-
Evaluation report SENDI project
T H I R D M E E T I N G - P R A G U E
This report contains the evaluation analysis of the filled out
questionnaire about the Kick off meeting in Granada of the SENDI
project. All questions will be covered with a small evaluation
supported by a
diagram.
9 januari 2014 Wri tten by: Tessa Grefkens, Pro Work
T
1
This report contains the evaluation analysis of the filled out
questionnaire of the third meeting in Prague of the SENDI project.
All questions will be covered with a small evaluation supported by
a diagram.
07/ 01/ 2015
Written by Tessa Grefkens – PRO WORK
2
-
1
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Evaluation report SENDI project Third meeting - Prague
In this evaluation report all questions will be evaluated
through a concise analysis supported with several
diagrams. All 13 questions are answered by 5 participants of the
meeting. In this report all questions will be
evaluated separately (so N=5 at the questions). At the end of
this evaluation report a general analysis of
the findings concerning this Third meeting will be given at
question 13.
-
2
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 1 – Efficiency and effectivity of Third meeting
Remarks/Explanations
Well organised and executed without undue time loss
Regarding to the diagram and the extra remarks, that were made
by some participants it seems, that again
both the efficiency and effectivity of the third meeting were
sufficient. The partners state the efficiency was
a little bit better than the effectivity. This indicates, that
everyone was al little bit more satisfied with the
meeting-process and realization (efficiency), than with the
outcome (effectivity). The remark made is also
positive.
Answered : 5 Skipped : 0
-
3
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 2 – Discussion project subjects & -activit ies
Remarks/Explanations
-
Concerning the project subjects and activities, the diagram
makes clear, that everybody seem to be very
positive about all the project subjects, that are discussed in
the meeting in Prague. Especially the “General
information about the development of the project” scored high.
But also the “Welcome”, “E-learning
support review, adding new ideas”, “General discussion among
partners” and the “Review of all partners’
tasks and deadlines” scored very sufficient to sufficient. The
“Compilation of Handbook with all the criteria
of SENDI courses”, “Dissemination (Project brochure + 2nd
newsletter + Other dissemination channels)”
and the “Certification of trainers (on the system)” scored the
least well, but still sufficient and no element
on the agenda scored unsatisfied.
Answered : 5 Skipped : 0
-
4
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 3 – Discussion al l necessary topics
Remarks/Explanations
All necessary topics were discussed and the face-to-face
discussion was very useful for planning the further project
activities. On schedule as far as I can tell
Obviously, all topics of the agenda were discussed during the
third meeting of the SENDI project in Prague
as can be seen in the diagram and from the two remark made.
Answered : 5 Skipped : 0
-
5
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 4 – Role tasks after third meeting
Remarks/Explanations
Most immediate needs completed.
According to all participants the role tasks were clear to them
when they left the meeting in November. Also
the remark made confirms this.
Answered : 5 Skipped : 0
-
6
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 5 – Active participation of al l partners
Remarks/Explanations
NTC wasn't present at the meeting, but is very present in the
project! Everyone participated fully. Partner 4 couldn't
participate in this meeting.
It seems, that all partners scored very positive according to
the partners who filled out this questionnaire.
Especially Stichting Pro Work (NL), scored high with only “Very
Sufficient”. Also Asociacion Agifodent (ES)
and ASDAN (UK) score high, followed by Euroface Consult (CZ) and
Ian Lynch (the Ingots UK). National
Training Centre (BG) scored the least well, but this can be
linked to the fact they weren’t present at the
meeting, but they are very present in the project as some
partner states.
Answered : 5 Skipped : 0
-
7
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 6 – Opinion hosting organisation Euroface Consult
ing
Remarks/Explanations
Everything ran smoothly.
As becomes clear by the diagram, the coordination of Euroface
Consulting of this third meeting is reviewed
only mostly very sufficient. The remark indicates, the meeting
“ran smoothly”!
Answered : 5 Skipped : 0
-
8
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 7 – Keeping made promises as partners
Remarks/Explanations
-
The only answer on this question by 5 participants of the survey
is, that all partners fulfil their tasks as
planned and agreed on in the project plan and during this third
meeting. No explanations were given.
Answered : 5 Skipped : 0
-
9
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 8 – Quality of partner teamwork and cooperation so
far
Remarks/Explanations
Team works very well together.
Most of the participants filled out “Very satisfied” at this
question regarding the quality of teamwork and
partner cooperation and one partner filled out “Satisfied”, what
indicates everyone is very positive about
the quality and development of teamwork and partner cooperation
so far and even more positive than after
the second meeting. Two remark made, confirm this answer “The
teams works very well together”!
Answered : 5 Skipped : 0
-
10
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 9 – Answering statements
Remarks/Explanations
-
As can be seen in the diagram, the partners are especially
satisfied concerning “the frequency of the future
project meetings”. Secondly they are satisfied with “the minutes
of meeting” and “The division of roles and
tasks between the project partners”, but also “the communication
between the project partners” scores
sufficient. The least well is the score again for the “the
guidance and support of the project coordinator”,
but why remains unclear.
Answered : 5 Skipped : 0
-
11
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 10 – Opinion about project progress and process so
far
What is your general opinion about the project progress and
process so far (including the future meeting locations, project
activities, -content, development, et cetera)? Please describe your
opinion in the text box below:
Remarks/Explanations
Project has been progressing as it was planned; all the goals
are continuously met. I think we are having a good project so far
and we are looking forward to the future. In my opinion the project
is very well organized towards the project goals achievement. Some
good refinements of the process, technology and methods in the
light of experience. Everything is on track and some good original
work is being developed that will benefit the target groups. The
project is being developed according to the application form and
all partners are working hard to meet deadlines and fulfill the
final project products.
