A new update to our successful column… seeking an answer to the most frequently asked and most important questions for a Europlanner!
Today’s question is simple: how to evaluate European projects?
There is no need to emphasize its relevance, neither for newbies who approach it with some fear, nor for experts who have repeatedly experienced the thrill of leaving their proposal in the hands of evaluators!
The answer can be as varied and multifaceted as the types of projects, selection criteria , and viewpoints of those who will read your bid. But there are certain elements that need to be kept in mind in all cases. Let’s analyze together which ones!
How are European projects evaluated? How can I get a rough idea of the quality of my proposal?
This topic is covered in two special sections of our handbook, devoted respectively to presenting a European project and structuring the logic of a project intervention. In these sections we offer reflections and insights on various key-points and practical advice.
A project that has a good chance of success is first and foremost a well-structured project that answers this set of questions well and is fully consistent with the call for proposals. If from your re-reading of the proposal you notice some possible forcing, it is likely that an external evaluator will detect them more clearly! Have a trusted person, possibly with a critical sense and some experience, reread the call and your proposal: he or she will almost certainly notice aspects you have not thought of and will contribute to its improvement. If you can, repeat the process several times and with different people!
Another aspect mentioned in the same section of the Guide concerns monitoring and evaluation criteria, which are internationally recognized standard dimensions of good project formulation: in addition to being covered extensively in the reference guide on Project Cycle Management and the Logical Framework, you can find further discussion of them here. These dimensions are certainly kept in mind by evaluators in any field. Obviously the “European added value” represents a typical element of our projects, the transnationality factor of which is to be taken into account especially in calls for direct management or territorial cooperation.
Other implicit but fundamental aspects are definitely:
- The perfect alignment between proposal and the intentions of the call for proposals (expected objectives, beneficiaries involved, etc.) and-even more so-between proposal and evaluation criteria, which are usually made explicit in the call itself. In this regard, it is appropriate:
- pay extreme attention to the precise wording of the evaluation criteria, to respond to you directly and to make sure that your offer is “an offer that cannot be refused” (if you pass us the quote)
- develop a project in the light of developments in the broader context in which it is implemented, remembering that a call for proposals always aims, implicitly, at the realization of programmatic objectives of the awarding body.
- The strength of the partnership: evaluators are reassured by proposing organizations that are competent in their field and have been able to formulate a realistic proposal in terms of objectives, time and means.
- Theoriginality, innovativeness and “unique” value of the proposal. Of course, your proposal does not have to be a Nobel Prize-winning work–otherwise there would be very few European projects submitted and implemented each year! But it is undeniable that each awarding entity would favor technically sound proposals that propose something new and compelling, capable of broad impact (an aspect also implicit in the aforementioned “European added value”). For this reason, it is appropriate to develop a project in light of other similar or otherwise relevant experiences already implemented in the territory or in other European countries.
- Clarity of message andeffectiveness of exposition. This is a very important and only seemingly obvious dimension, which further justifies what was suggested above regarding the usefulness of many re-readings of the text before submission of the proposal. A useful document in this regard is provided directly by the European Commission in all official languages (including, for example,English), “Writing Clear. In addition to form, it is important to use language in a concise manner that is appropriate to capture the reader’s attention, especially in the case of calls for proposals where electronic submission requires filling out relatively anonymous-looking forms (or simple “fields” in a browser).
Nothing simple, nothing obvious … but a challenge that we can all take up successfully to achieve a positive evaluation of our European project.
If you have any other suggestions on this issue, please feel free to write to us on our social channels!
