Welcome and
Introduction
Velkomin!
Transnational Cooperation Activity (TCA) that centres on knowledge-sharing
and capacity-building, in participating countries, enabling the sharing or
pooling of expertise in future years and actions.
 2014: Three countries develop and pilot the “Model for Expert Training”
 2015: Materials updated and pilot extended to additional countries
KA1 joint training session involving
internal (NA) and external experts
representing different fields:
KA2 joint training [and assessment] session
involving internal (NA) and external experts
representing different fields:
Reykjavik, March 2015
Stockholm, April 2015
Before we begin…
Who are
we?
Who are
you?
Note: Active Participation
is Required and Rewarded
The Erasmus+
Programme
Quiz Time
Which of these is closest to
the Programme Budget
for Erasmus+?
1
€ 5 Billion
€ 15 Billion
€ 50 Billion
The answer is €15 Billion
Erasmus+ budget:
€14.774 billion
1
What are the names of the
7 funding programmes that
were brought together
under Erasmus+?
Name as many as you can!
2
brings together
7 existing
programmes in
the fields of
education,
training and
youth under a
single heading
2
How many Key Actions are
there in the Erasmus+
Programme?
What is your best guess?
3
KEY ACTION 1: Learning
Mobility of Individuals
KEY ACTION 2: Cooperation
for Innovation and the
Exchange of Good Practices
KEY ACTION 3: Support for
Policy Reform
3
What are the 4 fields of
“education and training”
covered by the
Erasmus+ Programme?
Old names and new names
are accepted?
4
4
Focus on FIELDS (previously sectors)… namely:
- ADULT EDUCATION (AE) aka Grundtvig
- HIGHER EDUCATION (HE) aka Erasmus
- SCHOOL EDUCATION (SE) aka Comenius
- VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING (VET) aka Leonardo
… in addition to YOUTH and SPORT
What is ECVET?
Short description, or
explanation of the acronym?
5
ECVET is a system for the
transfer, recognition
and accumulation of the
learning outcomes
achieved by an
individual with a view to
achieving a qualification.
5
What is eTwinning?
Short description
or explanation?
6
eTwinning operates in 26 languages and
promotes school collaboration through the
use of ICT.
6
eTwinning offers a platform for staff in
schools to communicate, collaborate, share
and develop (including project development).
What is EPALE?
Short description, or
explanation of the acronym?
7
7
EPALE is a multilingual community, and
platform, for teachers, trainers, researchers,
policy makers and others with a professional
role in adult learning.
EPALE targets improved
quality in adult learning
provision in Europe.
Which of the four fields of
education and training finances
Individual Mobility for
students or learners?
[think back to the 4 fields that
we mentioned earlier]
8
8
KEY ACTION 1: Learning
Mobility of Individuals
STUDENT MOBILITY: for students/learners from HE and VET programmes
STAFF MOBILITY:
for teachers, trainers, school leaders
and youth workers: from all fields
MASTERS STUDENTS: joint masters and loan guarantee mechanism
YOUTH MOBILITY:
European Voluntary Service, youth exchanges
INTERNATIONAL
CREDIT MOBILITY:
Student and staff mobility between Programme
Countries and Partner Countries
Which field of education and
training has the highest target
for (non-Staff) Mobility
under Erasmus+?
[think back to the 4 fields that
we mentioned earlier]
9
Targeted Cooperation
[partnerships/alliances]
Targeted Mobilities
25 Thousand
Overall Budget
> 4 Million
€ 14.774 Billion
Targeted HE Mobilities
Targeted VET Mobilities
2 Million Students
Targeted Staff Mobilities
650 Thousand Students
[all sectors and actions]
800 Thousand Staff
9
Which of the 4 fields support
mobility that is led by a
National Mobility Consortium?
[think back to the 4 fields that
we mentioned earlier]
10
Individual School (sending) or
National SE Consortia (led by
authority or school coord.
body and involving a
minimum of 2 schools)


Individual AE Organisation
(sending) or National AE
Consortia (minimum of 3 AE
organisations)
Individual HEI or National HE
Consortia (minimum of 3
including 2 HEIs)
SE
HE
AE
VET
10


VET Partnership (sending and
receiving) or National VET
Consortia (minimum of 3 VET
organisations)
What are the 3 Award Criteria that
are used to assess mobility
applications under Erasmus+?
[name as many as you can]
11
KEY ACTION 1: Assessment Criteria
for Individual Mobility
RELEVANCE OF THE PROJECT
QUALITY OF PROJECT DESIGN and IMPLEMENTATION
IMPACT and DISSEMINATION
11
Which is the minimum Score
that must be achieved for an
application be considered for
mobility funding under KA1?
