PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

RAILVET PARTNER MEETING

19-20 JULY 2012

GENOA / ITALY

INDEX

• Evaluations on RAILVET Progress Report By EACEA Experts

• Evaluations on RAILVET Progress Report By Ute Haller-Block, Head of Unit

• Check of Formal and Financial Documents by Project Partners

• Evaluations on Operation Frame Modules

• Plans for Future Activities on ECVET Adaptation

• Second Railway Workshop in Prague

CR AS

Summary scoring sheet for Final Report

1 Objectives, results and products 8

2 Coherence between work plan and activities carried out during life of the project 8

3 Partnership 7

4 Project Management 7

5 Financial Management 6

6 Evaluation 6

7 Dissemination 8

Your global score is: 7 /10

- Addresses the criterion with some aspects of high quality 70%

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

Overall comment • The project has basically reached the set aims and objectives, the outputs which should have been

provided at progress report stage are all presented.

• Some small delays have occurred in the process which however had minor impact on the outputs so far. Nevertheless the project is now entering in a crucial phase where the curriculum established should be transferred into a ECVET based curriculum. The partnership is asked to mobilise all its knowledge and experience in this particular and new field (ECVET) in the VET systems.

• If the partnership feels that a subcontract with an expert in ECVET field would be needed, an immediate contact the Executive Agency about this is suggested.

Strong points: Well elaborated curriculum basis Strong partnership including political decision makers Good dissemination activities with broad impact

Weak points: Evaluation strategy on process and product level is not fully clear and needs to be better documented. Effects of changes in the partner organisations are difficult to estimate and changes should be finalised as

soon as possible. Possibly there will be problems in the second half of the project with the ECVET based implementation, the

project management should be proactive to call for support if needed.

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

• The management of the project appears professional and well engaged in all activities and actions performed.

• The partnership is so far working properly and efficiently. There are clear indications that all partners are contributing to the project.

POSITIVE EVALUATIONSEACEA EXPERTS

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

• The documentation and products attached to the progress report as well as the information provided in the report form show that the project so far is well on track.

• For the time being, the project is in line with the work programme of the application, some small delays occurred.

• The costs reported in the progress report are basically coherent with the activities performed.

POSITIVE EVALUATIONSEACEA EXPERTS

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

• The partnership, through a number of dissemination activities have reached quite a considerable target group of stakeholders so far.

• The project website is a core instrument of dissemination and has a professional appearance and provides lots of information about the project and actual activities.

WEBSITE:

New documents are being prepared.

Links will be activated.

Target: a common platform for ECVET volunteers in railway sector?

POSITIVE EVALUATIONSEACEA EXPERTS

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WARNINGSEACEA EXPERTS

• The costs reported in the progress report are basically coherent with the activities performed, the project spends quite a lot on hospitality expenses, catering for participants at seminars and workshops.

• This is basically justified by the need to involve experts and stakeholders in the project process, however the expenses appear pretty high for this task.

• It is suggested to evaluate the possibilities to achieve a cheaper hospitality service for following meetings

Three bids though not obligatory.

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WARNINGSEACEA EXPERTS

• The documentation of the project is quite well elaborated, however for the minutes of the partnership meeting it is suggested to go into more details about agreements made between partners, deadlines agreed, etc. apart from this the management can keep the project well on track and co-ordinates the partnership in a efficient way.

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WARNINGSEACEA EXPERTS

• The outputs so far are coherent with the proposal, however the general ECVET structure document does unfortunately mainly reflect and contain the officially available ECVET documents as well as EQF level descriptors, a more deeper reflection of these baseline documents for the sector and the requirements and frame conditions in the railway sector in the participating countries would have been interesting, this would finally also make the next steps namely the transfer of the curriculum to the ECVET model easier.

Already planned and started by partnership.

Final version will contain even more information.

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WARNINGSEACEA EXPERTS

• The plans provided for the second half of the project are also in line with the application however the project is now entering in a crucial phase where the real adaptation to ECVET conditions will take place and the management should pay attention not to loose track during this phase of the project.

