Presentation on theme: "Erasmus centralised actions and the Application results 2012"— Presentation transcript:
1 Erasmus centralised actions and the Application results 2012 DAAD-Seminar 19/07/2012Erasmus centralised actions and the Application results 2012Gilles GERVAIS, EACEA
2 Outline of the presentation Introduction: the Agency in the context of the Life-Long Learning Programme (LLP)Part 1: Erasmus centralised actions (2012)Part 2: Erasmus centralised actions application results/trends and
3 Executive Agency – programme portfolio About 400 EACEA staff for the management of these programmes
4 The structure of the LLP The Lifelong Learning Programme (LLP)Jean Monnet Programme3 key activities–Jean Monnet Action; European Institutions; European AssociationsTransversal Programme4 key activitiesPolicy Cooperation; Languages; ICT; Disseminationresults (valorisation)GrundtvigAdult educationLeonardodaVinciErasmusHigher education &advanced trainingComeniusSchool educationJean Monnet Action;Policy Cooperation; Languages; ICT; Dissemination and exploitation ofVocational educationand training
5 The Executive Agency Partners with complementary roles 31/03/2017The Executive Agency Partners with complementary rolesPolicyProgramme implementationDirectorates A & BPolicy and ProgrammesEuropeanCommissionPolicy documentsProgramme definitionPrioritiesCommitteesImpact analysisManagement of decentralised actions via National AgenciesManagement of centralised actionsCalls, selection, contractsMonitoring, acceptance, paymentsClustering & disseminationResults & feedbackCentre for Programme management~400 staffBased in BrusselsManaged by EC officialsLet me start by saying a few words about our AgencyThe Commission deals with policy initiatives, definition of the programme, the priorities and its impact. It works with the Members States the LLP committee and the NAsThe Agency manages the centralised actions delegated to it: - from publishing the call and selecting the projects, monitoring them through to closure, and reporting on the resultsAlthough a separate public institution, supervised by the Commission, with its own legal identity, the Agency works rather as a partner for the Commission with complimentary roles.We are around 300 persons – both experts from the domain and managers from the Commission – in a dedicated building in Brussels
6 The management of the Erasmus programme Centralised Actions and Decentralised ActionsCOOPERATION PROJECTSMOBILITYStudent mobility (incl. placements abroad)Erasmus intensive language coursesStaff mobility (e.g. teaching assignments abroad)Intensive ProgrammesPreparatory visits and othersErasmus Multilateral Projects:→ 5 “Priorities”Erasmus Academic NetworksErasmus Accompanying MeasuresErasmus centralised actions: budget 2010: 19.8 MIO €
7 Managing the complete project cycle The Agency’s core tasks in the framework of the implementation of the LLPManaging the complete project cycle
8 Multilateral projects Disseminationof outputsCooperation of HEInstitutions andrelevant stakeholdersApplyingEuropean policyframeworkInnovation5specific prioritiesTo prove their European dimension MCPs should in priority:share experience and good practice and give rise to concrete results and outputs suitable for dissemination (methods, tools, materials, courses)develop innovation and/or disseminate innovation and good practice with a potential for significant impact.foresee among their outputs the organisation of in-service training courses for adult education staff.contribute to applying, adapting and testing – in concrete adult learning situations – the relevant tools or policy approaches developed in the framework of policy cooperation at European level.
