Erasmus+

 

Erasmus+ is the European Union's new programme for...

Important!

If your University has not received PIC please register here

Higher Education

Information regarding the higher education system in Kazakhstan...

Tempus

TEMPUS is one of the European Union’s programmes which support...

Dear TEMPUS projects’ participants!

In this section we have collected the information that could help you to improve the implementation of your projects.

In particular, you will find recommendations on the following issues:

You have received a grant from the European Commission to implement a TEMPUS project and from now onwards you must clearly acknowledge the contribution of the TEMPUS IV Programme in all communications about your project. This is a requirement in your grant agreement, and we recommend you read it very carefully.

Please find Visibility main rules at the EACEA website: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/tempus/beneficiaries/beneficiaries_tempus4_en.php

The Tempus Unit at EACEA has established a field monitoring strategy targeting Tempus IV projects. The aim of the strategy is to increase the number of field monitoring visits and to make them more effective, so that projects receive better advice and support on the ground.

The Tempus programme uses three standard forms of monitoring:

1) Desk monitoring by project officers in EACEA in Brussels, by reading project reports and corresponding with beneficiaries on a daily basis

2) Field monitoring by National Tempus Offices and EACEA staff to visit the project in-country. There are three types of field monitoring, each with different aims;

Preventive field monitoring takes place at the early stages of the project. It aims to provide information on the rules and procedures and reviews objectives, priorities, methodology and activities planned.

Advisory field monitoring usually takes place mid-way through the project and aims to make useful recommendations on both the content and the financial aspects of the project.

Control field monitoring usually takes place after the end of the project and aims to make an assessment of the project's impact and the sustainability of results.

3) External Results-Oriented-Monitoring (ROM)

ROM monitors are external field monitors contracted by DG Development and Co-operation (DEVCO), to monitor Tempus projects on their behalf. They schedule visits in coordination with EACEA.

PLEASE FIND MORE ABOUT MONITORING AT THE EACEA WEBSITE: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/tempus/beneficiaries/beneficiaries_tempus4_en.php

In the 1st half of 2013 National Tempus Office in Kazakhstan in accordance with the plan carried out monitoring of four projects. In the 2nd half of the year 6 field monitoring visits will be held. Please find here the MONITORING PLAN ON 2013 .

In addition in this section you can find:

Please, note that the following list of questions is general. However, questions may vary somewhat depending on the content of the project, the comments and suggestions from interim reports, previous monitoring, etc.

Relevance and quality of design

- Have changes occurred in the project environment since project start (e.g. regulations/laws/ labour market needs) that have positively or negatively affected the relevance of the project?

- How is the project addressing these external changes and is this reflected in the project planning?

- To what extent have the needs of the partner country/partner country institutions developed since the project started? How does the project intend to address the new needs of the partner country institutions (internal changes)?

- Does the project still respond to the needs of the target groups? Do the planned target groups / beneficiaries correspond to the ones that are actually benefiting?

- To what extent are the expected results and activities, assumptions and overall objectives still valid?

- If applicable: How well did the project management adjust the project design (including the intervention logic / hierarchy of objectives) to make it more relevant?

- Is the intervention logic clear? Is the logical framework suitable for monitoring purposes (e.g. proper indicators or sources of verification)?

- Are project objectives clearly understood by all consortium partners?

- Are the project results achievable in the project framework?

Efficiency of implementation to date

- Have all partners been involved in the activities to-date? Has the management structure been appropriate to ensure participative and active involvement of the partner country institutions? Individual or institutionally oriented involvement?

- Has a Project Management Board been set up and is it meeting regularly? Evidence here will be in the form of Minutes of meetings, who attended, what papers were prepared, timetable established?

- In cases of large networks, how has the networking been managed? Has it proven difficult? What has been the added value of a large network? In cases of small networks, has there been sufficient expertise available to the project? In cases of structural measures projects, how is the Ministry actively involved in all steps of project implementation?

- Is the communication between the responsible person in the partner country and the project management satisfactory?

- Are timely and appropriate decisions being made to support effective implementation and problem resolution?

- Are project resources managed in a transparent and accountable manner which promotes equitable and sustainable development?

