Information Day Erasmus+ Capacity Building in Higher Education How to prepare a competitive project proposal? Information Day Anne Spangemacher Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency Almaty, Kazakhstan 17 October 2016

I. Selection results – 2106 Call for proposals OUTLINES I. Selection results – 2106 Call for proposals II. Preparing the application based on the requirements of the call III. Selection process IV. Application form and requirements Erasmus+

Selection results – 2106 Call for proposals Part I Selection results – 2106 Call for proposals Erasmus+

Selection 2016 – Overall Results Stage 1 Western Balkans 2 Eastern Partner-ship 3 South Med 4 Russia 6 Asia 7 Central Asia 8 Latin America 9 Iran, Iraq, Yemen 10 South Africa 11 ACP Total* Reception 109 238 169 78 101 14 53 736 Eligible 93 219 146 77 68 72 13 42 653 Sent to Consultation 37 64 80 35 57 49 31 5 19 287 Selected for funding 18 24 36 16 4 147 (compared to 2015) (15) +20% (23) +4% (40) -10% (13) +23% (27) +96% -17% (19) -26% (2) +100% (4) +25% (0) - (140) +5% Success rate in 2016 16,5% 10% 21% 20,5% 68% 19% 18% 50% 36% 17% 20% Grant Agreement Consultation Evaluation Committee Award Decision Notification & Publication of results 21/05 – 20/06 14/07 22/07-25/07 29/07 – 1/08 15/10 – 31/12 * Figures cannot be added as cross-regional applications are counted in one or two regions Erasmus+

Key messages for 2017 Keep on intensifying efforts to encourage the cooperation with Asian countries Pay particular attention to the eligibility criteria, mainly minimum number of nationally recognised HEIs in consortia Encourage the diversification of projects in terms of overall and specific objectives, activities, target groups and consortium composition. Revision of national and regional priorities will start early in 2017 (applicable for the 2018 Call for proposals)

Preparing the application based on the requirements of the call Part II Preparing the application based on the requirements of the call Education and Culture Erasmus+

Common requirements for all Erasmus+ International dimension – Centralised Actions Submission on-line to EACEA eForm & Annexes Criteria Eligibility Criteria Exclusion Criteria Selection Criteria Award Criteria Erasmus+ Education and Culture 7 7

Eligibility criteria Most eligibility criteria are integrated in the e-form (see E+ Programme Guide – CBHE action) Criteria double checked by the Agency: Formal submission requirements Grant size (and duration) Applicant, Partners and Partnership requirements (number of HEIs, status of the grant applicant & partners, etc.) It does not matter how well the project has been designed if it does not fulfil the eligibility criteria: this will lead to the automatic rejection of the proposal Education and Culture Erasmus+ 8 8

What is assessed? Award Criteria (30 points) Relevance Design + Implementation Quality of Team + Cooperation arrangements (20 points) Impact and Sustainability Proposals must score at least 60 points in total and - out of these points – at least 15 points for "Relevance"

Award Criteria: 1. Relevance (30 points) DEFINITION The project contributes to the achievement of the policy objectives of the participating partners It is based on and addresses real needs & problems of the target groups CONTENT How clearly the project addresses the Programme objectives and priorities (thematic, geographical priorities: National / Regional) Needs analysis and presentation of specific problems addressed Definition of target groups What is innovative or complementary to other initiatives How the project was prepared The national/regional priorities are addressed. Key problems and needs of the specific Partner Country/ies and of the potential stakeholders are identified. The objectives are realistic and relevant for the reform strategies of higher education in the Partner Countries The real needs & problems of the clearly defined target groups are addressed; relevant stakeholders are included The project describes how the project will contribute to solving the identified problems + innovative character. It explains how the project proposal was prepared. The description of the problem/need analysis of the partner country/ies and partner institutions should: demonstrate the existence of the problems (provide fact & figures to describe the situation) justify the project The project strategy should establish a link with the programme priorities and with policies at national and/or regional level Exchange between partners is necessary since this early stage of project identification

Award Criteria: 2. Quality of Design and Implementation (30 points) DEFINITION The activities proposed are appropriate to achieve the specific and wider objectives It uses the most appropriate methodology It demonstrates a logical and sound planning capacity CONTENT Description of the project as a whole, including: specific objectives activities, expected outcomes, wider and specific objectives academic content and pedagogical approach involvement of academics, students and stakeholders at large quality control processes Description of the project as a whole, including: academic / training content and the pedagogical approach; appropriate methodology, involvement of stakeholders in general, the link between wider and specific objectives and between expected outcomes and activities quality control processes (including indicators and benchmarks) foreseen and the monitoring measures that will be implemented – link to LFM management of the project, roles and responsibilities allocated to each partner, decision-making process and implementation structure cost-effectiveness; suitable allocation of resources; sound planning challenges/risks of the project are clearly identified and mitigating actions properly addressed Describe clearly the objectives and their feasibility in the planned time Indicate the working methodologies and processes to be used: anticipated quality control, monitoring and management of the project Make sure that the information in this section is consistent with the project Logical Framework Matrix Provide information on the contribution of each partner (balanced distrubution of tasks)

