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

480 views

Published on

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

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
480
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
124
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

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

  1. 1. Final Check URBACT LAB Mixed Use of City Centers SESSION 4
  2. 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. 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 1. Logical coherence check 2. 360 degree coherence check
  7. 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. 8. Problem Result 1 Result 2 Action Action Action ActionAction LOGICAL COHERENCE OF LAP
  9. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 14. PROJECT MONITORING URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 14
  15. 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. 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. 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. 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. 19. THE URBACT SELF ASSESSMENT TOOLS URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 21
  20. 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. 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. 22. THE URBACT SELF ASSESSMENT TOOL: LAP URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 25
  23. 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. 24. PITCHING THE LOCAL ACTION PLANS IN LAB 5 URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 27
  25. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 30. FINAL REFLECTIONS • What have you learnt? • What will you do differently in future? URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 33
  31. 31. URBACT LAB 1 SESSION 4 34

×