9 Erasmus Multilateral Projects Priority Cooperation between higher education institutions (HEI) and enterprisesPriority Social dimension of higher educationEncourage trans-national cooperation between HEI or with other relevant stakeholders in strategically important fields:Priority Mobility strategies and removal of barriers to mobility in higher educationPriority Support to the modernisation agenda of higher educationThe 2011 Call for proposals of LLP includes important changes regarding the application of priorities by all sectors, including Erasmus. In essence, the proposalarticulates the new Call around a common set of E&T policy bound priorities for all sectors, allowing each sub-programme to adjust them according to the sector's character and needs as well as to define a limited number of additional specific priorities.The following common priorities for all LLP sectors are proposed:(1) Encourage cooperation between the worlds of education, training and work(2) Support initial and continuous training of teachers, trainers and education and training institutions' managers(3) Promote the acquisition of key competences throughout the E&T system(4) Promote the social inclusion and gender equality in education and training, including the integration of migrants(5) Develop strategies for lifelong learning and mobilityIt is important to note that since 2011 these "priorities" should be understood as exclusive. In the previous calls priorities were defined per action and were not exclusive. The common priorities described above will be common for all sub-programmes (with specific adjustments reflecting their sectoral character), but will also contain a possibility of "preferences" in each of them to express non exclusive topics that the relevant E&T sector would like to be addressed .As regards Erasmus, previously existing multilateral actions will be structured in a new way by grouping together the previous Curriculum Development action and the Modernisation of Higher Education one. On the other hand, Structural Networks will no longer be supported as networks, since most of the activities under this action used to overlap with the action Modernisation of Higher Education. In addition, two new priorities are created under Multilateral actions.This proposal of new Erasmus priorities was welcomed by all the countries of the LLP Committee because of aligning Erasmus centralised actions to higher education policy priorities. In that meeting is was not possible to define fully the new Erasmus priorities since there are many ongoing initiatives in the area (the definition of new Bologna targets, the Youth on the Move initiative, Analysis of the consultation of the Green Paper on learning mobility, social dimension events during the Spanish Presidency, etc.). These priorities were finally approved by the LLP Committee in June 2010.Priority Fostering the excellence and innovation in higher education
10 Issues Are companies prepared for this? Cooperation between higher education institutions (HEI) and enterprises (ECUE)IssuesNew approaches, new methods, new tools, mobile devices, social networks, etc.Are companies prepared for this?Are Universities preparing their students for this reality?Are Universities and Enterprises working together for this purpose?
11 Cooperation between higher education institutions and enterprises (ECUE) ExamplesDeals with creating and testing crucial new teaching/training materials and curricula for a specific economical sector (automotive dealer);Develop cooperation and knowledge exchange between enterprises (improving dealer training) and HEIs (improving teaching)s (mostly SMEs) and for HEI sales students;Explore Marketing and its relation with Innovation.
12 Social dimension of higher education IssueAccess to Higher education to non traditional learnersPart time, update in jhte past, handicap,
13 Social dimension of higher education ExamplesValidation of Prior Learning, to a practical strategy for social inclusion of underrepresented and non-traditional target groups in higher education (HE).Develop a practical methodology for opening HE to any learner, regardless of background
14 Analyse and tackle barriers to mobility Mobility strategies and removal of barriers to mobility in higher education (ESMO)IssueAnalyse and tackle barriers to mobility
15 Mobility strategies and removal of barriers to mobility in higher education (ESMO) ExampleA Study that will help to increase understanding of information at national and regional level of Erasmus figures and on transnational mobility and employability patterns, analyse obstacles to mobility and identify which elements could be improved to enhance future opportunities.
16 Support to the modernisation agenda of higher education IssuesImproving strategic leadership within higher education institutionsSupport Curricular reform
17 Support to the modernisation agenda of higher education ExamplesStrategic LeadershipDeveloping strategies for connecting the three main quality spheres: teachers, students and quality managers. It will use newly developed tools and models which support reflection, discussion and innovation in quality practice at these three levels.Curriculum reformBachelor/Master/Doctorate; the need for highly-qualified professionals in the field of Nuclear Security by successfully developing and implementing a full-time and part-time study programmes.
18 Accompanying Measures Shorter action(1 year)Relevance to Modernisation Agenda of HEContribute to dissemination of projects resultsSynergies between actionsEnhancing implementation of Erasmus mobilityThe Acompanying Measures are a shorter action (1 year duration), but not for this reason less important. Their aim is to support activities which are not eligible under the main actions of the Erasmus programme (MP and NW), but wich may contribute to achieving its objectives, for example:having a potential impact in the implementation of the Erasmus mobility ,subscribing the Modernisation Agenda principles,contributing to the dissemination of project results with an added value to what has already been done under an Multilateral or network project.The activities supported could be (indicative list):−organisation of conferences and seminars concerning European cooperation in HE;−promotional and information campaigns;−disseminating products and processes resulting from cooperation (documents, publications, teaching modules, videos, CD-ROMs, innovatory methodologies, organisational measures in institutions, educational strategies).−publications relating to European educational cooperation in higher education;etc
19 Accompanying Measures (EAM) Issues:Implement activities concerning transversal policiesEnhance the implementation of Erasmus mobility
20 Accompanying Measures (EAM) ExampleHow enhance the social awareness of Erasmus students and promote cultural diversity among the local communities?
