which researchers to work with, but these factors were weighted differently depended on the policymaker's role, and the phase and type of policy development in which they were engaged.
Trustworthiness was considered to be an essential attribute by nearly all policymakers, shaping how researchers were sought and assessed. The conceptualisation of trust appeared to incorporate many of the attributes detailed below.
Policymakers naturally sought researchers in whom they would have confidence, but the basis of this confidence differed between politicians and civil servants. Politicians, in particular, preferred "reputable researchers who belong to a reputable organisation", as indicated by impressive academic status and, to a lesser extent, affiliation with prestigious universities or institutes: "We were confident because he had…his title, and lots of letters after his name". Recommendations from trusted colleagues, network contacts, and other researchers that indicated a researcher was held in high esteem within the academic community were also powerful: "We know we can trust his opinion because he's well respected in his field". Academic status was particularly important when researchers were sought for a public role because: "Convincing the general public, convincing the media, often relies on having an expert from a sandstone university". A researcher's credibility could also 'rub off' on the minister and their proposal: "[I want researchers who are] well regarded by their peers so…that when you quote your source people are going, 'Oh yes, I know that person and they're credible'. So you're using their reflected competence."
High profile academic credentials appeared less important to civil servants, many of whom assessed researchers on their body of academic work, the policy-relevance of their track record and/or on personal experience of working with them. Civil servants often used researchers for highly specific tasks that occurred behind-the-scenes, so a researcher's expertise in a particular method of intervention evaluation, say, or the niche specialism of a research institute were more valuable than their academic status. As one civil servant pointed out, most policy-effective researchers are "committed to outcomes and making a difference…so they're not always the most lauded professors and academics". Also, in the case of commissioned research, the ability of researchers and agencies to deliver reasonably costed quality work within an agreed timeframe was paramount: "If you believe that what they've delivered in the past in a timely, accurate, professional and scientific way is good, then you'll tend to go back to that researcher or research agency".
All policymakers valued researchers' independence. It not only enabled researchers to provide the "frank and fearless advice" that policymakers say they sought; it also delivered a political pay-off in that policy was seen to be guided by 'objective' science rather than political expediency: "We need independent advice that can also be perceived as independent advice". Public perception of researchers' independence was mentioned as a consideration by more politicians (6/8) than civil servants (4/18). (See Haynes et al. 2011 [2] for a more detailed discussion of independence and political use.)
Researchers were highly valued when they were able to move away from "pure" research and engage with the "messy real world" using "flexible", "non-dogmatic" and "problem-solving" approaches. This assessment was underpinned by policymakers' preference for research which is 'fit-for-purpose' rather than 'elegant'. However, there was speculation that most researchers, including some with established policy-related research track records, were unequipped methodologically and temperamentally to cope with the complexities that applied research demanded. One civil servant explained how he had sought help from a government-funded researcher:
[I said] "You've got to help me with this, I feel out of my depth." [The researcher] actually came up with a framework that was so pathetic we couldn't use it. It was just not relevant. It wasn't practical. I remember being so frustrated: 'How do we get people to evaluate this stuff?' when they [researchers] didn't really want to go there. It felt to me like it was all just a bit too hard.
A "helicopter perspective"
Over half the interviewees said they valued researchers with an authoritative breadth of knowledge who could "cut across the issues". This was particularly true in agenda-setting and early policy development when politicians were wrestling with ideas for "bold" reform and civil servants were weighing up alternative strategies for ministerial consideration. The researcher's own studies might focus on a specialist subfield which was particularly valuable to civil servants for designing intervention programs or crafting the fine details of policy, but their ability to situate advice within the 'big picture' and have a broad body of knowledge at their fingertips made them an invaluable resource for consultation: "In order to engage government you've got to be able to show that you encompass research." Such researchers were treated as representatives of science, thus a single researcher could become "our expert voice".