- Has disbursement of funds been regular? How is the disbursement organised and monitored? What additional resources have been made available to support activities?

- Are partners mobilising their resources as foreseen, including the planned co-financing?

- To what extent are activities implemented on schedule? Are there delays or deviation compared to the workplan? How can those be rectified?

- Is an activity schedule (or work plan) and resource schedule available and is it also used by the project management?

- How are staff development activities, both abroad and internally, planned and organised? What is the proportion of “young” and “older” staff? And the proportion of men and women (gender balance)?

- For curriculum development projects: are there difficulties with the development and introduction of new courses? Are the syllabi of courses available? Have the syllabi been reviewed and evaluated? Have the teaching materials been developed and introduced as planned? How many, by whom and when were they developed?

- Are students participating in the reform process? How do they perceive project results?- Are there problems with the organisation of staff mobility flows? If yes, what kind and what measures have been adopted to address them? What has been the average length of staff development placements/stays? Has the length of the stay been sufficient to ensure that the aim of the mobility is achieved? How do you assess results of these mobilities?

- How is student mobility planned and organised? How many student mobility flows have taken place? Are there problems with the organisation of student mobility flows? If yes, what kind and what measures have been adopted to address them? How do you assess results of these mobilities?

- What material conditions (study materials, welcome pack, practical support) and preparation have been foreseen for the student study periods and placements abroad? Have grants been sufficient? Have arrangements been made for accommodation? Have there been major administrative difficulties? Are the students mentored before or during their stay? Have students provided feedback on their return? How is this feedback taken into account?

- Have students received recognition of their study period? What type of recognition is foreseen for practical placements?

- Are there difficulties in the restructuring of university services (development of strategic plans, adaptations of procedures, establishment of structures or services)? If yes, why and what measures have been adopted to address them?

- Is equipment available to staff and students? How is the new equipment contributing to teaching methods? Have security measures been foreseen? Has any equipment been damaged or stolen? Was the equipment purchased locally? What maintenance arrangements have been made? What training measures have been implemented? Was the tender arranged according to the procedures of the grant agreement?

- Is an internal monitoring system in place, allowing cost-effective implementation of activities? Are activities monitored regularly by the project and corrective measures taken if required?

- What is the quantity and quality of the results produced so far in comparison to the plans? Have all planned results been delivered to date? Is there concrete evidence of the achieved results? Effectiveness to-date

- Have all planned outcomes (as defined in the logical framework included in the proposal) been achieved to date? What is the quality of the outcomes/services available? How assessment is done?

- What is the level of achievement of the project objectives to date? What are the prospects for achieving the project objectives by the end of the Tempus financing?

- To what extent did the project management actively promote the use of and benefit from these results / services?

- Has the target group benefited from the results? (e.g.: staff retrained, students following updated courses, agreements signed with companies and training provided, etc). Are there any factors which prevent target groups accessing the results/services?

- Are there any unplanned positive / negative effects on the target groups?

- How good is communication with the beneficiaries and stakeholders? Do the stakeholders have access to the results of the project (formal arrangements, cooperation)?

- For projects promoting links with labour market: how has industry/enterprise participated in the achievement of outcomes? Have training activities been carried out by the University for industry/enterprise staff? Has this been successful? Have they contributed to defining the contents of the initial training course? Have they defined adaptations that would require initial training in order to match needs? Are financial contributions foreseen?

- For projects promoting governance reforms: has staff at all levels participated in the process of reform? How are these reforms affecting daily work? To what extent are the project indicators being achieved? Have the beneficiaries benefited from the results? What spin-off (secondary) effects has the project had? How are these secondary effects contributing to the overall objectives of the project and of the institution? Are additional activities being developed as a result? How are they being financed?

Impact to date

Department level: Has the project resulted in changes in terms of department management, individual behaviour, course content, teaching/learning process and has it brought benefits to managers, teachers, students, inspectors?

Faculty level: Does the project meet more than just staff and student requirements and does it disseminate new educational approaches which have an effect on restructuring?

University level: Has the project been identified by the institution as promoting the university as a “centre of excellence” in a given field; has the project resulted in the university being integrated into a permanent European or international network?

Higher education level:

- Does the project serve as a model for the implementation of national reforms in the field of national Education? Has there been any influence on (further) introduction of the Bologna principles in the country?

- Is the project contributing to the wider objectives set out in the original application? Are the wider planned effects being or are likely to be achieved? Are unplanned effects negative (did the project management take timely measures?) or positive (consider the effects at the various levels: national/sector level; institutions; final beneficiaries)?

- To what extent have teaching/ learning processes and curricula been upgraded and have they enhanced student qualifications?

- What opportunities are being created for the project beyond the specific objectives in particular in fields related to graduate employability and enhanced university / enterprise cooperation?

- Are the project results adequately promoted for creating a wider positive impact (dissemination)?

- Is the project adapting well to external factors and coordinating well with other projects and donors?

- How far are the indicators at the level of the overall objective being reached?

Sustainability

- What support to the project has been provided by national, educational and budgetary policies (special programmes, legal regulations)? How much support is there for the project (Faculty and University level, political, public and private)? Is there a need for an official recognition of project outcomes at policy level? Is it likely to be obtained?

- Has the new curriculum been approved? Have staff to implement the new activities been identified and trained and will they be available? Have other sources of funding been identified? Have agreements been signed?

- Which of the planned outputs/outcomes will require further financial and economic support at the completion of the project? If the services/results have to be supported institutionally, are funds likely to be made available?

- Are the services affordable for the final beneficiaries at the completion of project?

- Are the responsible persons / institutions assuming their (financial/economic) responsibilities?

- Is there a phase-out strategy defined and (to be) implemented?

- How are long-term needs for support being addressed (maintenance of equipment, continued retraining of staff, continuity of staff and financing)? Are the arrangements among the project partners adequate to ensure financial sustainability of the relevant outcomes (e.g.: maintenance costs of software systems)?

- How are changes in higher education policies affecting the project and how well is the project adapting? Is there a process of continuously reviewing and addressing needs?

- What is the current level of ownership over the project outcomes by the various consortium partners? And how will it likely be after the end of the Tempus grant?

- What is the likelihood that target groups will continue to make use of relevant results? Are there good relations with new or existing institutions and are there plans to continue with some or all of the project activities?

- To what degree did the project intervention contribute to enhancing the institutional and management capacities of project partner institutions? Is the current institutional set-up adequate to continue project generated services?

- Are project partners being properly trained for handing over the project (technically, financially, and managerially)? What is the actual level of availability of qualified human resources to implement the project compared to initial planning?

 

Time

Activity

9.00 - 9.30

Meeting with rector/deputy rector

9.30-10.10

Introduction to theaims and objectives ofmonitoring (NTO) and presentation of project by coordinator

10.10-11.30

Meeting with project participants involved in study visits/project training activities

11.30 - 13.00

Meeting with teachers involved in project activities

13.00-14.00

Break

14.00-14.30

Visit to the project room

14.30-15.00

Meeting with students involved in the project activities

15.00-15.30

Meeting with project administrative staff

15.30-16.00

Informal preliminary feedback(NTO)

5.Information for Tempus Project partners on visa issuance procedure.

Please find more information for TEMPUS beneficiaries at the EACEA website: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/tempus/beneficiaries/beneficiaries_tempus4_en.php

Additional information could be found at the presentations of Tempus Information Day in Kazakhstan on the following link: http://tempuskaz.belight.net/index.php/en/news/69-news5.html  and in our Publications. For example in “Impact of Tempus on University Development in Kazakhstan: Projects Overview” you can find Tempus best practices in Kazakhstan. 

Connect with us

We're on Social Networks. Follow us & get in touch.
Erasmus+ in Kazakhstan
mod_jvcountermod_jvcountermod_jvcountermod_jvcountermod_jvcountermod_jvcounter
127
1052
4264
19715
654136

The website has been funded within the framework of the European Union Erasmus+ programme which is funded by the Directorate General for Development and Co-operation – EuropeAid and the Directorate General for Enlargement.This website reflects the views only of the authors, and the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency and the European Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.