Interact Logo Sharing Expertise

Practical Handbook for Ongoing Evaluation

Annex 4 Laboratory Group and pilot groups

Laboratory Group on Evaluation

Representatives from several Territorial Cooperation Programmes participated in the Laboratory Group on Evaluation. They met in March and June 2009, indicating needs and providing feedback and comments.

Participants in the Laboratory Group on Evaluation

Last name First name Organisation Country Email
    Territorial Cooperation Programme    
Brodda Yvonne JTS Austria-Hungary HU
Costandache Adrian MA Ministry of Regional Development & Housing RO
Duzova Maria Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works BG
Erikkson Maria Swedish Cross-border programmes SE
Futó Adrienn MA VÁTI Kht. Territorial Cooperation Division HU
Knol Peter Paul JTS Deutschland-Nederland DE
Gintowt-Dziewałtowska Agnieszka MA Ministry of Regional Development, Poland PO
Hoyos Elena JTS Spain-France-Andorra ES;
Köhle Bernhard MA Austria-Czech AT'
Möllers Anke INTERREG IVB North West Europe FR
Nachtigall Maxi JTS Northern Periphery Programme DK
Forsling Niclas JTS Northern Periphery Programme DK
Ortis Genia JTS Slovakia-Austria AT  
Richard Tarja MA MED FR
Santarossa Luca National Contact Point, "Alpine Space" Programme IT
Schausberger Bernhard JTS Slovakia-Austria AT
Schönklee-Grasser Monika JTS Central Europe Programme AT
Serafimovska Evgenija NIPAC Office, Macedonia MK
Simion Anca MA Ministry of Regional Development and Housing RO
Snikeris Edmunds Ministry of Regional Development & Local Gov., LV LV
Szűcs Márton JTS Hungary-Croatia HU
Kotkowska Agata EC - DG REGIO, E1 Territorial Cooperation BE
Mehlbye Peter Coordinator ESPON LU
Rantahalvari Pasi EC - DG REGIO, Evaluation Unit BE

Kalnina Ieva INTERACT Viborg DK
Nichols Matt INTERACT Viborg DK
Minichberger Daniela INTERACT Vienna AT
Montan Amparo INTERACT Valencia ES
Stockhammer Katrin INTERACT Vienna AT
Sturm Polona INTERACT Viborg DK
Wikström Ulf INTERACT Turku FI
Böhme Kai Spatial Foresight GmbH LU
Fernandez Lopez Javier ECORYS Spain ES
Verheijen Jenny ECORYS Nederland BV NL
Zondag Marie-Jose ECORYS Nederland BV, developed handbook NL

Pilot groups

Alongside the meetings of the Laboratory Group, draft texts were commented on and completed by pilot groups. The pilot groups consisted of participants from the Laboratory Group on Evaluation. Both the Laboratory Group meetings and the feedback through the pilot groups have been a valuable asset in the development of this handbook.

Overview of the content of each pilot and members of the pilot group

Pilot Questions dealt with Members
1. Evaluation Plan Aim: Provide guidance to Secretariats on Evaluation Plan. Questions:
How to develop an Evaluation Plan?
What should be in an Evaluation Plan?
Adrian Costandache , Kai Böhme, Anke Möllers, Edmunds Snikeris, Maria Erikkson
2. Ensure good evaluation Aim: Provide guidance to Secretariats on developing good & useful evaluation (ToR, expert, data, reporting). Questions:
What data should be collected?
What should be in an evaluation?
How to develop Terms of Reference for an evaluation?
How to select experts?
How to link evaluation & annual report?
Bernhard Schausberger
Edmunds Snikeris
Kai Böhme
Agnieszka Gintowt-Dziewałtowska (PL)
3. Thematic evaluation Aim: Show and explain possible approaches to thematic evaluation. Q:
When to start a thematic evaluation?
Cross-programme or within own programme?
How to use thematic evaluation?
Common risks, challenges, problems?
2 test cases: 1) investment projects and 2) strengthen Danube area.
Adrian Constandache
Edmunds Snikeris
Kai Böhme
4. Link project & programme evaluation Aim: 1) Provide guidance to projects on how to evaluate, 2) show possibilities of linking project and programme evaluations, 3) Ensure a link between KEEP & evaluation. Questions:
What could JTS do to ensure and guide good project evaluation?
How to usefully link project & programme evaluation?
How can KEEP & evaluation be useful to each other?
5. Useful evaluation Aim: Provide practical tips on what a programme can do to ensure that there is an interest in the evaluation. Questions:
What added value does an evaluation have?
How to convince the stakeholders?
How to make evaluation interesting for politicians?
How to link evaluation to strategy & policy development?
Peter Paul Knol
Erwin Siweris
Kai Böhme
6. IPA CBC Aim: Overview of differences & similarities for IPA CBC programmes.
Approach: Pilot group will be asked for IPA-specific suggestions on drafts.
Anca Simion, Maria Duzova, Evgenija Serafimovska

Enter labels to add to this page:
Please wait 
Looking for a label? Just start typing.