ida prosperi also project manager szeged, 16-17 april 2007 1 also strand b conference szeged,...

1Ida ProsperiALSO Project Manager

Szeged, 16-17 April 2007

ALSO Strand B ConferenceSzeged, Hungary16-17 April 2007

The experience of the ALSO project



Table of Contents

• WHY: performance

• WHAT: ALSO objectives, scope

• WHO: the partners

• WHEN and HOW MUCH

• HOW: the workplan, the ALSO model, the software application

• Conclusions



WHY

– Need at Programme Management level for evaluation methods and set of indicators in order to evaluate INTERREG projects impacts

– Lack of coordination between regional planners and INTERREG operators/project managers in order to better transpose into INTERREG the regional programming activities

– Necessity to develop common tools of communication and better instruments in order to diffuse the INTERREG results at regional, national and European level

– Strong necessity for training of regional planners and INTERREG operators/project managers



“Greater ownership…

Lisbon needs the Regionsas much as the Regions need

Lisbon.”

José Manuel Barroso

IDEA



Questions to be answered

• To what extent Interreg III projects can contribute to the achievements of the Lisbon and Gothenburg Strategy objectives from a regional point of view?

• Did the Interreg III projects bring their relevant territorial systems nearer to the objectives indicated in the Lisbon and Gothenburg Strategy Agenda?

WH

Y



While talking about assessment…

Performance

is a key word for both businesses and for not-for-profit

activities.

It defines the level and the capacity of an organization to

deliver the intended priorities and measures into the

verifiable results.

It covers the critical factors that enable an organization

or a project to be a high-performing.

WH

Y



ALSO:

An instrument for supporting regional operators,

decision-makers and project managers

in the efficient implementation of territorial cooperation

for the realization of Lisbon Strategy Objectives at local and regional level.

ww

w.a

lsop

roje

ct.

e u



ALSO project aims at:

• increasing the inter-regional cooperation within

the European Community in order to achieve the

Lisbon and Gothenburg Strategy Objectives.

• offering supporting tools for new projects to be

developed under the 2007-2013 programming

period.

• promoting exchanges of best practices to be

transferred from the Regional Administrations

already involved in INTERREG projects and those of

new Member States.

Ob

jecti

ves



“STRAND A” – North Europe: Regional Council of South West Finland (FI); Ita-Usima Region (FI); Klaipeda Regional Development Agency (LT); Hiiu County Council (EE)

“STRAND B” - East Europe: Marche Region (IT), Sviluppo Marche RDA (IT), Ervet - RDA (IT), A Del-Alfoldi Regioert- Organizing Public Association (HU), C.E.I. – Sub regional co-operation Initiative in Central and Eastern Europe (16 Countries), Bulgarian Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works (BL)

“STRAND C” – South and West Europe: Région Lorraine (FR), Cambridgeshire County Council (UK), Arco Latino – network of second-tier local Administrations in the Western Mediterranean region (59 members)

Scientific Partners: E.I.P.A. (NL) and ULB (BE)

WHO: Partners



WHEN and HOW MUCH

Timetable: The ALSO project lasts 24 months: June 2005 - June

2007Extension till October 2007

Total Costs and ERDF required:The ALSO project total budget is 1.376.047,79 Euros

The ERDF required is 677.303,87 Euros



WHAT – leading foresight

HOW – excellence in execution

WHO – actors and instit

utions

Designing and Delivering the Lisbon Strategy – What, Who and How

National/sub-national

EU-level

Inter-organizational

Intra-organizational

The EU will be the most competitive and

dynamic knowledge-based economy in the

world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater

social cohesion.

Governance is about people, techonology,

processes and structures for

enabling effective and efficient

strategy implementation

Source: Applied from Määttä Seppo (2005) Interpretative Horizons on Strategy and Strategic Information. Case Ministry of Finance”. (originally in Finnish). Turku School of Economics and Business Administration. PhD thesis.

STRATEGYSTRATEGY

ACTIONACTION

ALSO ALSO Project Project

PerformancPerformance e

ModelModel

HO

W



Conceptual framework: Balanced Scorecard and project assessment

PROJECT CONTENT - WHAT

PROJECT GOVERNANCE - HOW

Effectiveness

Resources

Competence and Improvement

Processes and structures

• What are the critical factors to be focused on for providing the intended outputs and impacts?