Award Criteria: 3. Quality Team and Cooperation (20 points) DEFINITION The partnership includes all the skills, recognised expertise and competences required Suitable distribution of tasks Sound communication and coordination CONTENT Presentation of the partners competences and roles in the project Description of any complementary skills, expertise and competences directly relating to the planned project activities ensure regional dimension Planned measures to ensure effective communication The partnership includes all the skills, recognised expertise and competences required to address the needs of the PC Higher Education Institutions or systems and to achieve the project objectives Each partner should demonstrate how their experience and their role is relevant in the planned project activities (stressing the complementarity of skills and competencies) The partnership ensures a regional dimension and diversity and a balanced distribution of tasks – No need for huge consortia: Associated Partners are accepted Measures to ensure effective communication among the partners are described Demonstrate the ability of the partnership to address the problems/needs identified and to deliver the expected outcomes Appropriate and diverse range of non-academic partners Applications that involve higher education institutions which have not yet benefited from the Tempus programme will be positively marked Organisations from Partner Countries are satisfactorily involved

Award Criteria: 4. Impact and Sustainability (20 points) DEFINITION Information/outcomes of the project are made available to groups not directly involved (multiplier effect) Optimal use of the results during & beyond the project lifetime Expected impact will be substantial and sustainable in the long term (financial, institutional and policy level) CONTENT Expected impact at different levels Dissemination strategy: outputs to be disseminated, target groups, dissemination tools & activities Measures planned to ensure the sustainability of project outcomes and outputs at three levels: financial, institutional and political Evidence of impact on HE at institutional / national level in PCs Involve the relevant persons (decision maker at national and institutional level, students organisations, professional organisations, private sector, etc.) Clearly identify target groups Plan internal (within PC institutions) & external (in the PC) dissemination Dissemination activities should start early and planning should be progressive and consistent COMMON WEAK POINTS IN IMPACT AND SUSTAINABILITY: Late start of diss&sust related activities Lack of involvement of stakeholders Limited variety of tools for dissemination (not only website!) or unconvincing relevance of dissemination activities (study visit to EU, etc.) Limited scope of sustainability related activities : sufficient number of staff should be involved in training and capacity building//official validation or recognition of project results Substantial impact on the capacities of participating organisations (notably HEIs) Multiplier effects outside the participating organisations at local / regional / national or international level Clear and efficient dissemination plan during and beyond the project lifetime Real sustainability of the proposed activities and outputs after the project lifetime, in particular through attracting co-funding or other forms of support Mainstreaming and effective use/implementation of the project results The project should consider to: develop a “visual” identity of the project clearly identify target groups plan internal (within PC institutions) & external (in the PC) dissemination use a wide range of dissemination tools advertise the first results / products consult and involve the relevant stakeholders demonstrate arrangements for recognition / accreditation of new courses evaluate and describe what will happen after the end of the project

Part III Selection process Education and Culture Erasmus+

Selection process - Steps Project Proposal EACEA Eligibility check Assessment by Independent experts Ranking on QUALITY based on award criteria EACEA Consultation: EU Delegations, PC authorities, NEOs Evaluation Committee EACEA, DGs, EEAS Final ranking list EACEA Grant Award Decision

Award Decision EACEA takes decision based on: Evaluation Committee's recommendation taking into account: ranking list on quality established by external experts the results from the consultation process the budget available for each region the need to achieve a geographical balance within a region sufficient coverage of the priorities

Application form and requirements Part IV Application form and requirements Education and Culture Erasmus+

Application form When? How? Where? One deadline - One-phase submission - on-line to EACEA Application form = unique reference information for the submission deadline. What? Specific application form: eForm: project data – parts A, B, C + compulsory annexes: Detailed project description (Word doc) – parts D, E, F, G, H, I, J Budget tables (Excel doc) Declaration of Honour+ Mandates (in one single PDF doc)

eForm - contents Part A: Identification of the applicant and other organisations participating in the project (administrative information) A.1. Organisation A.2 Person responsible for the management of the application (contact person) A.3 Person authorised to represent the organisation in legally binding agreements (legal representative) Part B: Description of the project (general information) B.1 Summary of the project B.2 Priorities of the E+ Programme B.3 Dates and languages Part C: Specific information related to CBHE projects C.1 Aims and objectives addressed C.2 Specific objectives of the project as indicated in the Logical Framework Matrix C.3 Project themes and priorities addressed by the application C.4 Partner countries and regions involved in the project C.5 Project history C.6 Special Mobility Strand C.7 Grant requested

