+ How to prepare competitive proposals in Tempus IV? Damascus; 7 February 2010 Monika Botz Consultant for European Funds

+

How to prepare competitive proposals in Tempus IV? Damascus; 7 February 2010

Monika Botz Consultant for European Funds

Tempus IVProject Preparation Where to start?

© Monika Botz; EduTrain: [email protected]

What is a good quality project?


Good project is:

Relevant: i.e. supportive to the overarching policy objectives of the EC (Tempus

Programme) and of the participating partners; Based on real needs & problems of target groups & beneficiaries;

Feasible:

The project objectives can be realistically achieved within the constraints of the operating environment and capacities of the implementing partners;

Sustainable: Benefits generated by the project are likely to be continued once the programme

funding comes to an end. The project has a tangible and long-term impact.

Where to start?


Prior to the preparation of the project applicationPre-analysis:

• Get an idea of what is possible and/or needed

- Familiarise yourself with the specifications of the Tempus programme;

- Familiarise yourself with related political developments at regional, national and European levels.

- Get an idea about interests and development priorities of potential stakeholders (universities, enterprises, NGOs);

Tempus Call including National & Regional Priorities for Partner Countries;Instructions for filling in the eForm, List of past & ongoing Tempus projects, etc.

Sources of information

Information on national development policies in the

relevant sector, Higher Education Reforms, Bologna & Lisbon

process, etc.

Universities` development strategies, Mission and strategy papers of NGOs to be potentially involved, labour market

surveys, etc.

The Analysis Stage


Stakeholder Analysis: Who are potential project stakeholders? What are their needs, interest, conflicts? What capacity they have to participate in the project (e.g. potential project partners)

Problem Analysis:

What are the real and existing problems faced by the project stakeholders and their causal relationships;

Objective Analysis: Which objectives are suitable to address the identified problems? (mirroring the identified

problems into positive situations);

Strategy Analysis: Which objectives can be included in/or excluded from the project; What will be project's wider and specific objectives, outputs and outcomes.

In order to ensure that the project addresses real problems to which stakeholders attach high priority, the analysis phase should be conducted in a participatory approach, i.e. the main project stakeholders should be consulted and involved wherever possible.

Prior to the preparation of the project application conduct:

Preparation of the Project ProposalDefinitions, Tips and typical mistakes


Logical Framework Matrix - Purpose


Often main reference document

of the project

The matrix:•brings together all key components of the project and exposes the logic of how the project is expected to work;•provides a concise picture of the entire project intervention.

Important Planning Tool

•The matrix is a tool that helps test the logic of the project strategy and ensure project's feasibility; Therefore:• it should be prepared at the beginning of the project formulation phase.

Management, Monitoring &

Evaluation Tool

• The matrix provides the framework for monitoring & evaluation; •It should be seen as a dynamic tool: during project's implementation the LFM should be kept under regular review & up-dated whenever the project changes course;

The LFM is not only a planning instrument but also a central management tool that will be used during the project implementation and evaluation. It therefore requires careful preparation.

LFM – Testing the project logic


Wider Objective

Specific Project Objective(s)

Indicators of Progress

Activities

Outputs/Outcomes (in

Work packages)


How indicators will be measured


Inputs



Risks & Assumptions

Risks & Assumptions

Risks & Assumptions

IF - THEN causality:•IF inputs are provided and certain assumption hold true THEN activities can be undertaken; •IF the activities are undertaken, THEN outputs and outcomes can be produced; •IF outputs/outcomes are produced, THEN the specific project objective(s) can be realized; •IF the specific project objective(s) is/are achieved, THEN this should contribute towards the wider project objective..

Wider & Specific Project Objectives


Wider Project Objective:

•Expected „global“ result or a broader aim to which the project will contribute;

•Longer Term Impact- i.e. It is not a direct or immediate result of the project - its achievement usually goes beyond the project-lifetime; •It should refer to the priorities, specific objectives and themes of the Tempus Programme

Specific Project Objective(s)•Intermediate or direct result of the project; •Should be in line with the objectives & themes of the Tempus Programme and with the national/regional priorities of the involved partner countries. •Should be realistic & time-bound.