Stronger cooperation & more frequent communication?

How about extra 4 or 6 months request without extra budget? Possible?

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WARNINGSEACEA EXPERTS

• The project so far did hardly show any concrete evaluation approaches and/or results. As the project is mainly built on internal evaluation by the management committee and stakeholders this process should be described more in details, especially the evaluation and feedback received in the railway workshops and seminars.

• There are plans to engage an external evaluation also for the second project half, this idea is strongly recommended since it provides and external independent view on the project and should include both process and product level.

Evaluations by external experts mentioned in the conclusion report of the 1st workshop.

External evaluations can be filed and sent to EACEA in the final report

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WARNINGSEACEA EXPERTS

• Exploitation has so far not so much been touched, however the second seminar organised will certainly provide a good opportunity for direct exploitation, again the fact that the project co-ordinator is a political decision maker on national level, the exploitation of outputs appears easier.

Who do you think in the partnership can play the greatest role for exploitation?

Nathalie.

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

SUGGESTIONSRAILVET

• FOR “EXTERNAL EVALUATION” AND “EXPLOITATION”.

Formal letters to already-cooperated external experts to thank their contribution and ask their comments on the latest version?

Formal letters to UIC members with a template asking their comments on the curriculum and ECVET implementation?

Advertise companies that cooperate on the project’s website?

Formal letter from each partner stating their eagerness for exploitation and pilot implementations?

Bilateral agreements?

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WARNINGSEACEA

• Please note that the approval of the Progress Report should not be considered as an approval of the reported expenses.

• All expenses of the project, including the expenses already reported at Progress Report stage, will have to be approved at Final Report stage.

• Please note these documents should be kept for a period of 5 years after the final payment is made

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WARNINGSEACEA

• We strongly suggest that you pay particular attention to the rules defined in the Guidelines for Administrative and Financial Management and Reporting.http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/llp/beneficiaries/2010/reporting_lifelong_learning_2010_en.php

• In particular check the rules concerning the eligibility of expenditure (cf. Section 2) when preparing your Final Report.

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WARNINGSEACEA

• Reimbursement of subsistence costs must be based on the existing internal rules of the partner organisations, which may be on the basis of actual costs (reimbursement of receipts) or daily allowances.

• The applied system (actual costs or daily allowances) should normally remain the same for an organisation during the entire project.

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WARNINGSEACEA

• It is therefore not consistent to find for the same organisation figures that seem to be actual costs and some others that seem to be allowances.

• for P1, item n°1 seems to be an actual cost while items n°8, 9, 17, 18, 19 seem to be lump sums.

• for P5, items n°3, 4, and 14 seem to be actual costs while items n°23, 24 and 31seem to be lump sums.

For P1: First meeting was EACEA Kick-off and in their letter “real cost” was asked.

For P5: ?

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

HANDBOOK2.3.2 Travel and Subsistencea) Travel costs

Examples of necessary supporting documents for travel.

• tickets (plane, train, bus, etc.) and invoices (hotels, restaurants, travel agency).

• boarding cards.

• for car journeys: declaration stating the calculation method with unit rate and number of units, dates and names and activities concerned.

• list of participants duly signed with clear identification of the activity/purpose of the trip, dates, names and functions of the participants in the project (e.g. partner, expert, volunteer, subcontractor).

• proof that the payments have been made by the partner and are recorded in the accountancy.

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

RAILVET TEMPLATESEACEA

• RAILVET developed the following templates for travel and subsistence costs.

• Sample for real cost:

• Sample for daily rate:

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WARNINGSEACEA

• The fact that the table shows several whole figures for the "Cost per day" and "Total staff cost by category" (P1, P2, P3, P4, P5 and P8) raises the issue of the staff costs calculation method.

• Please make sure the project reports actual costs for each partner as stipulated in section 2.3.1 of the Project Handbook: actual salaries plus social security charges and other statutory costs included in the remuneration are eligible while non-statutory costs like bonuses, lease car, expense account schemes, incentive payments or profit-sharing schemes are excluded.

