1 / 22

WP1: Periodic Review and Contract Amendment Reflections

WP1: Periodic Review and Contract Amendment Reflections Jerome Simpson, VANGUARD Project Coordinator 30 th May, 2011. Consortium Meeting, Brussels. Slide 2/17. Presentation Structure (2hrs). Periodic review report - the bad news (15’) Periodic review report - the good news (15’)

duane
Download Presentation

WP1: Periodic Review and Contract Amendment Reflections

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WP1:Periodic Review and Contract Amendment Reflections Jerome Simpson, VANGUARD Project Coordinator 30th May, 2011. Consortium Meeting, Brussels

  2. Slide 2/17 Presentation Structure (2hrs) • Periodic review report - the bad news (15’) • Periodic review report - the good news(15’) • Periodic review report - the costs (30’) • Periodic review report - the amendments (30’) • Periodic review report - the outlook (15’)

  3. Slide 2/17 THE BAD NEWS

  4. Slide 3/17 Periodic Review Report.. To avoid next time… • Numbers: Omission of PM data (either by virtue of inclusion of some bizarre alien numbers (quite contradictory with an inconsistent set reported on Form C) or hours reported instead of PM (which meant recalculating them!)

  5. Slide 4/17 Periodic Review Report.. To avoid next time… • Narrative: Clear justification of costs within WP2-5 (Coordination) and WP1 (Management) so I can prepare Section 6. • Omitting this info means 3-4 emails (and hours?) further correspondence w u! • - Clear indication of staff (PC) • - Clear indication of number of trips made by whom to where for what purpose (DC) • - Clear indication of major significant DCs (posters, postcards, travel reimbursements…) • NB: WP1 (Man) basically = CM travel and related expenses.. • And please don’t remove the formulas in the cells!

  6. Slide 5/17 Periodic Review Report.. To avoid next time… • Narrative: Take care that your reporting is realistic against your PM budget …a partner claimed 0.8PM (14 days) on WP1 when the justification contradicted reality (& exceeded the allocation) • Try to keep the reporting in the right place - some mixed the Press Corner (task 3.5) with CP Liaison (task 3.3) • If in doubt, please check the periodic report here (here)

  7. Slide 2/17 THE GOOD NEWS

  8. Slide 6/17 Periodic Review Report.. Main reflections at the halfway point • All key milestones and deliverables on track: strategies, training workshops, newsletters, Forum, PAC, evaluations of products/services and a doubling of 3rd party outreach in the last year, etc. • Some extra stuff not earlier foreseen: Study tour programme, two Toolkits, Results Exploitation Task Force, Website upgrade, video teaser, tailor-made ads, new-look Awards, monthly teleconferencing too. • Solid collaboration with our project officer (!) …and within the team • Other tools to help us do our job are in place (PR Tracker, Events database, press corner, gadgets, media pool, contact lists..(although the outreach database needs some ‘servicing’) • We’ve benefitted from horizontal coordination but another tool we need (if not more support from POINTER) is their measure tracker to help in turn CPs

  9. Slide 2/17 THE COSTS

  10. Slide 7/17 Periodic Review Report.. Success comes with a price.. • Above average PM spending of the initially budgeted allocations is evident • Renegotiation of labour rates for three partners (ICLEI, Mobiel 21 and FGM-AMOR and possibly Eurocities) urgent to increase their PM allocations sufficient to completing the foreseen project tasks • More tasks could be considered within such increases (e.g. upgrade the CIVITAS outreach database) • Revise the legal status of Agency NL • Use this opportunity to undertake some smaller re-allocations of PMs, direct costs (& 3rd party budget) between tasks(bi-monthly reporting and horizontal coordination, the training workshop series, CP liaison and continuing website management and services) • In one case reallocate some direct costs to personnel costs (FGM-AMOR)

  11. Slide 2/17 THE AMENDMENT

  12. Slide 8/17 Contract Amendment…Next Steps • Complete the periodic review (June 14th) • Revise the DoW for presentation to the EC in mid-July • Specify the broad suggestions made on the previous slide (coming next…)

  13. Slide 9/17 Spending – Key indicators at the halfway point • A: Red percentages/arrows/text: Overspending • A:Green percentages, Green Arrows: Underspending

  14. Slide 10/17 Spending – Key indicators at the halfway point • A: Red percentages/arrows/text: Overspending • A:Green percentages, Green Arrows: Underspending • B: Green numbers: Room to renegotiate labour rate, increase PMs for grey partners

  15. Slide 11/17 Spending – Key indicators at the halfway point • A: Red percentages/arrows/text: Overspending ∎ Red circles, reallocate PMs? • A:Green percentages, Green Arrows: Underspending ∎ Black circles, PMs solved • B: Green numbers: Room to renegotiate labour rate, increase PMs for grey partners

  16. Slide 12/17 • Handy reserve in case of proj. extension? Spending – Key indicators at the halfway point • A: Red percentages/arrows/text: Overspending ∎ Red circles, reallocate PMs? • A:Green percentages, Green Arrows: Underspending ∎ Black circles, PMs solved • B: Green numbers: Room to renegotiate labour rate, increase PMs for grey partners

  17. Slide 13/17 Main (Coordinator’s) Financial Messages to Partners from the Review (@halfway point) • NB: DC=Direct Costs with proposed changes are in blue

  18. Slide 14/17 Main (Coordinator’s) Financial Messages to WP leaders from the Review (@halfway point) • NB: ‘Decrease’ typically means ‘shift.’

  19. Slide 16/17 Part of the evaluation of the CIVITAS website could include a user-testing session, a bit like I know you completed for other websites in the past. This was an idea I shared during the DLG after some thought it might be a good idea to see how effective the new structure is/will be. Although we don’t foresee a full evaluation of the site until July 2012 (that’s a conclusion of the last VANGUARD CM), the user testing could be done shortly after website relaunch. The testing could be a great opportunity to gather video footage of folks using the site to access information. The idea was also circulated during the DLG of completing a short video teaser of ‘how to find one’s way around the CIVITAS website,’ something similar to that Toto is producing for CIVITAS as a whole. 2010 Proposed changes: WPs & Tasks (Narrative) • AGENCY NL: → MINISTERIE VAN ECONOMISCHE ZAKEN, LANDBOUW EN INNOVATIE; • PIC = 972778178

  20. Slide 17/17 2010 Proposed changes: DCs, PMs & 3rd Parties • ICLEI: WP 1-4 own PM increases definedin 22/11  + many shifts of PMs and DCs between WP4 tasks for partners • EUROCITIES: DC shifts btw WPs too

  21. Slide 15/17 ‘Contradictions’ w Late 2010 Proposals Action Items • ICLEI suggested rate (22/11) was €3907, M21: €4388 • And those couple of question marks above.. THE OUTLOOK • ICLEI, M21 and FGM-AMOR confirm new labour rates (and Eurocities?). Deadline: June 14th latest • Are Partners and WP leaders‘ proposed Task PM and DC re-allocations of late 2010/early 2011 still valid? • Editing work on DoW starts 15th June, will submit 1 month later w grant preparation forms (?)

  22. Thank You Jerome Simpson and Slavica Stavrik Tel: +36 26 504 039 Tel: +36 26 504 000 E-mail: JSimpson@rec.org and SStavrik@rec.org

More Related