MathGeAr Evaluation Results, Management and Financial Issues

1. Project Evaluation Results and
Discussion of Management and Finances

2. Evaluation Summary Report:
Relevance
• MathGeAr addresses several Tempus objectives:
– promoting HE reform and modernization
– enhancing the relevance of HE systems in the partner countries
• The overall needs analysis is well developed:
– Importance of STEM education in GE/AM
– Modernize this sector of HE in the post-Soviet era
– Facilitation of the Bologna process development
• 3-cycle, ECTS, lifelong learning have been adopted but the teaching
methods have not changed
– Necessity for wider ICT adoption in education
• The needs and expected outcomes for partner universities
have not been defined

3. Evaluation Summary Report:
Quality of the Partnership
• Good selection of partners with necessary
expertise, complementary competencies and
sufficient resources
• Project Coordination Board is the main
platform for communication and decision
making
• Need to define a detailed communication plan
• Armenian regional universities are not
represented in the project

4. Evaluation Summary Report:
Content and Methodology
• Well designed and presented, covers all main
aspects (fundamental concepts, academic
content, pedagogy, revision of curricula and
quality assurance)
• Objectives, outcomes and success indicators are
coherent and informative
• Role of each partner in project management
should be better defined
• More leadership should be given to the partner
country universities

5. Evaluation Summary Report:
Dissemination and Sustainability
• The dissemination strategy is well described and the dissemination
activities are planned accordingly
• Regional Association of Math Education will be organized based on the
final project memorandum to ensure the sustainability of MathGeAr
results
• Target groups of dissemination activities should be better specified
• Particular focus should be made on:
– dissemination activities conducted in GE/AM
– role of Math-Bridge as a tool that can spark interest among the stakeholders
– accreditation of the revised curricula and their recognition by the national
Ministries of Education
– financial sustainability of the developed system and the organized association
of math education
• Formal commitment of the partner countries representatives and the
project’s ownership should be secured

6. Evaluation Summary Report:
Budget and Cost-effectiveness
• The staff costs are reasonable
• The overall costs are too high
• Mobility should be optimized

7. Budget Reduction Summary
• Overall project costs are too high
• Savings should be achieved through optimizing
mobility (cut by ~10%)
• Hospitality costs (related to event organization
are not eligible and can be covered only from
Indirect Costs)
• Other costs left intact, but will need to be
increased through the formal amendment
(translation, audit, design)
• Staff costs had to be adjusted (cut by ~ 7%) due
to the 40% constraint

8. Budget: Big Picture
REQUESTED GRANTED
I. PROJECT COSTS € CONDITIONS
Direct costs
1 Staff costs 432,775.00 402,000.00 Cannot exceed 40% of the total eligible direct costs
2 Travel costs and Costs of Stay 494,890.00 446,000.00
3 Equipment 117,000.00 117,000.00 Cannot exceed 30% of the total eligible direct costs
4 Printing and Publishing 26,200.00 26,200.00
5 Other costs 16,550.00 16,550.00
Total Eligible Direct Costs 1,087,415.00 1,007,750.00
Indirect Costs 76,119.05 70,542.50 Flat rate funding (7%) of the total eligible direct costs or 0.
TOTAL ELIGIBLE COSTS 1,163,534.05 1,078,292.50 Must equal total project finance below
II. PROJECT FINANCE €
A Tempus Grant Requested 1,047,180.64 970,463.25 Cannot exceed 90% of the total eligible costs
B Co-financing 116,353.41 107,829.25 Must be at least 10% of the total eligible costs
TOTAL PROJECT FINANCE 1,163,534.05 1,078,292.50 Must equal total eligible costs above