Example:

Wider Project Objective:

„Increased employability of students and strengthened capacity

of Mediterranean Universities in meeting regional labour market

demands for engineers“

Specific Project Objective:

„Modernization/Development of Master and Bachelor programmes in Engineering at X Mediterranean

Universities according to the market needs by 20XX”

Outputs & Outcomes


Outputs & Outcomes Results of the planned/implemented activities;

Their realisation should logically lead to the achievement of specific project objectives.

Outputs (tangible)

Services, facilities or capital goods that the project delivers;

Example: New Technology Transfer Units at X Universities.New Master Programme developed

Outcomes (intangible):

Short and medium-term intangible effect of the project; Refer to new skills, methods, practices or capacities.

Examples: New pedagogical skills and methodologies

acquired by the teaching staff of X Universities

Enhanced managerial capacity in implementation of internal quality assurance.

New! Workpackages Grouping of thematically or timely related outputs and outcomes in working blocks.

Example: II. Capacity Building (Workpackage)Related Outputs:1.Traing of partner country staff developed and implemented (skills)2. Infrastructural establishment of innovation offices (physical capacities)

Activities & Inputs


Activities:

Tasks & actions that need to be carried out in order to deliver planned results

(outcomes/outputs)

Activities should be planned and presented in the LFM in a chronological order;

Inputs:

Financial & human resources, equipment necessary for the implementation of project

activities.

Example: Outputs/Outcomes & Activities:

Output:

2. New targeted training for teaching staff developed and implemented at X universities;

Activities:

2.1. In-depth analysis of existing training needs and staff selection;

2.2. Development of training modules and training materials;

2.3. Delivery of targeted training for university teachers…

Assumptions & Risks


Assumptions:External factors that have the potential to influence the success or failure of the project, but lie outside the direct control of project managers;

The way assumptions are formulated reflects a desired & positive situation.

Risks:A negative way of describing an assumption;Reflect negative situations.

Examples:

Assumptions:

“Institutional decision-makers are committed to (support) the project”

“Accreditation of a new study programme/curriculum received on time”

Risks:„Lack of political support“

“Difficult legal or fiscal conditions for imports of equipment”.

The determination of risks and assumptions is a method to asses project's “riskiness” and its feasibility – It should therefore be conducted within a careful analysis. Particular attention should be paid to external factors that may affect project's sustainability (e.g. political support, commitment of the project partners)

Counteracting Measures


Risks Potential Counteracting Measures and/or Activities

Delayed accreditation of a new study programme

Steps to ensure official recognition of the new study programme addressed from the very beginning of the project;

Limited language skills of university teaching staff that will participate in trainings abroad.

Organization of language courses at the beginning of the project implementation

Use of translation services whenever necessary

It is not enough to formulate risks & assumptions in the Logical Framework Matrix – The project structure should reflect efforts (counteracting measures) to limit the impact of

potential risks;

Indicators of Progress & Sources for their Measurement


Indicator of Progress:

A variable (quantitative or qualitative) that helps measure the project progress, achievements and performance.

•Indicators should be specific & measurable; •Include ambitious but realistic targets;

•Should be objectively verifiable, i.e. different persons that will use the indicators will obtain the same measurements;

How indicators will be measured:

Sources of information & means of their collection;

Where can I find the information? •Including: -Sources of information that are already available, e.g. publications, official statistics & documents; reports.

-Sources of information/methods to be facilitated during the project to collect the information; e.g. monitoring reports, questionnaires, interviews, evaluation reports.

Note: The Indicators and Sources for their Verification provide the basis for:

•Quality Control & Monitoring Plan as well as regular review of the project progress during the project's implementation;•Preparation & verification of monitoring reports. •Their definition should take into account the costs related to the data collection and analysis.

Indicators of Progress & Sources for their Measurement


Simplified Examples

Output Indicators of progress Sources of measurement

New Master Programme developed and implemented

X courses developed until X project month; X students participated in the programme's implementation; New Programme accredited until X project month

Course documentation; Accreditation documents;List of participants (students)

Staff training 80% of the training participants satisfied with the quality of the training (i.e. they evaluate the quality of the training as good or very good)

Feedback questionnaires

Quantity of deliverables; Milestone

(deadline) for the completion of a task;Size of the audience

Qualitative indicator/target

(reflecting perception, views of direct beneficiaries)

LFM - What to Avoid?


Lack of logical connections between the project objectives, outputs and activities (unclear project methodology);

Insufficiently specified indicators of progress, e.g. -lack of established targets, milestones, quantitative or qualitative dimensions; or

Confusion between “Indicators of Progress” and “How indicators will be measured”;

Insufficiently analysed risks and assumptions; or

Measures counteracting risks not translated into project activities;

Information provided in the LFM incoherent with indications in other parts of the application (including reference numbers).

Frequent Mistakes/ shortcomings:

Workpackages/ Outputs (& Activities)


New electronic Application Form: Narrative description of the workpackages replaces “old” Outcome/Activity tables

Plan, identify and/ or present: “Development” workpackages: devoted to the the realisation of the main/actual project

results (e.g. New study programme, new structures);

Specific workpackages for Dissemination, Sustainability (Exploitation of results), Quality Control & Monitoring (Quality Plan), Management.

Clear description of the methodology and working approaches for the implementation of each workpackage but also:

List and description of the planned outcomes/outputs and related activities (what, when, and how will be done?)

Target groups (beneficiaries) for each output/outcome (e.g. students, teachers, political decision makers) and quantify them.

Consortium partners participating in the implementation of each workpackage, including a lead partner (roles and responsibilities).

Definition of risks & assumptions (from the LFM) and required inputs (financial resources);

New: Language issues: Indication in which language specific outputs (e.g.training materials) will be produced and made accessible;

Workpackages/ Outputs (& Activities)


Insufficiently elaborated methodology/ description of the content or working methods for the implementation of outputs.

Lack or limited involvement of students throughout the project cycle;

Insufficient specification of target groups or measures to ensure their active participation in the project;

-e.g. lack of quantitative targets, general statements like „all students“;

What to avoid?:

Unbalanced distribution of tasks among the project partners or missing information on their involvement:

-Distribution of responsibilities strongly biased towards European partners with partners from partner countries having insignificant roles,

-Evidence of „sleeping partners“.

Lack of coherence between workpackage/outputs/activities listed in different parts of the application (e.g. LFM and in the Workplan); Incomplete information or tables left blank.

Overloaded or “empty” workplans;

Lack of logic in the distribution of activities, e.g.:

- Training of partner country teaching staff in the EU foreseen at the same time as/or after the “pilot” implementation of a new study programme in the partner country; - Instalment of equipment planned for the end of the project;

No implementation (teaching/testing) of the a new or modernized study programme in the partner country;

Extensive periods of initial and basic needs analysis;

Excessive inactivity and unjustified breaks;

Limited considerations concerning the location of activities and their cost-efficiency;

Workplan - What, WHEN & WHERE?


Pay attention to logic of the annual and multi-annual distribution of activities (include short preparatory, development and implementation (testing) phase and evaluation of the project results); Demonstrate progress of activities!

Avoid:

Dissemination


A strategy to communicate, propagate and diffuse the information about the project and its results; Should ensure project's visibility; An important instrument that supports project's sustainability.

Whom to address?

Dissemination


Insufficiently elaborated strategy and/ or proposed activities inadequate to generate concrete impact or potential multiplier effects;

Limited variety of dissemination tools (e.g. only a project homepage) or limited to passive dissemination instruments;

Unconvincing relevance of dissemination activities e.g.:

-Proposed dissemination activities not adequate to reach the main project stakeholders;

Late start of dissemination activities;

Underestimation of external contributors or of the existing dissemination potential of the consortium partners (e.g. economic partners and their networks).

Involvement of students, political decision makers or professional organizations not foreseen.

Frequent Mistakes/ shortcomings:

Sustainability


The capacity to deliver project benefits in a long term, i.e. for an extended period after the European funding has been completed; The longer term impact of the project.

Demonstrate that the project achievements/results will last beyond the duration of the Tempus grant and address:

Institutional sustainability:

-Well defined & adopted laws & decision making procedures (accreditation of a new curriculum, certification of training courses, institutional implementation of established structures);

- Human capital (e.g. the partner country staff has been sufficiently trained to maintain the project results in a long-term);

- Physical infrastructure (securing rel. technology and its long term operation).

Financial sustainability: - Financing of the project results will continue beyond the project's end, i.e. it has been secured from other sources than Tempus (e.g. through contribution from economic partners, service users, accreditation);

Political sustainability/ Potential multiplier effects: - The project is capable to generate impact on decision makers and lead to the reflection of the ‐area concerned in a wider context of institutional, regional or national planning and implementation.