21 Academic Networks Exchange of information/ Common platform for sharing knowledgeExchange of information/methodologies and disseminating good practicesProducing and promoting creativity and innovationThe first part of the presentation has reviewed the political priorities within the multilateral projects. Now we are moving to the academia networks. What the Erasmus networks are about? As we all know , they are designed to promote European cooperation and innovation in specific subject areas, that they are also an excellent platform for sharing knowledge BUT they also contribute to connect academic communities in different areas of study and have e a significant impact in teaching and research.This is a list of indicative activities that each network should seek to :Provide an overview of a field (through comparative studies and analyses) within a European contextHave a further debate on European strategies (improving the use of ECTS, governance models, for instance)Identify present, emergent and future needs, where European co-operation could be especially beneficialPromote the dissemination of findings and recommendations and their implementation in relevant fields and or courseEstablish better links between teaching and research
22 Erasmus Academic Networks (ENW) IssuesSharing knowledgeDiscussing methodologiesDisseminating good practice
23 Erasmus Academic Networks (ENW) ExampleLook at the role of Higher education in response to a professional body with changing demands in sector of humanitarian action.
24 Basic features and requirements for applications ErasmusCentralised ActionsMaximum EU Grant(75% of total project costs)Minimum/ Maximum project durationMinimum number of partner organisationsMultilateral projects€Min: 2 yearsMax: 3 years3 institutions from at least 3 LLP countries (of which at least one must be an EU member state) Knowledge alliance = 2 yearsMultilateral networks€Min and max: 3 yearsMinimum 25 partners from 25 countriesAccompanying Measures€Min and max:1 yearOne or several institutions from LLP countries
25 Type of applicant organisations Who can apply ? ActionType of applicant organisationsErasmus multilateral projects- Higher education institutions holding a full duration Erasmus University Charter- Enterprises (in particular SMEs), professional organisations, chambers of commerce, social partners and local/regional/national bodies- Associations and other relevant organisations active in relation to higher educationErasmus multilateral networks-Higher education institutions holding a full duration Erasmus University Charter-Public bodies, enterprises, associations and other relevant organisations active in relation to higher educationErasmus accompanying measures-Associations, networks or consortia of higher education institutions and other relevant organisations active in relation to higher education
26 How to apply ? Submission deadline: e-application Form 2013 Identification of the applicant and other organisations participating in the projectDescription of the projectB.1 Summary of the projectB.2 Lifelong Learning Programme Objectives and Priorities addressedB.3 Dates and languagesB.4 Summary budgetAttachmentsDetailed descriptions:C. Organisations and activitiesD. Description of the projectE. Impact, dissemination and exploitation, sustainabilityF. Action or programme specific informationG. Workplan and workpackagesThird country participation (optional)List of Associated Partners (optional)Declaration of HonourBudget tablesLegal Entity Form
27 LLP award criteria1. Relevance 2. Quality of the work programme 3. Innovative character 4. Quality of the Consortium 5. European added value 6. The cost-benefit ratio 7. Impact 8. Quality of the Valorisation plan (dissemination and exploitation of results) 9. Participation of organisations from third countries2 experts (data base)
28 Relevance Your needs analysis must be robust: thorough, clear and up-to-dateYou must show how your proposal builds on previous EU-funded work in the field2828
29 Innovation A proposal can present: Innovative products Innovative processes (including projectmanagement)In both cases, you must clearly demonstrate that there is real added value for the project2929
30 Quality of the consortium You must show that you have put together an effective consortium:All partners should make an active and identifiable contribution to the projectYou must demonstrate what each partner brings to the project (e.g. in terms of expertise, complementarity, etc.)3030
31 Success Factors A strong proposal is: Coherent (issues, solutions, target groups, activities, budget)Evidence-based (needs analysis, state of the art)Clear (objectives, solutions, outputs)Rigorous in its planning (what activities, when, for how long, and with what resources)Explicit (no information should be taken for granted, if it is not in your proposal it cannot be taken into account)Circumscribed (your proposal should focus on a specific issue)31313131