9. Current Budget (Staff + Mobility)
N° Partner Country
REQUESTED GRANTED LOSSES
Staff Mobility Staff Mobility Staff Mobility
1 USAAR DE 103,400.00 31,400.00 96,047.14 28,298.01 7,352.86 3,101.99
2 UCBL FR 45,300.00 19,716.00 42,078.68 17,768.26 3,221.32 1,947.74
3 TUT FI 41,175.00 18,540.00 38,247.01 16,708.44 2,927.99 1,831.56
4 GTU GE 30,900.00 53,028.00 28,702.67 47,789.38 2,197.33 5,238.62
5 UoG GE 21,350.00 37,356.00 19,831.78 33,665.61 1,518.22 3,690.39
6 ATSU GE 21,350.00 49,236.00 19,831.78 44,371.99 1,518.22 4,864.01
7 SRSU GE 21,350.00 48,576.00 19,831.78 43,777.19 1,518.22 4,798.81
8 GRENA GE 21,400.00 26,956.00 19,878.23 24,293.03 1,521.77 2,662.97
9 NCEQE GE 9,200.00 21,266.00 8,545.78 19,165.14 654.22 2,100.86
10 SEUA AM 29,850.00 61,530.00 27,727.34 55,451.47 2,122.66 6,078.53
11 ASPU AM 21,350.00 45,858.00 19,831.78 41,327.71 1,518.22 4,530.29
12 IIAP AM 13,500.00 34,140.00 12,540.00 30,767.32 960.00 3,372.68
13 ANQA AM 9,200.00 25,696.00 8,545.78 23,157.50 654.22 2,538.50
14 DFKI DE 43,450.00 21,592.00 40,360.23 19,458.93 3,089.77 2,133.07
Total 432,775.00 494,890.00 402,000.00 446,000.00 30,775.00 48,890.00
Total EU Countries 233,325.00 91,248.00 216,733.06 82,233.64 16,591.94 9,014.36
Total Partner Countries 199,450.00 403,642.00 185,266.94 363,766.36 14,183.06 39,875.64

10. Suggested Budget Redistribution
N° Partner Country
SUGGESTION LOSSES
Staff Mobility Staff Mobility
1 USAAR DE 103,400.00 20,945.14 0.00 10,454.86
2 UCBL FR 45,300.00 14,546.94 0.00 5,169.06
3 TUT FI 41,175.00 13,780.45 0.00 4,759.55
4 GTU GE 26,132.15 50,359.91 4,767.85 2,668.09
5 UoG GE 18,055.71 35,441.69 3,294.29 1,914.31
6 ATSU GE 18,055.71 46,148.07 3,294.29 3,087.93
7 SRSU GE 18,055.71 45,553.27 3,294.29 3,022.73
8 GRENA GE 18,097.99 26,073.26 3,302.01 882.74
9 NCEQE GE 7,780.45 19,930.47 1,419.55 1,335.53
10 SEUA AM 25,244.17 57,934.65 4,605.83 3,595.35
11 ASPU AM 18,055.71 43,103.78 3,294.29 2,754.22
12 IIAP AM 11,416.96 31,890.37 2,083.04 2,249.63
13 ANQA AM 7,780.45 23,922.84 1,419.55 1,773.16
14 DFKI DE 43,450.00 16,369.17 0.00 5,222.83
Total 402,000.00 446,000.00 30,775.00 48,890.00
Total EU Countries 233,325.00 65,641.70 0.00 25,606.30
Total Partner Countries 168,675.00 380,358.30 30,775.00 23,283.70
• Partners Countries: Mobility Costs are increased; Staff Costs are reduced
• EU Countries: Mobility Costs are reduced; Staff Costs are increased
• New_P_Staff = Granted_P_Staff – Total_EU_Staff_Losses * Granted_P_Staff / Total_Partner_Granted_Staff
• New_P_Mobility = Granted_P_Mobiliy + Total_EU_Staff_Losses * Granted_P_Staff / Total_Partner_Granted_Staff

11. Discussion (Budget)
• The budget is only provisional at this stage
• Staff budget transfers
– Every half a year, based on the actual costs evidenced by
convention forms and timesheets
• Mobility reimbursement:
– Tickets / Per Diem;
– To-From EU / Within Partner Countries
• Equipment purchasing
• Co-financing
• Employment contracts
• Keep all the project documentation

12. Discussion (Management)
• Conflict Resolution and Decision Making
• Project Coordination Board
– Representatives from each organization
– Local coordinators in Georgia and Armenia
– WP Coordinators and Task Forces
• New potential partner: TU Chemnitz
• Dissemination
– Stickers
– Local dissemination is important
• University officials need to be aware of the Project
• Websites linked
– Coordinators of dissemination activity in Georgia/Armenia
• National Tempus Offices (NTO)
– Monitoring Field Visit (progress, finances, visibility, sustainability)
• Higher Educational Reform Experts (HEREs)
• Partnership Agreement