1. Evaluation of Project Progress and Project Meetings Selena Teeling, Aston University
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

2. Where are we now?
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

3. Where are we now? Stock take
Thessaloniki, Yerevan, Minsk, Project progress evaluation
Timeline
Project started 3 months late but we were expected to keep to the original deadlines which has made this experience more stressful than it needed to be. There has been ambiguity over whether we will /can extend the project. This has became a pressing issue as we get closer towards the final outcomes.
The project started late and so all actions were delayed but the timeframe was not corrected.
We started three months late and everything has been delayed for at least three months. This had a knock-on effect on all activities and caused further delays.
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

4. Communications & Management
Communication has not been always good at many points. Questions asked on the intranet are not always responded to in a timely manner.
Feedback with the project coordinator was difficult from time to time. communication with the financial consulting team is not satisfying, 'cause they are not consistent in their information and responses. questions on the intranet sometimes were answered with a lot of delay
There were ups and downs; often there was not enough clarity and very often no decisions.
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

5. Lack of clarity
During the face to face meetings we did not use the time as wisely as we could. We should have more meaningful discussions around the WPs. Not enough discussion and action are taken during the face to face meetings.
Sometimes it was hard to get comments in or to have a proper discussion on them.
We have discussed problems but not decided how to resolve them.
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

6. Strengths
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

7. Achievements
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

8. Improvements
Events
Continuous improvement on the organisation and the content of the workshops
Website
Improvements of the website following feedback
Improved understanding of the needs of the Partner Countries
Internal and External Workshops
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

9. Going forward
We need to have the opportunity to reflect and evaluate what we have done to date to see if we need to amend / update the measured outputs. When the plan was originally put together it was all hypothetical, whereas now we have more idea as to what we should be achieving. Without a proper discussion there can not be adaption of the activities
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

10. Approaching Finishing Line
Timeline – extension indicated
Communications – own networks – posting on social media, eg twitter and Linkedin
Updated information (all meetings & newsletters) on individual partner websites
External community evaluations conducted by RAU and BSU?
What is yet to be achieved?
Qualitative/Quantitative indicators in forefront
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

11. Project Evaluation Plan
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

12. Impact Indicators Long term impact
Target groups/potential beneficiaries
Quantitative indicators
Qualitative indicators
Increased awareness &knowledge of state-of-the-art in internationalization level at higher education in EU &PCs
wider public incl. Universities in EU and PCs, International academic community, Students` communities; Governmental authorities, NEOs, Professional organisations & national & international networks
Analytical materials
Results of research of internationalization level at higher education in the countries involved
contribution to harmonisation of Internationalization strategies in EU and PCs in the framework of HEA according to main provisions of the Bologna Process and considering national interests and traditions.
wider public incl. Universities in PCs, International academic community, Students` communities; Governmental authorities, NEOs, Professional organisations & national & international networks
Framework of a Comprehensive internationalization strategy
Dissemination of best practice of Implementation of Pilot Internationalization Action Plans I
Description of Pilot Internationalization Action Plans
Implementation of Pilot Internationalization Action Plans in HEIs
contribute to increasing the attractiveness of the HEA, to establishing a HEI as a centre of excellence in all the activities related to higher education, research and innovation within the global scene but in accordance with national development strategies
Tool kits for harmonization of internationalization strategy in EU and Partner Countries
50 experts
Expert network for internationalization in higher education
Qualified staff in international relations management at PC universities
5 retraining programs
Retraining programs for HEI administrative staff
Support of the modernisation, accessibility and internationalisation of the higher education field in Armenia, Belarus, Russia
3 Recommendations
Adaptation of recommendations for harmonization of internalisation strategies at national levels
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

13. Project Evaluation plan
Element
Quality Indicators
Evaluation level
Items to be evaluated
Methodology development
In-depth analysis of the level of internationalisation in higher education, research and innovation in partner countries undertaken
Questionnaire developed
Internal
Annex 3 of kick-off meeting
Minutes of the discussions
Published methodological materials
Survey and document analysis
Analysis of EU and national policy in education, research, innovation undertaken
Surveys developed and undertaken
Annex 3 of study visits
Published analytical materials
Results of interviews
Published e-book of analytical materials
Development of Framework of a Comprehensive internationalization strategy
Internationalisation Action Plans developed and reviewed
PC HEIs reports on piloting of the Action Plans of Internationalisation undertaken
Retraining sessions for PCs HEIs undertaken
Draft of Internationalisation Action Plans
PC HEIs reports on piloting of the Action Plans of Internationalisation published
Annex 3 of training courses
Results of training courses published
an integral part of the QCP. It outlines the elements of project evaluation, the set of quality indicators against which progress and quality of project outputs will be measured, as well as the evaluation mode and the evaluation instruments to be used.
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

14. Project Evaluation plan
Tool kits for harmonization of internationalization strategy in higher education, research and innovation in EU and Partner Countries
Tool kits for harmonization of internationalization strategy in higher education, research and innovation in EU and Partner Countries developed
Tool kits reviewed by all partners
Internal
Final version of “Tool kits for harmonization of internationalization strategy” published
Review of tool kits submitted
Programme and minutes of the methodological workshop published
Annex 3 of methodological workshop
Project
Management
Project management plan developed;
Work plan with clear division of tasks and responsibilities between partners and time table produced;
Approved decision- making procedures;
Approved methods and tools of communication between partners;
Satisfaction of Steering Committee with project management plan;
Financial management;
Project events (seminars, meetings, conferences);
Project management reports.
Internal and external
Annex 1
Annex 2
Information collected from project partners
SC mission & working principles produced
Updated Workplan
an integral part of the QCP. It outlines the elements of project evaluation, the set of quality indicators against which progress and quality of project outputs will be measured, as well as the evaluation mode and the evaluation instruments to be used.
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

15. Project Evaluation plan
Coordination and project meetings
Quality of information and communication prior to and at the event;
Participation and contribution at the event;
Respecting the agenda & meeting the goals of the meeting;
Working environment;
Participants have a clear plan of upcoming activities;
Accommodation, food and social element.
Internal and external
Annex 3
Minutes of coordinating meetings
Dissemination & exploitation
Development & dissemination of Project Materials, including a Project Book
Development of Project Website
Dissemination events organized, including the Final conference
Collaboration agreements between partners signed
Internal and external
Annex 3
Annex 4
Annex 6
Published Project Book
Project marketing package published
Number of publications in the press and social media
Number of visitors to the project events
Number of visitors on the project website
Number of collaboration agreements signed
an integral part of the QCP. It outlines the elements of project evaluation, the set of quality indicators against which progress and quality of project outputs will be measured, as well as the evaluation mode and the evaluation instruments to be used.
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

16. Project Evaluation plan
Quality Control
Developed and approved quality plan
Evaluation by Quality Control Committee
External evaluation independent experts
Peer-review and consultations with the relevant Tempus & Erasmus + KA2 projects
Internal and external
Annex 5
Quality Control plan
Quality control and management reports
Mid-term evaluation and final evaluation reports
External evaluation reports and recommendations
an integral part of the QCP. It outlines the elements of project evaluation, the set of quality indicators against which progress and quality of project outputs will be measured, as well as the evaluation mode and the evaluation instruments to be used.
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

17. Let’s have a meaningful discussion
Hand over to the floor
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects
the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

18. Thank you