According to the answers, all partners who contribute to this
survey seem to be again all satisfied with the
project progress and process until now and are hopeful in terms
of the project progress and process in the
future. This third meeting seem to be contributing to a better
future perspective, better cooperation and
more motivation to bring this project to a positive end.
-
12
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 11 – Opinions about statements
Remarks/Explanations
Experience shows that the outcomes will be fit for purpose.
The partners are especially satisfied with the progress of our
SENDI project so far. Secondly they are
confident with reaching the project goals within the project
period, they are satisfied with the way all
partners are co-operating in this project and they are confident
the quality of our project results will be
sufficient. The two elements that score the least well are the
“confidence our project ´products´ will be
used after our project has ended” and the “confidence that our
project ´products´ will have an important
added value for flexible and tailor made learning and teaching,
but they score still sufficient. The remark
made is again positive.
Answered : 5 Skipped : 0
-
13
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 12 – Suggestion to improving project coordination
Remarks/Explanations
Have no stress to early. Sometimes things need time and the
quality is more important than the quantity!
In relation to the diagram and the remarks made, the overall
view of the participants is, that no
improvements have to be made, but one remark is made “Have no
stress to early. Sometimes things need
time and the quality is more important than the quantity!”.
Answered : 5 Skipped : 0
-
14
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
Question 13 – General remarks
If you feel anything has been forgotten or in case you have any
questions or comments with respect to this questionnaire or the
project progress/process/content, please add your remarks here!
Remarks/Explanations
No, we (as PRO WORK) are happy with the project so-far :) No I
think everything has been covered.
As made clear by all answers, the diagrams and the
remarks/explanations, and also at this question all
partners seem to be again positive about the progression of the
project.
Third meeting
The partners state the efficiency of this third meeting was a
little bit better than the effectivity. This
indicates, that everyone was al little bit more satisfied with
the meeting-process and realization (efficiency),
than with the outcome (effectivity). The remark made is also
positive (Q1). Concerning the project subjects
and activities, it seems that everybody seem to be very positive
about all the project subjects, that are
discussed in the meeting in Prague. Especially the “General
information about the development of the
project” scored high. But also the “Welcome”, “E-learning
support review, adding new ideas”, “General
discussion among partners” and the “Review of all partners’
tasks and deadlines” scored very sufficient to
sufficient. The “Compilation of Handbook with all the criteria
of SENDI courses”, “Dissemination (Project
brochure + 2nd newsletter + Other dissemination channels)” and
the “Certification of trainers (on the
system)” scored the least well, but still sufficient and no
element on the agenda scored unsatisfied (Q2). All
topics of the agenda were discussed during the third meeting of
the SENDI project in Prague as can be
seen in the diagram and from the two remark made (Q3). And
according to all participants the role tasks
were clear to them when they left the meeting in November. Also
the remark made confirms this (Q4).
Regarding the participation in the project especially Stichting
Pro Work (NL), scored high with only “Very
Sufficient”. Also Asociacion Agifodent (ES) and ASDAN (UK) score
high, followed by Euroface Consult (CZ)
and Ian Lynch (the Ingots UK). National Training Centre (BG)
scored the least well, but this can be linked to
the fact they weren’t present at the meeting, but they are very
present in the project as some partner states
(Q5). As becomes clear, the coordination of Euroface Consulting
of this third meeting is reviewed only
mostly very sufficient. The remark indicates, the meeting “ran
smoothly” (Q6).
General SENDI remarks
All partners fulfil their tasks as planned and agreed on in the
project plan and during this third meeting,
according to the filled out questionnaires (Q7). And most of the
participants filled out “Very satisfied” at the
question regarding the quality of teamwork and partner
cooperation and one partner filled out “Satisfied”,
what indicates everyone is very positive about the quality and
development of teamwork and partner
cooperation so far and even more positive than after the second
meeting. Two remarks made, confirm this
answer “The teams works very well together” (Q8). The partners
are especially satisfied concerning “the
frequency of the future project meetings”. Secondly they are
satisfied with “the minutes of meeting” and
“The division of roles and tasks between the project partners”.
The least well is the score again for the “the
guidance and support of the project coordinator”, but why
remains unclear (Q9).
-
15
Eval
uatio
n re
port
SEN
DI p
roje
ct |
9-1
-201
4
According to the other answers, all partners who contribute to
this survey seem to be again all satisfied with
the project progress and process until now and are hopeful in
terms of the project progress and process in
the future. This third meeting seem to be contributing to a
better future perspective, better cooperation and
more motivation to bring this project to a positive end (Q10).
When answering statements, the partners are
especially satisfied with the progress of our SENDI project so
far. Secondly they are confident with reaching
the project goals within the project period, they are satisfied
with the way all partners are co-operating in
this project and they are confident the quality of our project
results will be sufficient. The two elements that
score the least well are the “confidence our project ´products´
will be used after our project has ended”
and the “confidence that our project ´products´ will have an
important added value for flexible and tailor
made learning and teaching, but they score still sufficient. The
remark made is again positive (Q11).
In relation to the last question, the overall view of the
participants is, that no improvements have to be
made, but one (positive) remark is made “Have no stress to
early. Sometimes things need time and the
quality is more important than the quantity!” (Q12).
Communication & Collaboration between partners
As stated before, the communication between project partners
scored sufficient and every partner who
filled in this questionnaire seem to be very positive about the
partner communication and collaboration in
the future (Q9).
TO-DO l ist
- Be more positive about the future of the SENDI project!
- Continuation of this way of teamwork between partners in the
SENDI project future!