• What are the processes and the structures that have a

crucial role in delivering high-quality outputs and positive

impacts?

• What are the capacities and skills needed from the people in

•having well-functioning processes?•using resources effciently?

•delivering value-added outputs with positive impacts?

• What are the critical resources needed in delivering

high-quality outputs and positive impacts?

PROJECTAim

Objectives



Outputs/Impacts

Resources

Project Management

Balanced View on Project Value-added

PROJECTAim

Objectives

Cooperation

•Making Europe and its regions more attractive place to invest and to work•Improving knowledge and innovation for growth•More and better jobs

Critical Success Factors

•Coherence of the project consortium

Critical Success Factors Critical Success Factors


•Project management system and capacity

•Project management experience

•Internal and External Communication

•Joint Development

•Sound financial management

•Joint financing

•Joint staffing•Joint Implementation

•Sustaining the Macro-economic fundation



In-depth analysis of the selected pilot projects: objectives and procedure

• The ALSO Evaluation Model is based on a set of indicators for evaluating the INTERREG Projects impact on the achievement of the Lisbon Strategy objectives. These indicators are to be retrieved directly from the projects. The following procedure has been followed in order to find out the most useful indicators from the projects:

• screening of the collected projects in order to select the ones more directly linked to the Lisbon Strategy;

• in-depth analysis of the projects in order to sort out the necessary information to build the indicators.



Analyzing 6 pilot projects in-depth (written material, field visits)

More than 100 projects received

First screening and selection: 59 projects

Second screening and final selection: 24 projects

Analyzing other 18 (of 24) projects in- depth (written

material, survey...)

ALSO Workshop I (March 2006)

The ALSO Methodology

ALSO Workshop II (October 2006)

Dissemination & Use for 2007-2013

Process-based

Model

development and

piloting



Methodology

The eligibility criteria for Interreg III projects collection:

- direct or indirect involvement of the partner in the projects according to the relevent STRAND

- ½ of their planned duration- not below 200.000,00 Euro

More than 100 Interreg projects collected by the ALSO PPs



Methodology

Projects Screening:

- 1st Phase: 59 projects were selected since they deal directly with the general framework of Lisbon 2 (EC Communication 141 of 12 April 2005)

- 2nd Phase: 24 projects selected further to an in-depth analysis against the 24 Integreated Guidelines (endorsed by the European Council Conclusion in June 2005): Projects had to match a min. of 3 guidelines from pillars such as 1. A more attractive place to invest and work2. Knowledge and innovation for growth3. Creating more and better works4. Sound macroeconomic foundations: good quality public finances



A more attractive place to invest and

work (10-16)

Knowledge and innovation for growth (7-9)

Creating more and better

works (17-24)

Example of the first screening

Macro-economic

foundation (1-6)

Strand A

Cross- border

Strand BTrans-

national

Strand CInter-

regional

•I-Log: 8,15,16

•Smart Life: 8,11,16

•INNODEC: 8,14,15

•I-Log Hun: 8,15,16

•BRIDGES Marche: 5,8,16,23

•CAPTURE: 8,9,15

•ICN: 8,10,15•STRATINC: 8,9,15

•e-Bird (RFO: 1+4 projects): 7,8,9,15

•STIMENT (RFO: 1+ 9 projects): 7,8,9,15,23

•EMBRACE: 8,9,15

•InCluD: 8, 9,14,15

•SIMOCA: 9,20,23

•GALILEO: 8,9,15,16

•E-TEAMS: 8,9,15



24 projects selected for in-depth analysis

IIIA: Cross-border

Growth TriangleGalileo

Bridges MarcheNetworks of expertise3+3 Educational N.

IIIB: Transnational

SITMUNSmartLife

InCluDI-Log

SIMOCAEMBRACE

Seagull-DevERBI-Log in Hungary

ISA-MAP

IIIC: Interregional

StratincStiment

ICT AgentsTripel Helix

T2MTPEROU

EU.LO.GISTICE.K.C.

e-Learning EC SMEsECOW

Pilot projects



Results( outputs/ impacts )

Resources

Project Management

PROJECT

Objectives

Cooperation

• Making Europe and its regions more attractive place to invest and to work

• Improving knowledge and innovation for growth

• More and better jobs

• Coherence of the project consortium

Critical Success Factors Critical Success Factors


• Project management system and capacity

• Project management experience

• Internal and External Communication

•Joint Development

•Sound financial management

•Joint financing

•Joint staffing•Joint Implementation

Conceptual Framework for the ALSO project assessment

KEY PRINCIPLES• Lisbon Strategy based

and related• Multidimensional• Provides balanced view

on project performance

(intended and realized)• Understandable



Results

Resources

Project Management

Cooperation•Political commitment: high level on the Finnish side, low level on the other partners.•Business orientation: mainly and only through the business associations (FIN, EST). The role of associations unclear•Partner coherence & commitment: high on low level, low on high level; imbalances on equity and capacity

•Finance structure: different sources for different partners created inflexibility and bureaucracy. •Joint staffing: No joint resources•Size of the budget: overall budget too small to create interest and commitment. Budget not in balance with the content and the political/business profile and expectations.

•Management structure; roles not clear (steering group in particular), secretatiat was active. Personnel changes in some partners damaged continiuity and coherence. •Project management: leading partner ”too active” => project personalised to the Finnish partner?•Project setting: RFO (Strand C) would have been better setting for this project but was not accessible

GROWTH TRIANGLE (IIIA)The Gulf of Finland Growth Triangle (GT) aims to promote public-private co-operation, trade and economic development between Southern Finland, Estonia, City of St. Petersbourg and Leningrad area. The core principles for the GT approach are:

•complementarity•geographical cohesion

•political commitment and coordination•business orientation and commitment

•Establishing a network of regional authorities around the Gulf of Finland: This was achieved although the future of this network is not clear.•Creating the Growth Triangle strategy : The strategy was created but not approved. Thus the commitment to deliver the stratgy is unclear.•Integrating the GT strategy into the operational activities in Fin, Est and Russia: The future of the GT strategy itself is unclear.•Integrating the GT strategy into the EU’s Northern Dimension Policy: The GT strategy is mentioned in the policy papers, but the real impact is unclear.

In-depth analysis



SmartLife, IIIBPartners: UK/Cambridge, Swe/Malmö, Ger/Hamburg

Results

Resources

Project Management

Cooperation•Political commitment: Included into the joint UK-Sweden initiative on environmental construction (by the UK and Swedish PMs)•Business orientation: Mainly through training & education

•Partner coherence & commitment: limited nr of partners enables coherent cooperation in a complex subtance (though lead partner – the UK - has many sub-partners)

•Finance structure: more flexibility needed for re-allocations for unforeseen activities and priorities. Application form too static and detailed for the dynamics of the project life-cycle.•Joint financing: No, everyone has his own budget•Joint staffing: No joint staffing. Division of labor is based on WPs.•Post funding: Ideas and plans for self-financing.One funding applicatin to the UK DTI on waste mgt was nnt successful

•Management structure: steering group;

project mgt teams; WP-leaders, sub-

partnerships• Project management: desentralised to the

partners while the UK is the leading partner

SmartLife focuses on building innovations and construction training. The aim is to develop, implement and promote the concept of the Modern Method of Construction (MMC) by applying the supply chain approach

(from policy-making to construction).

•Business & Training Centres: Building concrete buildings by the MMC methodology in Malmö, Hamburg and Cambridge.•Training and Education: Providing training for intended number of participants with the aim to strenghten the revenue based financing•Policy and practice planning & research: Conducting research and performance monitoring for getting fact-based evidence on MMC e.g. by key performance indicators.

•Marketing & Communicating: Strong emphasis on promotion of new skills and MMC, opinion analyses etc., and involvement and facilitation of different focus groups (public, professionals).

Strong SME focus: 98 % of the UK based construction companies employ less than 10 persons!

•Joint development: Knowledge and information sharing on e.g. training materials and programmes.

•Contribution to local employment, SME growth, investments ??? In-depth analysis



ResultsResults

- Information system elaborated: reliable, fast, - Information system elaborated: reliable, fast,

easy, cheap easy, cheap

- Beneficiaries: 160 municipalities (theoretically)- Beneficiaries: 160 municipalities (theoretically)

- Problem of Intellectual Property Right- Problem of Intellectual Property Right

CooperationCooperation

- Good technical contribution from - Good technical contribution from

PPs (clear tasks and objectives since PPs (clear tasks and objectives since

the very beginning)the very beginning)

- High cohesion and dynamic - High cohesion and dynamic

participation thanks to LP guideparticipation thanks to LP guide

- Communication plan fulfilled: high - Communication plan fulfilled: high

interest of many municipalities interest of many municipalities

outside the consortiumoutside the consortium

Project ManagementProject Management

- No experience in European projects- No experience in European projects

- PPs project management not so good as their - PPs project management not so good as their

technical contribution technical contribution

- Bottom-up approach of project development: - Bottom-up approach of project development:

technical scientific partner conciliated the different technical scientific partner conciliated the different

needs of the PPs. needs of the PPs.

ResourcesResources

- Difficulties to finance the - Difficulties to finance the

project for some PPs who project for some PPs who

withdrew = need to withdrew = need to

change PPs change PPs

- EU reduced 50% of the - EU reduced 50% of the

budget, removing the budget, removing the

implementation phaseimplementation phase

- Complex structure for - Complex structure for

invoicing process: PPs invoicing process: PPs

not usednot used

SITMUN (IIIB)Main partners: Diputació de Barcelona; Region of Cantabria; Consortium of local informatics of Mallorca, Consell Insular of Mallorca: Universitat Autonòma de Barcelona; Universitat Illes Balears; Associação de municípios da terra quente trasmontana.The aim is to develop a centralized municipal system of territorial information managed by supra-municipal entities. This will allow the little municipalities to get System of Geographic Information tools reducing its costs.

In-depth analysis



ResultsResults

- Regions direct affected by the LS- Regions direct affected by the LS

- In alignment with IG on a - In alignment with IG on a more more

attractive place to invest and work attractive place to invest and work andand

on on knowledge and innovation for growthknowledge and innovation for growth

- One subproject resulted in a company- One subproject resulted in a company

- Willingness to develop another RFO with - Willingness to develop another RFO with

the same partnersthe same partnersCooperationCooperation

- Three years of preparation before the - Three years of preparation before the

applicationapplication

- High political involvement through the - High political involvement through the

Monitoring Committee. Monitoring Committee.

- Equally distribution of tasks and resources to - Equally distribution of tasks and resources to

all partnersall partners

- No sleeping partners- No sleeping partners

- Three thematic components with 3 - Three thematic components with 3

subprojects for each fieldsubprojects for each field

- Web-application cleverly used for both - Web-application cleverly used for both

internal and external communication internal and external communication

(average 700 visitors per month)(average 700 visitors per month) Project ManagementProject Management

- Strong political commitment (1-2 meetings a year)- Strong political commitment (1-2 meetings a year)

- Previous experience from each region on European - Previous experience from each region on European

projects and bilateral cooperation prior to the RFO projects and bilateral cooperation prior to the RFO

- One partner opted for a private consultancy for - One partner opted for a private consultancy for

project implementationproject implementation

ResourcesResources

- Major difficulties for first - Major difficulties for first

level control in one level control in one

partner regionpartner region

- Possible private funds - Possible private funds

availability exceeded 17%availability exceeded 17%

- 30% of personnel time - 30% of personnel time

allocated to financial allocated to financial

issuesissues

STIMENT (IIIC)Partners: Ovre Norrland (SE); Hame (FI); Lorraine (FR); Wielkopolska (PL) and Brescia (IT).The project aims to improve and provide new and innovative approaches to entrepreneurship. Stiment concentrates on three priority themes:

•Economic Intelligence•eLearning

•Logistics and locations

In-depth analysis



Methodology/Progress steps

• Involvement of the Project Partners in the assessment.

• Preparation of questionnaire.• Field visits. • Introduction of regional indicators.• Scoring of indicators.• Selection of best practices.• Testing of the Targetor“Cube”software application.



Criteria and Indicators

How to determine the indicators?– Analysis of existing indicators– Relevance of the indicators– Availability of the information/data

• Information from project partners• Field visits• In-depth analysis




• How to determine the indicators?– Lisbon strategy indicators– Regional indicators– Innovation indicators– Results indicators– Output indicators– Other indicators




• Lisbon Strategy Indicators– Regional competitiveness

• Indicators prepared by EUROSTAT, DG REGIO, STRINNOP, etc

– EC evaluation criteria• efficient, effective, impact, sustainable

projects



Indicators

• Results indicators– Results dimension of the ALSO Model

• Enablers Indicators– Cooperation – Project management– Resources dimensions of the ALSO

Model



Scoring Indicators

• 1st step: relevance and availability of data for the indicator– Due to irrelevance of indicator or lack of

information (NR & NA)

• 2nd step: level of impact or achievement of the indicator (0-4)



Scoring Indicators

• Due to lack of indicator for Guidelines: 2, 4, 6, 12, 22

• Quantifying the indicators– e.g. “venture capital” or “private

investment” lack of info => from amount to none-low-medium-high-very high



Scoring Formula

• NR and NA scores– Indicators scored NR are not counted in

the formula– Indicators scored NA are counted in the

formula but with a different weight than the other scores

• Show formula in the Excel Sheet



Scoring

• Dimension scores for– Project management– Cooperation– Resources

• Total score: 40% of results dimension + 20% of the sum of the other dimensions



CRITERIA and INDICATORS

• Evaluation Framework, 4-dimensions– Results dimension

• 20 indicators

– Cooperation dimension• 20 indicators

– Project management dimension• 10 indicators

– Resources dimension• 10 indicators




Results dimension1. Increased level of private investment2. Contribution to renewable energy resources3. Contribution to domestic expenditure on R&D4. Level of science and technology graduates5. Increased participation in lifelong learning6. Increased level of business expenditure on R&D7. Level of EPO high-tech patent applications8. Increased level of venture capital9. Contribution to job creation10. Impact on job-loss prevention11. Impact on establishing new companies12. Creating “innovation &entrepreneurship culture”13. Facilitating access to technology & service providers14. Contribution to the creation of new products15. Impact on number of start-ups16. Private initiative within regional cluster17. Public initiatives for networks & clusters18. International networks created19. Increased coherence of regional policies20. Increased contacts at inter-regional level




Cooperation dimension1. Percentage of partners with contacts before the project2. Percentage of partners with experience of cooperation3. Percentage of PPs previously working together 4. Number and quality of dissemination activities/outputs 5. Number of target group reached6. Number of new cooperation agreements 7. Commitment to future cooperation 8. Number of policy-makers involved 9. Number of provisions for sustainability 10. Number of provisions for qualitative communication 11. Quality of internal communication tools12. Level of commitment of all PPs13. Clear and balanced responsibilities 14. Balanced involvement of all PPs 15. Degree of exchange of experience 16. Contribution to new methods/tools 17. Improving existing methods18. N. of new policy instruments introduced 19. Acceptance of changes on regional level 20. Common approaches in regional policies




Project management dimension1. Percentage of reports submitted in due time 2. Percentage of progress reports approved instantly3. Clear management and co-ordination 4. Flexibility and problem solving ability5. Shared and effective administration 6. Percentage of partners with INTERREG experience 7. Quality of SWOT analysis 8. Quality of project evaluation9. N. of future contacts among the PPs 10. New international networks created




Resources dimension1. Effective financial and accounting procedures2. Number of seminars for financial management3. Budget spent within agreed timetable4. Absorption of the operation5. Timely submission of financial claims6. Co-financing from the regional authority 7. Participation of PPs in co-financing 8. Clearly defined resources9. Costs for PPs clearly defined10. Balanced N. of skilled staff



Shaping the Assessment Model: introducing indicators

• Project level: cooperation dimension (examples)

Coherence of the project consortium: % PPs with experience in the proposed topic for cooperation. Internal and external communication: Number and quality of dissemination activities/events/products/publications.Joint implementation: Clear and balanced distribution of tasks/responsibilities among PPs.

• Project level: project management (examples)

Project management system and capacity: % of reports submitted in due time to JTS. Project management experience: % of partners with experience from INTERREG initiative. Joint development: Quality of SWOT analysis.



Shaping the Assessment Model: introducing indicators

• Project level: resources dimension (examples)indicators

Sound financial management: % of budget spent within agreed timetable.Joint financing: Clear definition of resources to be used for carrying out common activities.Joint staffing: Balanced N. of skilled staff people in relation to activities to implement.