Sustainability


What to avoid? Frequent shortcomings:

Unclear specification which project results/services or activities should be sustainable;

Lack of involvement of stakeholders/political or institutional decision makers (e.g. rel. Ministries, decision-makers within the universities, professional organizations);

Limited scope of sustainability related activities, e.g.:

Training of staff and stakeholders insufficient to develop skills for the maintenance of results;

Official recognition/institutional implementation of the developed outputs not described;

Opportunities outside the purely academic sphere not considered (eg. additional funding sources); or:

Arguments supporting financial sustainability not supported by any quantitative demand and financial analysis.

Late start of activities supporting sustainability (e.g. official recognition / validation of project results).

Quality Control & Monitoring


Monitoring

•Ongoing analysis of the project progress in relation to the planned activities, budget implementation & outputs.

•Internal management responsibility (at all levels);

•Involves collection, analysis and use of information on the physical and financial progress of the project and the achievement of results.

Quality Control

Periodic assessment of the quality of the project results, outcomes and outputs but also: evaluation of the quality of the entire project intervention

Main aspects to be addressed

•Arrangements for reporting on the project progress (collection of information).

•Regular review to assess the project progress and take potential corrective measures;

•Contingency plan (What will you do in case the results are not achieved on time or with insufficient quality)

•Involvement of experts/ professional bodies external to the project management to ensure impartiality and credibility of the evaluation findings;

•Participation of major stakeholders/service users to ensure their expectations are taken into account (e.g. feedback mechanism)

Quality Control & Monitoring


What to avoid? Frequent shortcomings

Monitoring:

Measures for analysis of the collected information/ regular review not demonstrated;

Lack of a Contingency Plan;

Inadequate indicators of progress (LFM).

Quality Control/ Evaluation:

Limited involvement of the main project stakeholders/potential service users in quality control and evaluation (e.g. no feedback mechanism or evaluation surveys);

EXTERNAL evaluation/ quality control not addressed (e.g. involvement of experts, or professional bodies (national or international accreditation agencies).

•Measures to ensure the academic quality of the project results not foreseen.

Project Management


Involves planning, organizing, and managing resources to ensure smooth implementation of a project and to bring about successful completion of the project goals

and objectives.

Main aspects to be addressed:

• Clear Management structure (governing bodies, teams, responsibilities)

•Decision – making processes (who will take strategic decisions, voting mechanism, e.g. within a Steering committee); •Procedures to ensure formal communication (online communication, coordination meetings, electronic fora);

•Arrangements for financial planning/budget implementation; •Conflict resolution strategy (e.g. specific voting procedures in case of disagreement)

Note!

Project management activities should support ongoing project implementation and should not become “more important” than activities related to the realization of the actual project objectives.

Project Management


What to avoid? / Frequent mistakes

Lack of a clear management structure or missing information (e.g. on roles and the composition of the governing body/ individual teams);

Too complex & complicated management structures and/or decision-making, which may hamper smooth project implementation;

Unbalanced tasks distribution - One-Man show!

Confusion between "communication" & "decision making"; e.g. “decision making process will be via email”);

Description of project management tasks and partners roles limited to the grant applicant (roles of each partner should be indicated)

Unjustified "outsourcing" of project management tasks;

Lack of information on conflict resolution mechanism;

Inflated costs

Project Budget – Basic Principles


The budget preparation should be conducted from “bottom up”, i.e. estimating the costs of intended activities. This should be done taking into consideration different types of costs established in Tempus (staff, equipment, travel & accommodation, other costs etc.)

The budget should be in line with the requirements and financial conditions specified in the Tempus call (incl. eligibility/ineligibility of costs, grant size, thresholds and ceilings, costs categories).

The project methodology and the project budget should reflect efforts that will allow the implementation and achievement of the project results at lowest possible costs!

Budget preparation from bottom up:

Compliance with financial requirements defined in Tempus:

Budget effectiveness & Cost efficiency

Project Budget


What to avoid? Frequent mistakes

Inflated budget or improbable calculations

Examples: -8.000 working days for two persons (academic staff) in a framework of a two-year project;

-Inflated project management costs e.g. constituting 80% of the total project budget;

Missing justification or lack of considerations concerning the cost-efficiency

Examples:- Extensive travel and accommodation costs (training seminars taking part only in the EU)

- Lack of justification or evidence concerning the need for and use of requested equipment within the project lifetime.

Note: In Tempus equipment purchase should be limited to what is necessary and requested equipment should support the achievement of the project objectives.

Calculations under wrong budget headings

Example:

- Costs related to travel/health insurance and visa should be calculated under "travel and costs of stay" not under "other costs”.

Project Budget


What to avoid? Frequent mistakes

Unbalanced and/or unjustified budget distribution between the partners

Example:

-70% of the project budget foreseen for the grant applicant.

- Note: Projects or budgets clearly benefiting only one individual partner or mainly project partners from EU Member States should be avoided.

Ineligible Expenses

Examples:- Inclusion of cost categories that are specified as ineligible in the Tempus call (e.g. exchange losses);

- Costs that exceed the maximum rates or amounts indicated in the Tempus call; or - costs for „mobilities“ which exceed the min. or max. eligible periods defined in Tempus (e.g. students mobilities that exceed the period of max. 3 months)

- Costs for equipment requested for partners from EU Members States.

Description of the Project and its Rationale


Should be prepared at the end of the project formulation phase (I.e. after all other features/parts of the project have been elaborated). The section is meant

to justify the entire project intervention.

Few Tips

Demonstrate the very existence of the specific problems the project intends to address;

Establish an explicit link of the project objectives to the HE modernisation agenda and concrete policies/needs at regional, national, European or institutional level. - Provide evidence that the project is in line with the institutional needs or development priorities of the involved partners (e.g. explicit reference to the universities development priorities);

Provide facts and figures;

Demonstrate the the project objectives clearly address the identified needs and that they provide suitable solutions to the identified problems (link between the project objectives, outputs and activities and the identified needs);

Provide concrete information on the content of the proposed reforms, institutional impact, benefits, novelties (e.g. the content and number of the new courses in comparison to existing courses);

Quality of the Project Partnership – few tips


Criteria to be addressed:

Expertise:

Demonstrate that the partners have:

Specific (complementary) expertise in the area the project is going to address;

Experience in the field.

Regional Dimension & Diversity:

The partnership should involve representative number of Higher Education Institution from participating partner countries covering broad geographical area (i.e. from marginal and large cities);

Wherever appropriate non-academic members should be involved in the partnership.

Grant Applicant:

While choosing the grant applicant investigate & demonstrate that the institution has:

Sufficient resources (human, financial, infrastructure);

Institutional support;

(ideally) Experience in management of international projects.

Note: The quality of the project partnership constitutes an important quality criterion that will be assessed during the evaluation procedure.

Last but not least…


Eligibility – Critical Aspects


• Eligibility check constitutes the first step in the assessment process and is conducted by the EACEA – Proposals which do not pass this step will not be further evaluated by external experts and will be immediately rejected.

• The non-compliance with only one eligibility criterion may lead to the rejection of the proposal.

Therefore pay attention to and check:

•Conformity of original supporting documents with formal requirements and instructions;

•The language of the application (English, German or French) and project's duration (24-36 months);

*Adherence of the project objectives to the thematic priorities defined for partner countries for national and multi-country projects;

*Financial requirements and thresholds (co-financing, min. and max. grant size, etc.)

*The project focus and project activities to be within the scope of the Tempus programme (Tempus is not a research programme! )

*Criteria concerning the composition of the partnership, incl. number, status and origin of participating institutions.

Eligibility – Critical Aspects


Proposals which are obviously "copied“

or which reproduce parts of other applications, are ineligible!

Evaluator's Point of View – Few Tips


Provide facts and figures.It is not enough to state that something will be done, but WHY, by WHOM and HOW it will be done. If information is missing the only grade evaluators can give is zero!

Explain the concepts and ideas! Wherever possible refer to the award criteria according to which experts evaluate proposals.

Choose the language in which you feel most comfortable and in which you can best express the project idea; Proposals which cannot be understood by experts risk lower grades during the evaluation process.

Proposal`s Language

Educate the Evaluator!

Be precise & specific!

Finally


Good Luck!Thank you for your

Attention!

Documents

+ How to prepare competitive proposals in Tempus IV? Damascus; 7 February 2010 Monika Botz Consultant for European Funds