32 a coordinator’s experience Preparing a proposal:a coordinator’s experienceWhat were the main steps in putting together your Erasmus proposal?What challenges did you encounter?How did you ensure that the award criteria were properly addressed?How much time did you need?What’s your top tip for submitting an application?1 - What were the main steps in putting together your Erasmus proposal?The main steps wereto articulate the common focus and intention of the network as it relates to the call and to the existing political situation in EuropeHow has been done? How is the idea for the network (focus and intention) generated? Is this a negotiated process? How long did it take? How did you ensure there is a good fit with the call?to confirm with each individual (not only each partner institution) their contribution and compliance with the agreed upon frameworkWho has defined the contribution of all partners? "The agreed upon framework?" It seems that it is a top-down management approach? How is the framework agreed?c)to complete the application form (this can be a big challenge as the electronic forms were/are not well suited to large networks), have it signed and sent on time.Is it the sole responsibility of the coordinator? What advice can you give for networks faced with the form? What were the challenges?2-What challenges did you encounter?administrating the preparation with no or few funds for coordinationHow come? It has to be presented as: "some funds need to be dedicated to the coordination ex; assistant, logistics staff etc?? It could be that you had to prepare the proposal on a pro bono basis. If so, it would be interesting to know how did you manage this. Who absorbed the costs? How did you share resources to prepare the proposal?balancing the wishes of some partners with the expertise and ability to cooperate which was required for each workpackageHow did you overcome this? How did you match partners and workpackages? How did you manage expectations?bringing experts from different disciplines together (diverging vocabulary and approaches)Moreover, details should be provided on the challenge of working in multicultural context and to face different institution culture. How did you identify these experts and motivate them to contribute?d)bringing partners from different areas of Europe together (language problems and different understanding of rules and intentions)How to deal with this at the very first steps of the design of the project. How did you resolve possible tensions?d)keeping the interest and commitment of the partners during the proposal processing period (when institutions often require that staff make binding commitments for the coming academic year already in the spring) How? Video conference, e-platform, etc?3.-How did you ensure that the award criteria were properly addressed?By describing precisely and concretely how the project reflected each theme.It was also important to follow closely the developments within each theme in Europe so as to understand how the project related to them.4-How much time did you need?It is essential to start early gathering the opinions and ideas of the partners. That we usually did about 12 months in advance. The concrete proposal writing work began at least 6 months in advance so that drafts could circulate among the partners for comment and adjustment. The final writing and budget work was done at least 2 months before the deadline because the final institutional approval and submission always takes more time than expected. In total we used a bit more than ca. one total month of staff time (100%)Who was involved? All partners in all work packages?5-What’s your top tip for submitting an application?Be concrete, specific and check all your details more than once or twice. There are often things which are overlooked in such comprehensive applications.Give practical examples.3232
33 Erasmus Call for proposal results and Trends Part 2Erasmus Call for proposal results and Trends
34 Erasmus proposals selection Selection of projects for the Call 2012250 applications have been submitted from 33 participating countriesCall 2013 will be launched by September2012EACEA - Lifelong Learning Programme
35 Call 2012: Received vs Selected applications PrioritiesReceivedSelectedMULTILATERAL20143Cooperation HE-Enterprises6712Mobility strategies197Social dimension205Excellence and innovation324Curriculum reform5510Funding reform1Governance reformENW268EAM2 »Total25056
36 DE Coordinators : 15 Proposals PrioritiesN°Support to Modernisation: Curriculum Reform (EMCR)4Cooperation University-Enterprise (ECUE)Fostering Excellence and Innovation (FEXI)Mobility strategies and removal of barriers to mobility (ESMO)3Academic Networks (ENW)Accompaniyng Measures (EAM)14 selectionnées
37 Call 2012 Received applications Small countries, high participation: FI,LT,NLPT,SI
38 Call 2012 Selected applications BE higher, but association head office BE
39 DE Participation /proposals Call 2012/Coord + Part PRIORITIESReceivedSupport to Modernisation Agenda4+18Cooperation University-Enterprise (ECUE)4+21Fostering Excellence and Innovation in Higher Education (FEXI)0+8Mobility strategies and removal of barriers to mobility (ESMO)3+9Social Dimension of Higher Education (ESIN)Academic Networks (ENW)3+26Accompaniyng Measures (EAM)1+7Selected1+50+30+41+42+8Numero de HEI DE=
40 Call 2012 DE Partners Major participations European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher EducationFreie Universität BerlinHannover Medical SchoolRuprecht-Karls-University HeidelbergTechnical University of BerlinTechnische Universität DresdenUniversity of Applied Sciences HamburgUniversity of Applied Sciences EberswaldeUniversity of Applied Sciences MainzUniversität Duisburg-EssenUniversity of CologneMelleiures participation de ceux sélectionnée.
45 Further information on LLP / Erasmus centralised programme Life-Long Learning Programme (LLP) of the EUErasmus centralised programme and multilateral actionsCompendia of funded Erasmus projectsPublic reports of funded Erasmus projectsErasmus/Jean Monnet InfoKitsLLP Info Days 2012(presentations and recordings)
46 Thank you for your attention ! Gilles GERVAISProject AdviserEducation, Audiovisual and Culture Executive AgencyUnit Erasmus/Jean Monnet Contacts for further questions: