Leonardo da Vinci

1. Leonardo da Vinci Transfer of Innovation eGuide+ Athens Polina Stavrou 7-8/04/2011 INEK-PEO

3. We are evaluating : • The project implementation • The quality of the products • Their impact on a)target groups and b)on geographical areas. • ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION 6

4. Evaluation becomes particularly important as soon as the partnership starts training “master” trainers. From this point onwards INEK will take the lead in collecting feedback regularly and systematically.

5. 1. Evaluation of project implementation Management Coordinator Respective work package leaders Through: • a detailed quality management plan • workflow manual (internal communication, delivery of documents, guidelines for meetings) √ • work management tools (detailed description of work packages, responsibilities, bar charts, etc.) √ • ongoing monitoring of the work (regular progress reports delivered by partners to the coordinator) √ • ongoing financial controlling (regular expenditure reports) delivered by partners to INEK –In Process- Where necessary modification of activities.

6. 2. Evaluation of the quality of products • (The most tangible products) • Training provided √ • eGuide+ quality assurance framework√ • Assessment tools√ • Open and close type questionnaires given to Partners, Master Trainers and Practitioners. • Online platform • Platform users Statistics (Can Doros explain this better?) • Information leaflet • Difficult to Evaluate a leaflet-Any thoughts? • Dissemination event √ • Number and composition of the Participants • Open and close type questionnaires given to Participants

7. 3. Assessment of impact • We will assess: • the impact of project activities on career guidance practitioners in Cyprus, Greece and Slovenia (on the quality of their guidance work). √ • Interviews after the decentralized training workshops. • the response of job seekers and their acceptance of the assessment tools provided by the project. √ • Questionnaires given to Job seekers just after the use of the tools. • the response of career guidance practitioners in Europe and their acceptance of the online platform. • Not clear how they will have access to our tools-through webpage? Possible solution: Fill an on line questionnaire /feedback

8. Evaluation Plan Master Training Partners: Feedback Questionnaire (Open and Close type Questions-simple structured) Master trainers: Feedback by each country group ( Report based on Open Questions) Feedback by each M. Trainer (Open and Close type Questions) Decentralized Workshops by Country Master Trainers Feedback by each country group (Report based on Open Questions) Feedback by each M. Trainer (Open and Close type Questions) Practitioners Feedback by each practitioner (Open and Close type Questions) Dissemination Event Participants Feedback by the participants (simple structure questionnaire)

9. Evaluation Plan Impact on Target Groups Practitioners: Feedback by Practitioners in total(Interviews –Sample size? After a month?) Job Seekers: Feedback by the job seekers in total (simple structured Questionnaire) Impact on Geographical areas Practitioners: Feedback by Practitioners by country Job Seekers: Feedback by the job seekers by country

10. Impact on Target Group(s) and/or Sectors Quantitative Indicators 1. number of persons trained in the use of the QAF and Atools (Master trainers) 2. number of practitioners participating in the pilot phase 3. number of assessments completed by job seekers 4. number of feedback questionnaires collected from both practitioners and job seekers 5. online platform user analytics Impact Indicators

11. Qualitative Indicators • The degree to which the practitioners • are satisfied with the quality of the training given • find the QAF and ATools user friendly-not complicated to use • use the QAF and ATools in their daily work (number of job seekers they serve) • Improve the quality of their services ( time consuming, better job placements, receive more interest from job Seekers) • 2. The degree to which the Job seekers • are satisfied with the ATools (easy to use, help them understand their skills, • Are satisfied with the quality of career guidance given by the practitioners (clear guidance) • Find a proper job based on their skills.

12. Impact on Geographical areas availability of 1. local language versions of the quality assurance framework and of related assessment tools 2. additional language versions of the assessment tools, relevant for the particular migrant communities in each country number of 1. persons trained and number of participating practitioners, by country 2. feedback questionnaires collected, by country 3. assessments completed, by country 4. and quality of contacts in the database of European stakeholders in career guidance 5. information leaflets printed and posted, by country online platform user analytics, by country Quantitative Impact Indicators

13. Impact on Geographical areas Qualitative Impact Indicators Degree of positive Feedback collected : 1. By the practitioners by country regarding the quality of the training, the use of QAF and the Atools and their impact to their daily work. 2. By the job seekers on the quality of the translation in local and other languages (of particular migrant groups). 3. By the job seekers by country regarding the ATools and their impact on their way to find a proper job. How can we measure the positive or negative opinion? By the combination of two things, a) the researcher opinion regarding the answers given as a whole and b) by the answer given by the interviewer to the question “Your general view regarding the Training/tools/QAF/etc” .

14. Findings will be compared with the user requirements analysis earlier in the project and will be used to further adapt the eGuide+ quality assurance framework and/or the related assessment tools.

15. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION