URBACT Summer University 2013 - Labs - Human Capital - Session 4

224
-1

Published on

Materials from the URBACT Summer University Lab "Human Capital", managed by Alison Partridge

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
224
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

URBACT Summer University 2013 - Labs - Human Capital - Session 4

  1. 1. URBACT LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK Final Check
  2. 2. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 2 1. Feedback from the ULSG @ work 3 2. Checking coherence of the LAP 3. Thinking ahead about monitoring 4. Introducing the URBACT self-assessment tool 5. Explaining the “Dragons den”
  3. 3. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 3 1. Feedback from the ULSG @ work 3 2. Checking coherence of the LAP 3. Thinking ahead about monitoring 4. Introducing the URBACT self-assessment tool 5. Explaining the “Dragons den”
  4. 4. WHERE ARE WE IN PLANNING CYCLE MODEL? URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 1 4 Problems Stakeholders Evidence Results Ideas Actions Resources Check Consultation Launch Problems Stakeholders Evidence Results Ideas Actions Resources Check Consultation Launch
  5. 5. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 5 1. Feedback from the ULSG @ work 3 2. Checking coherence of the LAP 3. Thinking ahead about monitoring 4. Introducing the URBACT self-assessment tool 5. Explaining the “Dragons den”
  6. 6. COHERENCE OF LAP • WHY check? • WHEN check? • HOW to check… URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 6
  7. 7. COHERENCE OF LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 7 1. 2. Actions Problems – Needs - Opportunities 3.Results Check: Result corresponds to problem? Check: Action supports achievement of result? Check: Result contributes to solve problem/ address stakeholder needs?
  8. 8. 360 DEGREE COHERENCE OF LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 8 Check Results Actions Sustainable and integrated social are there …? are there …? environmental are there …? are there …? economic are there …? are there …? cross-sectoral cross-thematic are there …? are there …?
  9. 9. COHERENCE OF LAP 1. Example where coherence was improved after checking Intended results: Expansion of space capacity for mayor functions • Housing by 10.000 m² • Hotels by 5.000 m² • Social infrastructure by 3.000 m² Conflict: Through checking it was realized that only 15.000 m² are available. Solution: Definition of a process to coordinate which function at which location is to be realized best and monitoring that the intended results per function are not exceeded. URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 9
  10. 10. COHERENCE OF LAP Exercise: 30 minutes In ULSG groups (staying in this lab room) check your Action Table and portfolio using the 2 tools. Deliverable: adjust plan if necessary URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 10
  11. 11. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 11 1. Feedback from the ULSG @ work 3 2. Checking coherence of the LAP 3. Thinking ahead about monitoring 4. Introducing the URBACT self-assessment tool 5. Explaining the “Dragons den”
  12. 12. PROJECT MONITORING URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 12
  13. 13. GENERAL OBJECTIVES OF MONITORING 1. Observing and analysing 2. Reviewing the performance- output achievement 3. Providing information to the general public and giving advisory services 4. Supporting evidence based decision making and taking corrective actions URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 13
  14. 14. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 14 1. Feedback from the ULSG @ work 3 2. Checking coherence of the LAP 3. Thinking ahead about monitoring 4. Introducing the URBACT self-assessment tool 5. Explaining the “Dragons den”
  15. 15. THE URBACT SELF ASSESSMENT TOOLS: ULSG Main Headings: • Frequency of meetings • Organisation of ULSG • Diversity of members • Participation of residents, users, business… • Empowerment of users, citizens • Other voices • Involvement of managing Authorities • Leadership • Animation and structure of meetings URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 15
  16. 16. THE URBACT SELF ASSESSMENT TOOL: ULSG ULSG Example of questions for self assessment: Frequency of meetings score 1: LSG has few meetings (e.g. One per year) score 3: Regular meetings, no info on participation score 5: Regular and frequent meetings with high level of participation, links to meeting notes Diversity of members score 1: ULSG dominated by public officials from municipality score 3: ULSG mostly public officials but other agencies involved score 5: Involvement of all three sectors, (public, private, civil society) Animation and structure of meetings score 1: All meetings are organised in traditional 'committee' formats score 3: some efforts to introduce new formats score 5: Innovative techniques have been deployed for meeting animation and shared decision making URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 16
  17. 17. THE URBACT SELF ASSESSMENT TOOL: LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 17 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Process and governance Content of action plan Integrated approachFinance and project planning EU and URBACT added value
  18. 18. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 18 1. Feedback from the ULSG @ work 3 2. Checking coherence of the LAP 3. Thinking ahead about monitoring 4. Introducing the URBACT self-assessment tool 5. Explaining the “Dragons den”
  19. 19. PITCHING THE LOCAL ACTION PLANS IN LAB 5 URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 19
  20. 20. THE PRESENTATION • Each ULSG @work group selects 1-2 people to present the LAP in 5 minutes • The presenters can use 3 pp slides, flipchart, other media • The presentation focuses on the action table developed in Lab 3, and makes use of/reference to all portfolio materials • The presentation will be delivered to a panel of 4 representatives (1 from each of the other ULSG @work groups) and the Deputy Mayor in front of all Lab members URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 20
  21. 21. THE LAP PORTFOLIO • Lab 1 Problem Tree Validated Stakeholder List • Lab 2 Expected Results Evidence Enhancement Table • Lab 3 Action table • Lab 4 Presentation URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 21
  22. 22. CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS (SCORE EACH CRITERION FROM 1 TO 5) URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 22 Criteria Score 1. Coherence between problem, actions and results 2. Addressing the deputy mayor’s challenge 3. Feasibility 4. Integrated approach 5. Quality of presentation Total
  23. 23. THE PANEL • Each ULSG @work group selects one panel member (different to the LAP presenters) • Each panel member is given a role (managing authorities, private enterprises/funders, local residents...) • They listen to the presentation (5 min) • They ask questions (5 min) from the perspective of their particular role • Questions can be asked from the floor (whole Lab group) URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 23
  24. 24. ULSG@WORK 4 • Time – now! • Objective: Prepare pitch • Tasks: to prepare to pitch • Tool: Portfolio+ 3 slides (written) + ???? • Deliverables: • Dragons Den pitch • 1 slide ‘Unique Selling Proposition’ at lunchtime URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 24

×