[we need the total score]
12
Actually, there are two answers
[International Credit Mobility has a higher threshold]
but the one you need to know is:
60 points
12
Policy
Insight
Policies, Frameworks and Priorities
Europe 2020
ET 2020
Rethinking Education
…a strategy for smarter, more
sustainable and more
inclusive growth
…a new strategic framework
for European cooperation in
education and training
…a Commission Communication
that confirms education and
training as a vehicle for growth
2020 TARGET  3% investment in
Research and Development
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 
Making Lifelong Learning and
Mobility a Reality
PRIORITY  promoting
Excellence in VET
2020 TARGET  75% Employment
among 20-64 year olds
2020 TARGET  Reduction of Early
School Leaving
to < 10%
2020 TARGET  40% completion of
Tertiary Education (30-34 yr olds)
2020 TARGET  20 million fewer
people at risk of Poverty
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 
Improving Quality and Efficiency
in Education and Training
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 
Promoting Equity, Social
Cohesion and Active Citizenship
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 
Enhancing Creativity and
Innovation (including
Entrepreneurship) at all levels of
Education and Training
PRIORITY  Improving Student
Performance (e.g. high risk groups)
PRIORITY  strengthening
Transversal Skills
PRIORITY  reducing the number
of Low Skilled Adults
PRIORITY  increased use of ICT in
learning and access to OER
PRIORITY  strengthening the
profile of Teaching Professions
Erasmus+ : A Policy Response
Erasmus+
Erasmus+
Erasmus+
…a single programme for
education, training, youth and
sport that aims to contribute to
the achievement of:
…a single programme for
education, training, youth and
sport that includes areas for
special attention:
…a single programme for
education, training, youth and
sport with bespoke development
and mobility targets:
EUROPE 2020 OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS
RECOGNITION AND VALIDATION OF
SKILLS AND QUALIFICATIONS
TARGET  > 4 MILLION MOBILITIES
ET2020 OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS
DISSEMINATION AND EXPLOITATION
OF PROJECT RESULTS
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN PARTNER
(NON-PROGRAMME) COUNTRIES
OPEN ACCESS FOR EDUCATION
MATERIALS, DOCUMENTS AND MEDIA
OBJECTIVES OF RENEWED
FRAMEWORK FOR YOUTH
STRONG INTERNATIONAL DIMENSION
(PARTNER COUNTRY COOPERATION)
OBJECTIVES FOR DEVELOPING A
EUROPEAN DIMENSION IN SPORT
MULTILINGUALISM
PROMOTION OF EUROPEAN VALUES IN
LINE WITH ARTICLE 2 OF TREATY ON EU
EQUITY, INCLUSION AND SAFETY
DURING PROGRAMME LIFETIME
TARGET  2 MILLION MOBILITIES
INVOLVING HE STUDENTS
TARGET  650 THOUSAND MOBILITIES
INVOLVING VET STUDENTS
TARGET  800 THOUSAND MOBILITIES
INVOLVING STAFF FROM AE-HE-SE-VET
TARGET  25 THOUSAND
PARTNERSHIPS AND ALLIANCES
Briefing Sheet: Policy Documents and Frameworks
Scoring
Overview
Individual Assessment: Scoring Bands
Scoring Bands
VERY GOOD
GOOD
FAIR
WEAK
…application addresses all
relevant aspects of the
criterion in question
convincingly and
successfully; the answer
provides all the information
and evidence needed and
there are no concerns or
areas of weakness.
…application addresses
the criterion well,
although some small
improvements could be
made; the answer gives
clear information on all,
or nearly all, of the
evidence needed.
…application broadly
addresses the criterion,
but there are some
weaknesses; the answer
gives some relevant
information, but there are
several areas where detail
is lacking or the
information is unclear.
…application fails to
address the criterion or
cannot be judged due to
missing or incomplete
information; the answer
does not address the
question asked, or gives
very little relevant
information.