eForm compulsory ATTACHMENTS - 1 1. Detailed description of the project (MS Word document)   D - Quality of the project team and the cooperation arrangements E - Project characteristics and relevance F - Quality of the project design and implementation G - Impact, dissemination and exploitation, sustainability Logical Framework Matrix Workplan H - Work packages I – Special Mobility Strand (where applicable) J - Other EU Grants

eForm compulsory ATTACHMENTS - 2 2. Detailed Budget (Excel tables)   Overview Staff costs Travel Costs and Costs of Stay Equipment Costs Sub-contracting Costs Special Mobility Strand - Students Special Mobility Strand - Staff Co-financing Breakdown and project funding (automatically fully filled in) Indicative rates (informative)

eForm compulsory ATTACHMENTS - 2

eForm compulsory ATTACHMENTS - 3 3. Declaration of Honours + Mandates (PDF)   Declaration of Honours – only from the Applicant organisation Mandates – from all partners (except for P1 – Applicant) - not required for Associated Partners (if applicable) - must be scanned and attached in one single document, with Mandates keeping the order as in List of Partners (P1-Pn)

Successful vs. good proposals How should I start? Drafting a good proposal When can I start? Education and Culture 24 24

Erasmus+ Proposal A successful proposal demonstrates that the combination of all its elements will produce concrete and sustainable results for the benefit of all the parties concerned. Education and Culture 25 25

Necessary condition but… not sufficient ! A good proposal is a proposal that Has been prepared and agreed jointly by the partnership. Has received the full commitment and support of the participating institutions. Is ready to start immediately after the selection decision. All proposals start from individual initiatives. Good proposals are always the result of a joint institutional commitment. Education and Culture 26 26

You have a "broad knowledge" of Erasmus+ What/who is it for? How does it work? What activities does it support and how? Who could help you understand it better? You have a concrete idea for an international cooperation. project Does it fit the programme' s objectives, priorities, requirements, intervention modalities, etc.? Does it address your institution (/sector /country) needs? Your idea is supported by your institution You have discussed it with the relevant authorities You will be supported for the proposal preparation and, if successful, the project implementation You can set up (/be part of) an international partnership for carrying out the project Education and Culture 27 27

International partners Start locally In your institution (other colleagues, services, departments, authorities, etc.) Among local stakeholders (other universities, education providers, employers, local / regional / national authorities, NEOs in Partner Countries etc.) International partners Colleagues / Organisations you (/your partners) have worked with in the past Partners are not individuals, they are organisations Each partner must Bring a concrete added value to the project Gain a concrete added value from the project Cooperation is based on trust, confidence AND on formalized agreements Education and Culture 28 28

Choose the language common/comfortable to all project partners Broad knowledge of Erasmus+ is not sufficient anymore You must become a "master" in the relevant Erasmus+ Action (objectives, priorities, requirements, criteria, etc.) Most probably, you will need to adapt your idea to the Action requirements. Drafting the proposal is a shared exercise It reflects the partners shared responsibilities at project implementation stage It requires regular revisions/rewriting in order to ensure Consistency and coherence Comprehensiveness Fulfilment of all the E+ Action requirements Choose the language common/comfortable to all project partners Have your final Draft proofread by a colleague not involved in the proposal Education and Culture 29 29

COHERENT in its entirety; avoid contradictions; avoid "patchwork" SIMPLE: better a few well-chosen words than long/vague explanations CONCRETE: use examples, justify your statements, bring proofs CLEAR: Follow the questions and answer them in the right order EXPLICIT: do not take anything for granted; don't assume: experts cannot read your mind; avoid abbreviations or explain them RIGOROUS: the application is the basis on which your project will be implemented; it is also the cornerstone of your partnership commitment FOCUSED: stick to what is asked COMPLETE: ensure (twice!) you have followed all the instructions and that the proposal fulfils all the mandatory requirements. Education and Culture 30 30

When to start? Now! Propose / Discuss potential cooperation projects within your institution (e.g., CBHE, with or without mobility Special Mobility Strand) If a mobility action is in view, What type of student mobility (level of study, duration, thematic area, type of activities, etc.) or staff mobility? What added value can you offer to incoming students / staff? Does your university fulfil the principles of the Erasmus Charter ? On what criteria will you select your EU mobility partners? Education and Culture 31 31

Respect the Call requirements & criteria Be clear, well-structured, concise, to the point (see guiding questions in the Application Form) Manageable partnership Cost-effective 32 32

CONCLUSIONS A good proposal is (much) more than a successful proposal. Nobody else knows your institution/country needs better than you. Have everybody on board as early as possible. Good luck !! Education and Culture 33 33

Questions & Answers Education and Culture 34 34