URBACT Summer University 2013 - Labs - Attractive cities for young people - Session 4

0 views

Published on

Materials from the URBACT Summer University Lab "Attractive cities for young people to live and work" managed by Robert Arknil

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
0
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

URBACT Summer University 2013 - Labs - Attractive cities for young people - Session 4

  1. 1. URBACT LAB SESSION 4 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. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 4 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”
  5. 5. COHERENCE OF LAP • WHY check? • WHEN check? • HOW to check… URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 5
  6. 6. COHERENCE OF LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 6
  7. 7. VERTICAL COHERENCE OF LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 7 1. 2. Actions Problems – Needs - Opportunities 3.Results Check: Objective corresponds to problem? Check: Action supports achievement of objective? Check: Action contributes to achievement of results? Check: Result contributes to solve problem/ address stakeholder needs?
  8. 8. 360 DEGREE COHERENCE OF LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 8 Check Objectives 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. EXAMPLE OF MONITORING: HERO URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 14 Monitoring 1. Data collection 2. Data analysis 3. Discussion of results4. Monitoring report 5. Update CHIMP • by responsible institutions according to your work/organisation structure • based on the target setting • Draft and communication of monitoring report • Monitoring meeting to discuss monitoring report (reasons for developments, actions to be taken, etc.) • Communication of final monitoring and action report • Taking corrective actions
  15. 15. THE URBACT SELF ASSESSMENT TOOLS URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 15
  16. 16. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 16 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”
  17. 17. THE URBACT SELF ASSESSMENT TOOLS: ULSG 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 17
  18. 18. 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 18
  19. 19. THE URBACT SELF ASSESSMENT TOOL: LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 19 Photo of a LAP
  20. 20. THE URBACT SELF ASSESSMENT TOOL: LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 20 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
  21. 21. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 21 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”
  22. 22. PITCHING THE LOCAL ACTION PLANS IN LAB 5 URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 22
  23. 23. 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 23
  24. 24. 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 24
  25. 25. CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS (SCORE EACH CRITERION FROM 1 TO 5) URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 25 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
  26. 26. 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 26
  27. 27. ULSG@WORK 4 • Time • 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 27
  28. 28. FINAL REFLECTIONS • What have you learnt? • What will you do differently in future? URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 28
  29. 29. URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 29

×