C1 - Monitoring of the project impact on the main target audience

C1 - Monitoring of the project impact on the main target audience
Baseline assessment of awareness about sludge and codigestion issues among key stakeholders
Measurement of changes occurred and correlation with COWS
D7 - Monitoring and evaluation report about the impact of the project on the main target audience

{{#if: |

|}} Note: {{#if: |{{{1}}}

}} Upload

--A.rodeghiero 11:58, 16 July 2011 (CEST)

---

Description and methods employed (what, how, where and when)

What

This activity belongs to the group of monitoring actions. It will define the indicators and probe the project's outcomes to assess the appropriateness of the strategy devised and the effectiveness of actions implemented with respect to the project goals. During the project implementation its feedback helps keep communication focussed.

How

Monitoring and evaluation aims at tracking the changes occurred in the project target audience and ascertain whether these changes are produced by the project's communication efforts (and demonstration activities, of which Action B4 is the most important).

COWS beneficiaries deem that COWS communication actions should impact on key factors that influence decision processes of organisations that may actually implement the solution brought about by the project.

COWS partners believe that in the end the "impact factor" of COWS will be measured by the number of utilities and municipalities that will consider COWS a real option, i.e. the overall indicator of effective impact of communication action on the main target audience is the awareness about the existence of a proven solution for sludge amd OF-MSW co-digestion. A complementary factor (that COWS can partially influence) is supply-side, i.e. the rising interest of technology providers and practitioners who link their offering to COWS approach.

The baseline for monitoring will be derived from the consultations done in Actions A2 and A1 and from the outcomes of the informal work table.

Thereafter monitoring will follow two lines of action:

• direct monitoring, continuing to check the level of awareness in all occasions;
• indirect, examining expert reviews and content (documentary) analysis.

Methods employed:

• Expert reviews and content analysis. This applies to all situations in which there is a need for elicitation of data from documentation, typically documentation of target audience changes, which need interpretation of impact. Mapping and analysis will be used to highlight changes in referral to good practices and cross influences relevant to COWS (particularly about academic publications). This method applies also to the analysis of interviews carried out in Action A2.
• Media monitoring. This applies to all linear data (records of requests, distribution figures) including web metrics. It is particularly useful for tracking if COWS reaches the agenda of local authorities.
• Tracking mechanisms. It is specially dedicated to follow individual trend of changes, e.g. the log of collaboration activities during demonstration run (Action B4).

Feedback from this monitoring activities will influence COWS communication, particularly to identify most influencing actors and channels.

Where

This action will mainly take place in Viareggio, Tuscany IT.

When

22/03/13-28/04/16

Constraints and assumptions

• Constraints
  • Principal constraints are time and budget.
• Assumptions
  • No disruptive change in sectoral regulations or priorities occur.
  • There is enough interest to ensure an average reaction to communication

Beneficiary responsible for implementation

P2 - SEAAMB

Expected results

Principal results of monitoring the project impact on the main target audience are:

• information and feedback about ongoing effects of activities, early alert about misfunctionings, enabled capability to correct problems;
• knowledge of the effectiveness of the project in increasing the awareness including COWS-like solutions in waste-related policy/investment choices;
• evidence of value for money of COWS communication and demonstration actions.

These results will be summarized in the deliverable "D7 - Monitoring and evaluation report about the impact of the project on the main target audience"

Indicators of progress

• Schedule and effort variance;
  • actual vs. planned start of tasks;
  • actual vs. planned resource use (15% work overload and 5% budget variance are thresholds for triggering remediation actions)
• Performance
  • Delivery of compliant outputs:
    • useful feedback during project implementation
    • D7 - Monitoring and evaluation report about the impact of the project on the main target audience"
  • Quality of delivered outputs: completeness and appropriateness (assessed by the project management team and by users, e.g. people involved in COWS communication activities).

Torna all'indice