• Project level: RESULTSSelection of regional indicators in relation to the Lisbon Pillars:

-A more attractive place to invest and work-Knowledge & Innovation for growth

-More and better jobs-Sustainable macro-economic foundation



Selection of the best Practices

• Scoring of the indicators

• Measurement and ranking according to a technical furmula

A set of best practices (in relation both to the dimensions and for a global

score per strand)



The best practices

STRANDDIMENSION

A B C The best of 3 Strands

Cooperation 3+3 Educational Network(85)

Isamap + Seagull DevERB

(88,8)

Perou (82,5)

ISAMAP + Seagull DevERB

Project Management 3+3 Educational Network(70)

SmartLIFE(77,5)

ICT + Stiment(77,5)

SmartLIFE+ ICT +

Stiment

Resources 3+3 Educational Network

(97,5)

SmartLIFE(90)

ICT(92,5)

3+3 Educatio

nal Network

Results Galileo(78,1)

Seagull DevERB(89,1)

Stiment(100)

Stiment

Total Score(all 4 dimensions and

relative weight considered)

3+3 Educational Network

Strand A - coordinator:

SW Finland

Seagull DevERBStrand B -

coordinator: SVIM

STIMENT Strand C -

coordinator: Lorraine



ASSESSMENT - SCALES

EX-ANTE MID-TERM/EX-POST

ScoreNo evidence or only anecdotal evidence of an approach

An approach is planned

An approach is planned and the implementation is described

An approach is planned the implementation is described and the monitoring system is set.

An approach is planned the implementation is described and the monitoring system, including verifiable targets are set.

0

1

2

3

4

No results are measured

Key results are measured and show negative trends

Results show modest progress

Results show substantial progress

Excellent results are achieved and postitive comparisons to own targets are made

0

1

2

3

4

Score

Adapted from the Common Assessment Framework (CAF). EIPA, Oct. 2002.



Regional Framework Operation STIMENT

ALSO GOOD

PRACTICE



• Interreg IIIC project (the first RFO North zone project)

• Lead Partner– County Administrative Board of Västerbotten (Övre Norrland,

SE).

• Partnership with– Regional Council of Lorraine (Lorraine, FR)– Regional Council of Häme (Etelä-Suomi,FI)– Marshal Office of the Wielkopolska Voivodeship (Wielkopolskie,

PL)– Province of Brescia (Lombardia, IT)

STIMENT case

The five regions had co-operated bilaterally since the 1990’s and had already experience in European programmes (e.g. RIS+, INTERREG, EQUAL, TACIS, PHARE )

Success factor



STIMENT case

• Duration– May 2003 – December 2006 (after three years of preparation).

• Global budget: – 3,010,000€ including 1,660,000€ ERDF funding

• Application costs (in euros)

Staff costs

Administration costs

External expertise 10.000

Travel and accommodation 40.000

Meetings and events

Promotion costs

Other

Investments

TOTAL 50.000

Success factor



• Problem description (SWOT Analysis). – Structural changes after the 70’s meant the decline of the traditional economic

sectors. – A weakness of entrepreneurial tradition. – A serious lack of entrepreneurs. – Brescia is a leading entrepreneurial region.– The main need is to stimulate entrepreneurship in the four regions as well as

to identify new and innovative approaches in the case of Brescia.

STIMENT case

The Consortium agreed to focus on three thematic components.

Economic Intelligence e-Learning Logistics and Locations

Success factor



Mission of STIMENT• Overall objectives:

“Develop long-term and strategic co-operation between regions in

order to: – For them to take an active part in the process of European Integration, including the enlargement of

the EU.– Provide a multi-dimensional and stable framework for co-operation between the regions and their

regional actors.

– Enhance entrepreneurial knowledge and skills by exchanging experiences and transferring tools, methods and policies.

– Increase the international cooperation of the regions and actors in regional partnerships.– Give impetus to new innovative ideas and develop new methods and processes for programming/

implementation of Structural Funds programmes, as well as in relation to other EU and MS policies (e.g. eEurope action plan).

– Basing co-operation on strong and fully-inclusive regional partnerships.”

STIMENT case

Success factor



Three priority components to stimulate entrepreneurship:

– Economic Intelligence to develop the traditional economic sector enterprises. A rational managing of enterprises and a greater use of new technology in order to shorten costs.

– eLearning to increase the possibilities for the life long learning enterprises. Can contribute to allow people improving their knowledge and professional skill through the newest information, thanks to the instruments offered by the Information Technologies.

– Logistics and Location to create better pre-conditions for entrepreneurship. New spatial, cross-sectorial approaches related to logistics and location (e.g. better transport infrastructures).