• In case you did not report actual costs then you are requested to make the necessary corrections for the final statement of accounts (final report).

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

HANDBOOK2.3.1 Staff costs

Examples of necessary supporting documents for staff.

• document explaining the internal policy on salaries and the calculation of the daily cost rate (pro rata basis in case of part-time workers).

• Internal policy means the policy that was in place before the implementation of the project and used for all staff members no matter if they work on the EU project or not.

• timesheets signed by both the worker and the responsible of the organisation mentioning name, function and tasks fulfilled, reference to the work plan’s activities, number of hours per day or days per month allocated to the project.

• official payroll document which allows to check both number of days worked and amounts paid & social security charges duly paid.

• proof that the salaries and social security contribution recorded in the accountancy have been paid by the partner to the authorities.

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

M1 M2U1

M2U2

M2U3

M3 M4U1

M4U2

M4U3

M4U4

M4U5

M5U1

M5U2

M6U1

M6U2

M6U3

M6U4

M6U5

M7U1

M7U2

M8

MODULE NUMBER

MODULE TITLE

MODULE DESCRIPTION

LEARNING OUTCOMES

COMPREHENSIVENESS

ACTIVE VERBS

VERIFIABLE

DESCRIPTION OF KNOWLEDGE

DESCRIPTION OF SKILLS

DESCRIPTION OF COMPETENCE

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

LEARNING HOURS (NOTIONAL)

ECVET POINTS

GENERAL ASSESSMENT OF PACKAGE - FULLY CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS - PARTIALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS - INCONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS - DATA MISSING

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

PARTNER MEETING ITALY / 19-20 July 2012

CR AS

WP-1 : EFFECTIVE PROJECT MANAGEMENT (MNG)

WP-2 : ANALYSIS OF “OPERATION” & “ECVET”

WP3

WP-4 : ADAPTATION OF “OPERATION” TO “ECVET”

WP5

WP-6 : DISSEMINATION OF PROJECT PRODUCTS & RESULTS

WP-7

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

JAN FEB MRC APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MRC APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SPT OCT NOV DEC

1ST

SM(TR)

1ST

PMIT

2ND

PM(FR)

1ST

WS(TR)

3RD

PM(SK)

4TH

PM(IT)

2ST

WS(CZ)

2ND

SM(TR)

REVISION OF OPERATION BY PROJECT PARTNERS

REVISION OF OPERATION BY EXTERNAL EXPERTS

DRAFT OPERATION

FINALOPERATION

EXAMINATION OF ECVET BY

PROJECT PARTNERS

REACTIONS FROM

EXTERNAL EXPERTS

DRAFTRAILVET

FINALRAILVET

GENERAL STRUCTURE OF ECVET

02.05.2011HAK-İŞ

FVETS

GENERAL STRUCTURE OF ECVET

02.05.2011HAK-İŞ

FVETS

WORKSHOPISTANBUL07.11.2011

2-DAY TRAFFIC2-DAY LOGISTICSTOTALLY 5 DAYS

HAK-İŞ

WORKSHOPISTANBUL07.11.2011

2-DAY TRAFFIC2-DAY LOGISTICSTOTALLY 5 DAYS

HAK-İŞ

RAILWAY OPERATION CURRICULUM

30.12.2011

TCDDAIMM-ITN

RAILWAY OPERATION CURRICULUM

30.12.2011

TCDDAIMM-ITN

WORKSHOPPRAGUE03.09.2012

2-DAY TRAFFIC2-DAY LOGISTICSTOTALLY 5 DAYS

NUV

WORKSHOPPRAGUE03.09.2012

2-DAY TRAFFIC2-DAY LOGISTICSTOTALLY 5 DAYS

NUV

RAILWAY OPERATION IN ECVET

24.12.2012

MTEGM

RAILWAY OPERATION IN ECVET

24.12.2012

MTEGM