40 POINTS
34 - 40
28 - 33
20 – 27
30 POINTS
26 - 30
21 - 25
15 - 20
Scoring
Ceiling

20 POINTS
17 – 20
14 - 16
10 - 13
0 - 19
[fails threshold]
0 -14
[fails threshold]
0-9
[fails threshold]
Practice
makes Perfect
Mock Assessment Results
Relevance: Average 21 (out of 30)
28
25
25
25
24
26
25
25
22
24
20
20
18
17
15
20
20
22
20
22
16
15
17
15
Mock Assessment Results
Quality of Project Design: Average 19 (out of 40)
33
28
27
25
23
22
22
23
20
19
17
20
18
16
15 15
11
20
18
15
14
10
10
8
Mock Assessment Results
Impact and Dissemination: Average 15 (out of 30)
23
20
21
20
18
19
18
16
17
15
14
12
15
14
12
17
15
15
11
5
10
17
15
10
Mock Assessment Results
Total Score: Average 55 (out of 100)
80
73
71
67
64
60
63
62
60
55
58
54
59
60
51
52
45 46
40
36
52
52
33
31
LIGHT DINNER
Online Expert
Evaluation Tool
(OEET)
Processes
and People
Overview of Core Assessment and Selection Steps
Advance Circulation of
Briefing Materials
Joint Expert Briefing
(Reykjavik)
Local Expert Briefings
(different countries)
Quality Assurance
by NA Staff
Scores and Comments
added to OEET
Assessment of
“Eligible” Applications
by Experts
Ranking List Created
Decision by Selection
Committee
Contracts Issued to
Successful Applicants
Overview of NA Activities in Assessment and Selection
Recruit, Select and
Contract (or nominate)
Experts
Provide Expert Briefings
and Briefing Materials
Confirm “Eligible
Applications” that
require assessment
Quality Assurance
Expert Assessments
(5Cs, 6Cs)
Manage and Support
Experts during
Assessment
Ensure no “Conflict of
Interest” among
selected Experts
Create Ranking
List
Host Selection
Committee
Contract Successful
Applicants
Overview of Expert Assessment Activities
Funding requests ≤ €60,000
(irrespective of key action)
Funding requests > €60,000
(irrespective of key action)
Practice
makes Perfect
Onsite Assessment: Group Activity
KA1-VET
Application
Read the Relevant
Sections
• Individually
• 20 mins.
Group(s):
Relevance
Group(s):
Project Design
Discuss
• In Groups (A, B, C)
• 45 mins.
75
Group(s):
Impact and
Dissemination
Comment and
Score
• Rapporteur & Flipchart
• 10 mins.
COFFEE
Onsite Assessment: Group Reporting
Group(s):
Relevance
Group B:
Project Design
Group(s):
Impact and
Dissemination
15
15
15
Consistent
scores and
comments?
Consistent
scores and
comments?
Consistent
scores and
comments?
Onsite Assessment: Group Feedback
1. Did all group members
agree on a single set of
comments and scores?
2. Were all elements of the
assessment criterion able to
be covered?
3. Was it easy to remain
within the scoring bands?
4. What was the most
difficult aspect to assess?
Creating
Comments
Individual Assessment: Assessment Form
Add comments for
each assessment
criterion
Add overall
comments
(highlighting
strengths and
weaknesses)
Add scores for each
assessment criterion
(refer to scoring
bands and remember
thresholds!)
Remember different
maximum scores exist
for different criteria
(these change for HE)
Total is automatically
calculated in OEET
Add comments
specifically for use
by the NA
Confirm whether
reductions are
proposed to the
original grant
Assessment Overview: Comments
 Each award criterion comprises several elements (see briefing sheets) which must be
considered and commented on;
 Experts should make a judgement on the extent to which the application meets defined
criteria with judgements based solely on the information provided in the application and
ensuring that applicants are not penalised more than once for the same issue;
 Experts should keep in mind the project type, the scale of planned activity and the amount
of funding requested and should integrate the proportionality principle into their assessment;
 Comments should be provided in text format (not bullet points) and should respect the 5 Cs :
Coherent: easy
to understand
even for a reader
that has not read
the application
Comprehensive:
covering each of
the award
criteria and
incorporating
most, if not all,
of the composite
elements
Consistent:
easily aligned
with the scores
that have been
awarded for
each criterion
and within the
predefined
scoring bands
Courteous:
polite and
respectful (note
that comments
are used to
provide feedback
to applicants)
Concise: whilst
there will always
be exceptions,
comments
should be of a
standard size, as
determined by
NA staff
Activity: Rate These Comments
WEAK?
FAIR?
GOOD?
VERY
GOOD?
The project has some merit, in terms of
providing mobility opportunities for the
target group and the target sector, yet
greater argument is needed in a number
of areas of the application [a]
The project wants to promote traditional
apple picking skills. Apple picking as a form
of mobility is not relevant for the
programme, for me the project should not
be funded [b]
Whilst there are arguments given as
regards the benefits that “apple picking”
and related activities will provide to the
targeted agriculture students, there is
insufficient data given in the application in
terms of the level and extent of learning
that will be targeted for delivery [c]
Apple Picking! This project is a joke: it
cannot be serious that somebody would ask
for money for such an activity [d]
Activity: Accept or Reject These Comments
Personal
Experience is
Not Good
First Person is
Not Good
Constructive is
Good
Positive is
Good?
Arguments for the use of Facebook, and other social media platforms, should be better
described in terms of the added-value that they bring to the project.
The use of Facebook, and other social media platforms, is relevant to the broader
promotional strategy of the project; the rationale for its use is both clear and convincing.
I do not see the value of using Facebook in the project, for me the rationale is not clear.
In my experience, Facebook can be a positive addition when targeting promotional activity
at younger learners.
Activity: Create Comments
Less
Positive
Right Side
of Room
Positive
Write Comments
•
•
•
•
Left Side
of Room
Exchange and Adapt Comments
Work Individually or in Pairs
Write 3-5 Comments
10 minutes allowed
Consider “high quality” definition
• Work Individually or in (same) Pairs
• Flip Comments (negative/positive)
• 10 minutes allowed
20
2
A high quality FRUIT BASKET should:
• Contain a good balance of fruits
and berries;
• Be presentable and able to be
used in a variety of events and
occasions;
• Include a variety of colours and
shapes.
Activity: Group Feedback
1. Was it easier to
prepare POSITIVE or
LESS POSITIVE
comments?
2. Was it easier once
you had a starting
point (i.e. to FLIP
the comments)?
3. What was the most
difficult aspect of this
exercise?
Briefing Sheet: KA1 Assessment Comments
Budget
Assessment
Overview of KA1 Budget Assessment
o
For KA1 Individual Mobility applications, the majority of the budget headings are
automatically calculated (within the application form) using unit costs;
o
Exceptions are special needs costs and exceptional costs (financial guarantees –
where requested by the NA; participation of learners with fewer opportunities in
VET) for which the applicant is required to present a convincing explanation, of
the need for these costs, within their application;
o
Experts should additionally focus on the type, number and duration of mobility
(flows) ensuring that plans are appropriate, realistic and achievable and that
they are aligned with the capacity of the participating organisation(s);
o
Where this is not the case, experts should propose reductions and must provide
full justification of this decision in their assessment comments and in their
comments to the National Agency: this enables the National Agency to make the
required reductions to mobility flows (and budgets) prior to making an offer of
financing to the applicant.
Activity: Group Discussion
Not
Convincing
Reductions
Convincing
No
Reductions
Consider Questions and Propose Solutions
•
•
•
•
Work in small groups (5-6 persons)
Appoint Notetaker
20 minutes allowed
5 Questions on Next Slide
20
QUESTIONS
1. In what scenario(s) might you decide that mobility plans (or
mobility flows) are unrealistic or unachievable?
2. In what scenario(s) might you decide that mobility plans (or
mobility flows) are not appropriate for Erasmus+ and/or the
selected field?
3. How might you judge the capacity of an organisation or
institution as being suited (or not suited) to the targeted
mobilities?
4. Do you consider staff mobility a necessity where learner
mobility is planned?
5. What is the highest and lowest number of mobilities that
should be considered for a single organisation or institution?
Briefing Sheet: KA1 Budget Assessment
Consolidation
Consolidation Overview
 Consolidation will not be undertaken for all KA1 projects: only for those applications where 2
experts are involved (normally grant request > €60,000 but can be less);
 Consolidation will only ever involve 2 experts (if a third expert is involved, the 2 experts with
the closest scores will be asked to consolidate);
 Comments and scores are combined in a single consolidated assessment (half-scores can be
used during Consolidation only; averages are not automatically used);
 Only during Consolidation can you discuss a project with another assessor (initial
assessments remain independent and do not change);
 Lead assessors are appointed by the NA prior to consolidation being launched;
 Comments should be provided in text format, not bullet points, and should respect the 6 Cs:
Coherent, Comprehensive,
Consistent, Courteous, Concise
and…
Consolidated: comments should read as single texts
(sentences or paragraphs) and should be harmonised,
not contradictory.
Activity: Consolidating Scores
Individually
Own
Score
Pairs
Consolidated
Score
Prepare and Discuss Scores (only)
• Score Individually: 5 minutes
• Identify Partner: ensuring that holders of [A] are paired
with either [B] or [C] from the same side of the room
• Discuss and Agree on a Consolidated Score: 10 minutes
• Quick Feedback
15
Activity: Group Feedback
1. Did you arrive at a
common score and, if
so, how (discussion,
average, other)?
2. Did you review the
Scoring Bands during
your consolidation
discussion?
3. Is the consolidated
score BETTER or
WORSE for the
applicant?
Activity: Consolidating Comments
Individual
Comments
Already
Written
Consolidated
Comments
Prepare
in Pairs
Prepare One Set of Consolidated Comments
• Review Individual Comments
• Discuss Commonalities and Differences
• Agree on a Single Set of Consolidated Comments
(refer also to the consolidated score that you gave)
• Quick Feedback
20
Activity: Group Feedback
1. Did you arrive
(easily) at a common
set of comments?
2. Did you align your
comments with the
consolidated score
from the last exercise?
3. Did you find yourself
being protective of
your own comments?
Briefing Sheet: Expert Assessment and Consolidation
Questions
and Close