STIMENT caseOperation of STIMENT



Subprojects

- Triple Helix

- ECOW

- ICT Agents

- PEROU

- E-Learning Education Centre for SME

- EKC

- T2MT

- SRlog

- EU.LO.GISTICS

STIMENT case

Economic Intelligence

E-learning

Logistics and Locations

Success factor

9 running operations with 57 participants involved



TRIPLE HELIX • To single out the best practises and the innovative operative methods that contribute to the

growth of the SME, through the collaboration with researchers, a better dialogue with the financial operators and a greater involvement from the public sector.

• Lead part: Province of Brescia / Project budget: 403.330 € / End date: April 2006.

PEROU• Is the Project for a European Open University. Proposes a partnership between five organisms

from the partners regions to work together to stimulate entrepreneurship using their know-how and experiences in the field of e-learning.

• Lead part: Region of Lorraine / Project Budget: 307.498 € / End date: June 2006

T2MT• The project Territory Management Methods and Tools on logistics and locations aims to

develop new management methods and tools for creating the best-preconditions possible for entrepreneurship in the concerned regions (Lorraine, Wielkopolska and Häme).

• Lead part: Region of Lorraine/ Project Budget: 280.000 € / End date: March 2006

STIMENT case

Success factor



STIMENT case

Elected representatives

from the five regionsRepresentatives from all

participating regions

Success factor



1. A strong cooperation based delivery of project on many levels, exchange of best practices and a specific organizational structure;

2. High political involvement and leadership – high potential share of private funding (17% of the global budget);

3. Three themes that influence and boost regional competitiveness (in alignment with the Lisbon objectives).

STIMENT Success Factors in a Nutshell



Towards a “Smart local/regional administration”

• An integrated approach (“cooperative identity”), including a better definition of project objectives in relation to sustainability criteria (mid and long term).

• A “real” cooperative approach among the key stakeholders in the regions.

• Form early on, to identify and approach the right partners (RDA, chambers, SME associations, academic bodies etc.)

• To define responsibilities and requirements of the partners (e.g. budgetary issues, administrative standards).

• Political commitment from the start and throughout the project implementation is necessary.

Resumé



• Opportunities for public sector through Public-Private- Partnership (PPP):– A way to offset public sector costs and functions– Some risks can be transferred to the private sector– The private sector often has sufficient capacity and instruments to successfully deliver project objectives– Carefully consider technical and administrative feasibility of PPP (“Don’t loose this experience”).

• The EU funding schemes (such as the RFO) are perhaps the only way for municipalities and regions to “really” co-operate trans-nationally and inter-regionally.

• The regional representatives/offices in Brussels are an ideal partner to support the building up of the interregional partnership, to give advise and to monitor the process (as a mediator or facilitator for instance).

ResuméTowards a “Smart local/regional

administration”

Lisbon delivered!



ALSO manual: looking for guiding principle

The Manual is being printed by the partners and

will be distributed soon.

It is available at

www.alsoproject.eu



ALSO Application

The Software



The model includes 3 levels. These are described

more in detail.

The project level is the one to operate (putting in the data)



FIRST LEVEL (LISBON STRATEGY)- OVERVIEW

This box will always be there as a reminder



SECOND LEVEL (ALSO FRAMEWORK)– OVERVIEW




THIRD LEVEL (PROJECT ASSESSMENT)– OVERVIEW




Conclusion: a new approach and a wide impact

A new approach (the ALSO Model)

towards INTERREG proposals writing, projects evaluation and results dissemination is expected by the ALSO targets, with particular reference to the framework the Lisbon and Gothenburg strategies and the new European Territorial Cooperation Objective

A wide impactDirect Beneficiaries:• The INTERREG Community: regional officials, regional planners,

project managers • The Policy Makers mainly regional and local level politicians

Indirect beneficiaries:• The civil society and the three INTERREG geographical area

communities (“STRAND A” – North Europe, “STRAND B” – East Europe and “STRAND C” South and West Europe)



Would you appreciate more information on the ALSO activities

and results, do not hesitate to contact

Marche Region and SVIM:

[email protected]+39.071.28.994.1www.alsoproject.eu

Thank-you for listening!



Q&A

ida prosperi also project manager szeged, 16-17 april 2007 1 also strand b conference szeged,...

Documents

project slide

project manager szeged

ida prosperi

project managers

regional level

regional cooperation

regional operators

regional administrations