1. Number: TR/06/B/F/PP/178066 WASTE-TRAIN VOCATIONAL TRAINING, EDUCATION, CONVEYING INFORMATION ON UP-TO-DATE WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES TO DECISION MAKERS/STAFF INVOLVED IN WASTE MANAGEMENT Forth Consortium Meeting Salamanca, 15 th – 18 th of November 2007 WP 6: Monitoring and evaluation of project progress

2. “Supporting a successful project outcome” Content Reminder on the objectives of monitoring and evaluation. Evaluation achievements and partner’s contributions Summarise Interim Evaluation report: - Successes - Challenges - Concerns Discussion on duties of the external evaluator Provide guidance for next stages of the evaluation activity

3. WP6 – Monitoring and Evaluation of project progress What do we want to achieve with the evaluation? To identify strengths and weaknesses of the implementation process and to give recommendations on any potential problems and adjustments. To identify the achievements and potential areas of improvement. To ensure the quality of the project outcomes/products. To contribute to project planning. To enable the partnership to develop good practices through continuous learning process. An evaluation process that provides a feedback loop to maximise the positive aspects of the project will be a key part of the dissemination and valorisation process. The objective of the internal evaluation is not to satisfy the European Commission independently from partner work.

4. WP6 – Monitoring and Evaluation of project progress Evaluation achievements and partner’s contributions  Compilation and submission of the second Monitoring and Evaluation report, including : - monitoring and overview of project activities; - evaluation notes and observations for WP1; - evaluation of the second consortium meeting. * Adjustments were made to 2 nd eval. Report after partners comments.  Preparation of templates for evaluating the third consortium meeting and interim evaluation report. Partners contribution for interim evaluation report  Received from TR, AUT, SP, SLO, PL, GR. Missing data from: - Germany (?), Switzerland (?), Italy (?) Partners contribution for 3 rd meeting evaluation  Received from TR, SP, SLO, PL, IT Missing data from: DE, AU, SWI

5. First observations from interim evaluation report NATURE of transnationality in the project -lies in the explicit exchange of experience -worked out as a two-way process based on mutual exchange of know-how and implementation of different models and methods. RESULTS compared to INITIAL OBJECTIVES All the partners agree that compared to the initial objectives the results of the project are successful and that until the moment the partnership more or less did what it intended to do. One of the partners mentioned that the partnership got quite interesting results on an area outside the original objectives. The most distinctive result turned out to be the blended-learning training method that is the first one of this type on the subject solid-waste.

6. First observations from interim evaluation report CONTRIBUTION or HANDICAP, in the execution of the projects objectives Contribution –Common understanding of the “waste” problems by all Partners; –Excellent communication channels; –Understanding of cultural differences by all Partners; –The symbiosis between technical and pedagogical teams; –Good base in specific knowledge (professional and didactical) and experience of all the partners in their areas. Handicaps –Non-focused communication (the problem was partly solved after the partnership meeting in Rome) – Numerous of incoming emails. –It is necessary to identify clearly the tasks to be realized for each partner of the same country. –Physical evidence of our project‘s products (not test results yet)

7. First observations from interim evaluation report FACTORS that made the partnership what it is -Enthusiastic people; -Mixture of technical / educational / managerial experts; -Clearly stated goals in the application and project brief; -Clear division of responsibilities; -Different initial background in the knowledge of waste management; Different understanding in e-learning techniques; Previous experience of partners in Leonardo Da Vinci Projects ; Cultural and professional knowledge exchange, networking, valuableness and vision idea of the project, type of project organization and execution

8. First observations from interim evaluation report INNOVATIVE OUTCOMES of the project (so far) A training tool on waste management to be used on transnational level. A well-structured collection of links to further documents on the subject – in its extent probably the largest of its kind. Use of MOODLE for waste management courses. Using of LAMS monitoring and evaluating system. The possibility to obtain: “electronic products” such that: web page, BTB, DVD, etc. The possibility to disseminate the results concerning waste management to politicians, municipalities, etc. Designing and development of specific vocational-courses on WM valid all over Europe. Combination of pedagogical view and technical view of the learning methods and forms.

9. First observations from interim evaluation report EFFECTIVE METHODS to get results in transnational co-operation Pref. 1: The exchange of information Pref. 2: The exchange of methods and approaches Pref. 3: The joint development of methods and approaches Pref. 4: The organisation of meetings Pref. 5: The exchange of documents and literature Possibility of FUTURE NETWORKING All the partners agree that the partnership has to continue working together.

10. First observations from interim evaluation report SUCCESSES of transnational activities -The majority of the partners express positive opinion towards the project results developed so far. They assess them as good and very positive. -Bilateral exchanges and plenary sessions were of equal importance the project work. Both type of meetings affected each other and were organised in the right balance. -All the partners agree that the website was sufficient for the (internal) co- operation in the project. -The majority of the partners agree the transnational coordination within the project is good. Everything is discussed in the group in detail and decisions are taken all together. There is a very close relation between the partners & a very good coordination between the work packages.

11. First observations from interim evaluation report CONCERNS Communication still remains an issue: - Certain partners request substantial communication – avoiding accumulation of emails on superficial issues. Confidence in professional partner’s knowledge. Integration of partners culture to project culture (?)

12. First observations from interim evaluation report RECOMMANDATIONS - Clear identification of tasks and roles to be realized for partners of the same country. - More informal contacts for strengthening of relationships and team work. Informal brainstorming sessions of development teams could strengthen team work, confidence in partner’s knowledge and common understanding. And/or Developing a cooperative bridge between technical team + pedagogical experts + BL experts - Informative emails should be sent by project promoter once per week and by WPs leaders when necessary – mails of personal interest to be communicated only to responsible partner. - More time needed for advices and clarifications on financial and administrative aspects of the project. - Clear definition of objectives (meeting sessions) and expected outcomes to be defined by each WP leader so as to prevent from losing time on discussions.

13. Discussion on the external evaluator’s duties Decide what will be evaluated ; Decide whether the evaluation will be formative (evaluation leading to action during the implementation of the project) or summative (retrospective analysis of the project); Decide the extent of goal-based and goal-free evaluation; Indicators for the evaluation; State the expected outputs. BOOK /

14. Thank you for your attention!