Understanding government: the need for balance
Cultural differences between academe and government were mentioned by almost half the policymakers. Although several talked about the positive aspects of academe, all the politicians and two thirds of the civil servants preferred to work with researchers who had a solid understanding of government that included a knowledge of public health infrastructure, bureaucracy and parliamentary processes, and the socio-political history of policy reform: "the most important thing in a good public health researcher in my view is that they have a very good understanding of politics, or what makes policy change, and know what the triggers are of pushing change." These researchers, they explained, appreciated the incremental nature of policy development, and the necessity for compromise and "bringing people along with you". This meant that their advice was more "balanced" and "realistic".
Having a "balanced approach" was particularly important when it came to policy commentary. Half the politicians and a third of civil servants disparaged researchers who "came out with guns blazing", especially when they made "wild claims or wild predictions" that drove policy in directions that were seen as neither constructive nor evidence-informed.
A third of policymakers described soured relationships with researchers that they attributed to researchers' "unrealistic expectations" about government process, and a failure to appreciate the "big, complex picture in which we work". They argued that these researchers patronised policymakers, felt "disillusioned", "threw rocks" and failed to respect confidentiality about behind-the-scenes conversations. These experiences made many policymakers keen to avoid researchers who were not known to be policy-savvy. The acknowledged low level of research utilisation in one ministerial office was attributed to this researcher-policymaker disjuncture: "It's uncomfortable for us to seek research out because the people who'll provide that research aren't familiar with our processes". This had contributed to a workplace culture in which researchers were seen as extraneous:
"We just set up a group looking at X [a contentious social issue with significant associated research]…, the minister asked me to set that up and I did, and I didn't even think of seeking out a researcher. I guess that's a good example of, in practice, us not even thinking of academics as relevant."
Collaborative skills
The cross-cultural challenges of collaboration were minimised when researchers were "good team players"; "thoughtful, open to conversation and dialogue". Collaboration was facilitated by researchers making themselves available when needed—sometimes at very short notice; being friendly and easy-going; and being constructive in their criticism: "It's easy to be a critic but it's often harder to be helpful". Contracted partnerships also required that researchers were "flexible with their research design" in response to "real world" demands.
All policymakers appreciated researchers with these qualities; however, nearly a quarter of civil servants had worked with researchers whom they considered to be poor collaborators. They noted that although the process was sometimes strained, the partnership had delivered some policy successes. These civil servants argued that pragmatism trumped personal preference and they would work with these researchers again if they believed a positive outcome was achievable. No policymakers suggested that researchers who were critical of government were necessarily poor collaborators.
Six of the eight politicians thought it very important that a researcher's agenda was "authentic", "genuine", "honourable" and "sincere", i.e. they were advocating on behalf of the public good "for the right reasons" and not because they "liked listening to the sound of their own voice", or because they were attempting to secure increased funding for their program:
Sometimes people overstep their bounds and try to overemphasise the importance of their issue when the evidence may not necessarily support it. They've got a research agenda to support, research centres to get funding for – so they put it on the agenda to get more funding from government agencies because they're salesmen of their particular illness or disease… [They] aren't making a real contribution. [They're] just tinkering at the edges.
One minister noted: "you don't go back to those people twice". Only a quarter of civil servants echoed this concern. One argued that motivation was irrelevant: "…if they're saying the right thing, it's based on research…then I don't mind whether they're doing that out of the goodness of their heart or out of hogging the limelight. They're still doing something good".
Faithful representation of research
Interviewees universally agreed that researchers' commentary or advice must be congruent with the research. Thus policymakers looked to researchers for "honest and unbiased", "objective", "non-ideological", "unadulterated factual quality information" which did not "manipulate" the data or "overstep" it in any way. Politicians seemed particularly concerned to avoid researchers who gave ideologically-driven advice—"We have enough ideology in politics"—or who "finessed" the data: "You have to have people who you can trust absolutely who will educate you, not give you spin."
One minister commented wryly: "If it's going to be twisted and manipulated, leave that to me!"
This concern about ideology also applied to institutions. Exceptions were where the politicians believed their department was partisan and wanted to balance departmental advice with a counter view. In these rare cases the politicians consulted with researchers in think tanks that were known to have a particular political leaning.
Researchers' ability to communicate clearly in briefings, committees, public meetings and the media was valued by policymakers: "they've got that skill in talking to media but then they've got that skill in talking to government and also talking to us [civil servants] without it being patronising". Nearly two thirds of the politicians preferred researchers who avoided dense, technical language: "being able to understand what they are saying is actually a big, big problem". Therefore researchers who were "concise" who could "get to the point" and "who are able to express complex concepts in fairly simple and easy to understand terms" were "the ones that really strike a chord with the policy and political people." Less than half the civil servants emphasised communication skills. Those who did focused on researchers' strategic communication: the ability to communicate persuasively with different audiences in different contexts. Listening and giving opinions respectfully was important. Researchers with less impressive communications skills were used for research and advice but not for persuasive or public purposes: "if they're that kind of presenter then I won't use them. I'll use their research but I won't use them in the meeting."
Trust was at the heart of policymakers' approaches to identifying and assessing researchers. This helps to explain their preference for working repeatedly with the same tried and tested researchers, and their tendency to rely on colleagues to recommend new researchers—a recommendation being some assurance that the researcher had been informally 'risk-assessed'.
All the attributes that policymakers' sought in their assessments of researchers could be understood using the dimensions of trustworthiness identified in the literature: competence/ability, integrity and benevolence [14], [15]. Policymakers judged researchers' competence through their: reputation, academic authority, scope of expert knowledge, applied research skills, and their understanding of government as manifested in their collaborative and communication skills. Academic credentials were seldom sufficient to convince policymakers that someone was worth listening to; an understanding and experience of pragmatic research and/or policy-shrewdness was often required to establish "real world" competence. Such assessments were context specific, shaped by current need, such as the type of policy development the policymaker was engaged in (e.g., developing intervention programs required different input than legislative change), and the different phases of development (e.g., exploratory discussion during agenda-setting favoured researchers with "big ideas" while consensus-building demanded researchers who could engage with and persuade stakeholders). Thus a researcher's reputation did not have fixed value across the repertoire of policy needs; it was considered on a fit-for-purpose basis, in much the same way that research itself is often appraised [23]–[25].
Some desirable attributes were universal. All interviewees were adamant that credible researchers must have integrity. Policymakers sought researchers who were "fiercely independent" and "honest and unbiased" and many also found it easier to trust "honourable" researchers who were "authentic" in their desire to improve public health. Yet, in the high risk politicised world of policymaking [26], the added assurance of benevolence was critical: the belief that researchers had sufficient commitment to the current policy agenda (and possibly to the policymakers themselves?) to sustain their support or, at least, withhold public opposition, through the "ugly compromises" of the policy process. The ideal researcher was professionally disinterested, detached from politics but dedicated to improving public health and therefore committed to their role in furthering research-informed policies.
This tension between political independence and policy commitment could pose problems. Policymakers had to trust researchers to respect confidentiality even if the researcher saw a potential to advance public health by revealing information that highlighted poor decision-making. Consequently, a researcher's media profile could be a double edged sword. Although the majority of policymakers valued and utilised researchers with media skills and contacts, some commented that this easy access to the public also made researchers a greater threat if they were critical of government. Thus "anybody that is likely to be trouble", or may be "difficult to control", who might "go to a press conference and… launch an attack on the government"—was excluded from insider conversations. While policymakers acknowledged researchers' "democratic right" to criticise government policy, none of them responded positively to our prompts about the role of researchers in holding governments accountable. Policymakers occasionally sought the views of individual researchers or institutions known to oppose current policy plans, sometimes in order to demonstrate openness to a breadth of advice rather than to consider it. But once policy directions had been decided policymakers seldom worked with researchers who were not "on our side".
These findings may concern researchers and experts who believe that they have responsibilities to advocate for research-informed policy reform. They may be tempted to mute their advocacy to avoid the risk of becoming persona non gratia if they openly criticise government policy or inaction. Public health policy reform frequently calls for increased regulation, yet when anti-regulatory governments are in power many cornerstone reforms are known to be off the agenda, despite the strength of the research base. These circumstances create professional challenges both for researchers who are politically acceptable and for those who find themselves firmly "outside the policy tent" [27].
Implications for policymakers
As our interviewees pointed out, the ways in which policymakers identify researchers would be better if they were more systematic and considered. Relying on media presence as a proxy for academic authority has self-evident risks. There are many roles for researchers that do not require them to be media-savvy, and those who are adept at media advocacy or at 'speaking policy' do not necessarily offer the most impartial or informed advice. These risks could be reduced through more systematic scrutiny of researchers' credibility within the wider research and policy communities. But relying wholly on interpersonal networks to identify and assess researchers is also problematic because new recruits will be more likely to share the perspective of the colleagues who recommended them. Given that there is not always a policy consensus in public health it is essential that policymakers cast their nets broadly to obtain a spectrum of advice. Knowledge brokers, NGOs, over-looked universities and research institutions, and a search of the literature (including the use of academic measures such as citation rates and/or matrices like the h-index [28]) may provide alternative sources. The work and advice of all researchers should be appraised, no matter how long-standing their connections with policy may be.
Policymakers stated that working relationships with researchers were most productive when the researchers were "partners in the process". However, in order to be effective and trustworthy partners, researchers required considerable understanding of and engagement with policy. It seems that policymakers are in the best position to facilitate this: informing researchers about policy priorities, providing feedback about deliberations and outcomes, convening discussion about research requirements, and educating newer researchers about bureaucratic and government processes.
Implications for researchers
The implications of the attributes that policymakers value in researchers need little explication: researchers who wish to influence policy will hone these attributes or not according to their goals, values, core skills and personalities. Furthermore, we suspect that our account of how researchers are assessed by policymakers will simply confirm what most policy-engaged researchers have discovered from experience. Influential public health researchers who we interviewed in an earlier study had well-developed understandings of the attributes that policymakers valued in researchers [4]: their accounts of these attributes tally well with those described by policymakers in this paper. However, there are some overarching strategic implications from our findings on the formation and influence of researcher-policymaker relationships.
These findings suggest that, in the majority of cases, the most effective method for researchers to influence policy is to work with civil servants. Civil servants were more open to being 'cold canvassed' than ministers and advisors; they were involved in the breadth of policy development from program improvement to legislation, at all stages of the policy cycle; and they provided briefs about researchers who approached ministers directly. Yet other relationships were also important. Policymakers' consultations with NGOs and professional bodies placed these stakeholders in a powerful position to facilitate the participation of researchers and the use of research in policy development. Similarly, positive networks with policy-engaged research colleagues helped to establish reputation with and links to policymakers. It would seem that a researcher who is well connected (and respected) across multiple policy domains significantly increases their opportunities to influence policy.
Despite our interviewees' emphasis on relationships we caution against any suggestion that researcher-policymaker networks are a panacea for the research/policy disjuncture. First, interviewees naturally focused on the aspects of policy development that they were responsible for rather than the overall trajectory of policy reform. This focus on day-to-day deliberations probably over-emphasises the role of interpersonal communication. Second, interviewees acknowledged the labyrinthine nature of the bureaucratic machine in which a multitude of individuals and interests jostle to influence policy. This prevents the smooth passage of research recommendations into policy, regardless of who champions them [29]. Researchers may be able to convince people at one strata of policy through interpersonal means, but other complementary measures are required to achieve a critical mass of support. Changes of government and high staff turnover among civil servants compound the limitations of relying on personal relationships [30]. Therefore, the other methods of contributing to policy that our interviewees identified also require attention: serving on committees, advisory groups and task forces; providing departmental and ministerial briefings; promoting research via conferences, tailored workshops, websites and newsletters; undertaking government-commissioned research; advocacy through direct lobbying; and media engagement. This last point is particularly salient given that our politician interviewees used the media as their primary means for identifying researchers.
A multifaceted approach to influencing policy allows researchers to negotiate roles and strategies in response to emerging opportunities that reflect their disciplinary skills, communicative strengths and personal preferences. Using diverse methods to influence policy also supports the process of "enlightenment" [31], that some argue is the major way in which research influences policy [32]. In this model, research-informed ideas permeate the policy process through multiple routes including family and friends, intra-organisational 'grapevines', and wider networks and the media, to produce a gradual conceptual change that is not easily portrayed in a direct cause and effect relationship between research findings and policy outcomes [33].
This paper broadens our understanding of research-to-policy channels by describing the ways in which some research-engaged Australian state civil servants, ministers and ministerial advisors identify researchers to provide policy advice or undertake commissioned research, and how they make judgements about if and how to use these researchers.
How policymakers found and assessed researchers was strongly affected by their role. Politicians were more likely to use media presence at a proxy for researchers' merit, to express concerns about ideology, and to consider public perception of the researcher. Civil servants were more likely to canvass research and policy networks, and assess researchers on their track record using conventional academic indicators. The type of policy development the policymaker was engaged in, and the phase of development (e.g., agenda-setting, consensus building or program design) also shaped how researchers were assessed.
Assessments about researchers encompassed a range of behavioural and attitudinal attributes which clustered under the three domains of trustworthiness: competence, integrity and benevolence. In policy settings, researcher competence comprises policy pragmatism as well as scientific rigour. Viewing researcher-policymaker engagement through the lens of trustworthiness helps us to understand the tension between policymakers wanting researchers who were independent and non-ideological (attributes of integrity) but nonetheless "on our side" for the purposes of policy reform (benevolent).
Policymakers are encouraged to better their methods for selecting researchers and to investigate other mechanisms for identifying them. They could also maximise the many benefits of strong researcher-policymaker networks by supporting researchers in their efforts to engage more effectively with policymaking.
Researchers should adopt a multifaceted approach to policy influence. This includes cultivating responsive relationships with policymakers, community stakeholders and research colleagues, and using complementary channels of influence such as serving on committees, providing behind-the-scenes advice, diffuse dissemination of research, and education/advocacy through the media. The latter can both support and pressure policymakers to consider research in their decision-making.
Conceived and designed the experiments: SC WH SR AH JG GD. Performed the experiments: AH GD HS. Analyzed the data: AH GD HS. Wrote the paper: AH.
1. Ritter A (2009) How do drug policy makers access research evidence? Int J Drug Policy 20: 70–75.
2. Haynes AS, Gillespie JA, Derrick GE, Hall WD, Redman S, et al. (2011) Galvanizers, guides, champions, and shields: the many ways that policymakers use public health researchers. Milbank Q 89: 564–598.
3. Campbell DM, Redman S, Jorm L, Cooke M, Zwi AB, et al. (2009) Increasing the use of evidence in health policy: practice and views of policy makers and researchers. Australia and New Zealand Health Policy 6:
4. Haynes AS, Derrick GE, Chapman S, Redman S, Hall WD, et al. (2011) From "our world" to the "real world": exploring the views and behaviour of policy-influential Australian public health researchers. Soc Sci Med 72: 1047–1055.
5. Kothari A, MacLean L, Edwards N (2009) Increasing capacity for knowledge translation: understanding how some researchers engage policy makers. Evidence & Policy 5: 33–51.
6. Hanney S, Gonzalez-Block M, Buxton M, Kogan M (2003) The utilisation of health research in policy-making: concepts, examples and methods of assessment. Health Research Policy and Systems 13:
7. Innvaer S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman A (2002) Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Po 7: 239–244.
8. Lomas J (2000) Using 'linkage and exchange' to move research into policy at a Canadian foundation. Health Affair 19: 236–240.
9. Mitton C, Adair CE, McKenzie E, Patten SB, Waye Perry B (2007) Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. Milbank Q 85: 729–768.
10. Keller AC (2009) Science in environmental policy: the politics of objective advice. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
11. Lomas J (2000) Connecting research and policy. ISUMA Canadian Journal of Policy Research 140–144.
12. Choi BCK, Pang T, Lin V, Puska P, Sherman G, et al. (2005) Can scientists and policy makers work together? J Epidemiol Community Health 59: 632–637.
13. Moorman C, Zaltman G, Deshpande R (1992) Relationships between providers and users of market research - the dynamics of trust within and between organizations. J Marketing Res 29: 314–328.
14. Mayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman FD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad Manage Rev 20: 709–734.
15. Schoorman FD, Mayer RC, Davis JH (2007) An integrative model of organizational trust: past, present, and future. Acad Manage Rev 32: 344–354.
16. Dobbins M, Hanna SE, Ciliska D, Manske S, Cameron R, et al. (2009) A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies. Implement Sci 4:
17. Landry R, Amara N, Lamari M (2001) Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada. Res Policy 30: 333–349.
18. Trostle J, Bronfman M, Langer A (1999) How do researchers influence decision-makers? Case studies of Mexican policies. Health Policy Plann 14: 103–114.
19. Orr G (2010) Academics and the media in Australia. Australian Universities' Review 52: 23–31.
20. Lenton S (2007) Beyond modelling and evidence: bridging the gap between drug policy research and drug policy practice. First Annual Conference of the International Society for the Study of Drug Policy (ISSDP). Oslo.
21. Derrick GE, Hall WD, Haynes AS, Chapman S, Redman S, et al. (2010) Challenges in assessing the characteristics of influential public health research. Available in preprint from Sydney eScholarship Repository website: http://hdlhandlenet/2123/6116 Accessed 2011 Dec 16.
22. Crewe E, Young J (2002) Bridging research and policy: context, evidence and links. ODI Working Paper No 173. London: Overseas Development Institute.
23. Nutbeam D, Boxall AM (2008) What influences the transfer of research into health policy and practice? Observations from England and Australia. Public Health 122: 747–753.
24. Pawson R (2003) Assessing the quality of evidence in evidence-based policy: why, how and when? (Working Paper 1) Research Methods Programme, Economic and Social Research Council, UK.
25. Gluckman P (2011) Towards better use of evidence in policy formation: a discussion paper. Auckland, New Zeland: Office of the Prime Minister's Science Advisory Committee.
26. Stone D (1997) Policy paradox: the art of political decision making. New York: Norton.
27. Kemm J (2005) The future challenges for HIA. Environ Impact Asses 25: 799–807.
28. Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. P Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 16569–16572.
29. Flitcroft K, Gillespie J, Salkeld G, Carter S, Trevena L (2011) Getting evidence into policy: the need for deliberative strategies? Soc Sci Med 72: 1039–1046.
30. Fox DM (2010) History matters for understanding knowledge exchange. Milbank Q 88: 484–491.
31. Weiss CH (1979) The many meanings of research utilization. Public Admin Rev 39: 426–431.
32. Nutley SM, Walter I, Davies HTO (2007) Using evidence: how research can inform public services. Bristol: The Policy Press.
33. Weiss CH (2001) What kind of evidence in evidence-based policy? Paper presented at the Third International Evidence-Based Policies and Indicator Systems conference. Durham, UK: CEM centre, University of Durham. pp. 284–291.
Is the Subject Area "Science policy" applicable to this article?
Public and occupational health
Is the Subject Area "Public and occupational health" applicable to this article?
Is the Subject Area "Public policy" applicable to this article?
Is the Subject Area "Network analysis" applicable to this article?
Social communication
Is the Subject Area "Social communication" applicable to this article?
Is the Subject Area "Decision making" applicable to this article?
Is the Subject Area "Health care policy" applicable to this article?


text:
Winter will be a challenge for Wiggins, says Brailsford
By Cycling News published 9 August 12
Tour winner must maintain focus to retain title
Bradley Wiggins came out to watch a day of track racing, which he used to do (Image credit: AFP)
Bradley Wiggins was in the house (Image credit: Tour of Japan)
Bradley Wiggins salutes the home fans after winning gold at the 2012 men's Olympic time trial in London (Image credit: AFP)
Sky team principal Dave Brailsford has said that Tour de France winner Bradley Wiggins' next major challenge will be dealing with the attention his achievements have garnered in his home country.
Brailsford: We're here to win the Tour, not read Twitter
Brailsford: Wiggins showed that he was the strongest
Video: Wiggins reflects on a life-changing six weeks
Cavendish, Wiggins headline Team Sky at Tour of Denmark
Wiggins was asked to ring the bell that started the London 2012 Olympic Games opening ceremony the week after his Tour triumph and he followed that up by taking gold in the time trial, the seventh Olympic medal of his career.
"Most people, when they win something that they've really wanted, a big major, career defining victory, the period after that is difficult," Brailsford told The Associated Press.
Wiggins has been tipped to be feted with everything from a knighthood to the title of Britain's Sports Personality of the Year in the coming months, and Brailsford acknowledged that Wiggins' increasing profile means that he will be a man in demand during the off-season.
"Bradley will get pulled this winter from award ceremonies to media things to all the things that normally aren't there in life," he said. "He will inevitably get asked to do a lot of that this winter. And the challenge with a lot of guys who hit a peak, they go through all of that and while everyone else is training really, really hard, they're not. Not because they don't want to, it's just difficult to fit it all in."
Wiggins has downplayed comparisons between Sky and the US Postal Service team of the controversial Lance Armstrong – who was recently charged with doping by the United States Anti-Doping Agency – but Brailsford acknowledged that the American had succeeded in repeating his Tour triumphs.
"That's where the guys who had repeated success on something like the Tour de France, like Armstrong, it's a phenomenal achievement, in that sense, to manage your life and to have the discipline to manage your life," he said. "And that's the challenge for Bradley really now."
Wiggins has no plans to end his season just yet, however, and he is set to line up at the Tour of Denmark from August 22-26.


text:
Getting ready for Inland Rail
Regional Development Australia Orana (RDA Orana) is already primed for Inland Rail. John Walkom, chair of RDA Orana, has welcomed the strategic planning tool, Are you ready for Inland Rail?, which will be developed by Regional Australia Institute. It was commissioned by the Department of Infrastructure, Regional Development and Cities to assist regions in identifying potential areas of growth based on new opportunities.
Mr Walkom said that the network would introduce a new era in freight transport in Australia, increasing the volume of commodities being transported and making it easier to move freight to state, national and overseas markets.
"It is expected to return $480 million to the economies of Central and North West New South Wales, introducing the potential to explore unchartered opportunities, forge new connections and increase profitability. In economic terms, we expect this to be a real driver of success.
"During the development phase alone, 16,000 jobs will be created to manage extensive upgrades and reconstruction of the existing rail track which includes replacement of bridges and culverts, enhanced level crossings and crossing loops."
The Narromine to Narrabri rail link is a new corridor, which will become the longest and most significant greenfield project within the Inland Rail. At 307km in length, the addition of this new section will reduce transit times and complete one of the missing freight rail links between Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth and Brisbane.
For more information about the Inland Rail, visit www.inlandrail.com.au and www.majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au
There is an Inland Rail Regional Liaison Officer based at Dubbo. Contact Elisha Bailey on 0409 844 091 or Elisha.Bailey@infrastructure.gov.au