URBACT Summer University 2013 - Labs - Mixed Use of City Centers - Session 4
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

URBACT Summer University 2013 - Labs - Mixed Use of City Centers - Session 4

on

  • 380 views

Materials from the URBACT Summer University Lab "Mixed Use of City Centers", managed by Nils Scheffer

Materials from the URBACT Summer University Lab "Mixed Use of City Centers", managed by Nils Scheffer

Statistics

Views

Total Views
380
Views on SlideShare
279
Embed Views
101

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0

2 Embeds 101

http://university2013.urbact.eu 100
http://131.253.14.66 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

URBACT Summer University 2013 - Labs - Mixed Use of City Centers - Session 4 Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Final Check URBACT LAB Mixed Use of City Centers SESSION 4
  • 2. 2 ACTION PLANNING MODEL URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 1 2 Problems Stakeholders Evidence Results Ideas Actions Resources Check Consultation Launch Problems Stakeholders Evidence Results Ideas Actions Resources Check Consultation Launch Lab 1: Getting started Lab 2: Preparing well Lab 3: Action planning Lab 4: Final check Lab 5: Dragons Den
  • 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. 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. COHERENCE OF LAP • WHY check? • WHEN check? • HOW to check… URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 5
  • 6. COHERENCE OF LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 6 1. Logical coherence check 2. 360 degree coherence check
  • 7. LOGICAL COHERENCE OF LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 7 1. 2. 3. Problems – Needs – Opportunities Check: All stakeholder problems addressed? Actions Check: Actions support achievement of results? Final check: Actions contribute to solve problems/ address stakeholder needs? Check: Intended results corresponds to problems? Intended results
  • 8. Problem Result 1 Result 2 Action Action Action ActionAction LOGICAL COHERENCE OF LAP
  • 9. 360 DEGREE COHERENCE OF LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 9 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 …?
  • 10. 9 septembre 2013 10 Result 1 Result 2 Result 3Objectives Actions conflicts? synergies? conflicts? synergies? Action 1 Action 2 Action 3 conflicts? synergies? conflicts? synergies? 360 DEGREE COHERENCE OF LAP
  • 11. 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 11
  • 12. 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 12
  • 13. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 13 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”
  • 14. PROJECT MONITORING URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 14
  • 15. 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 15
  • 16. EXAMPLE OF MONITORING: HERO URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 16 Monitoring 1. Data collection 2. Data analysis 3. Discussion of results4. Monitoring report 5. Update LAP • 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
  • 17. SCHEME OF INDICATOR TABLE Objective Indicator Explanation Target setting Availability Responsibility Verificatio n date Communicatio n of cultural heritage values Number of visitors of the cultural heritage information center Number including not- paying children above 4 number > year before number < year before number < 1 and 2 years before Annual year book of statistics Operator of information center 01.02 for whole year; reporting 01.03.
  • 18. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 20 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. THE URBACT SELF ASSESSMENT TOOLS URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 21
  • 20. 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 22
  • 21. 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, medium level of 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 makingURBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 23
  • 22. THE URBACT SELF ASSESSMENT TOOL: LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 25
  • 23. LAB 4 – FINAL CHECK URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 26 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”
  • 24. PITCHING THE LOCAL ACTION PLANS IN LAB 5 URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 27
  • 25. 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 28
  • 26. 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 29
  • 27. CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS (SCORE EACH CRITERION FROM 1 TO 5) URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 30 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
  • 28. 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 31
  • 29. ULSG@WORK 4 • Time: 11.00 – 13.00 • Tasks: to prepare to pitch • Tool: Portfolio • Deliverables: 3 slides or flipcharts • Dragons Den pitch • 1 slide Unique Selling Proposition at lunchtime URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 32
  • 30. FINAL REFLECTIONS • What have you learnt? • What will you do differently in future? URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 33
  • 31. URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 34