tempusprojecteiger.files.wordpress.com€¦ · Web viewFinal report and financial statementAnnex IV/44. Tempus Project. No. Financial Statement. Final report and financial statement

EDUCATION, AUDIOVISUAL & CULTURE EXECUTIVE AGENCY

ANNEX IV

Final Report on implementation of the project (FR)Summary report for publication and

Financial Statement

T E M P U S IV(Sixth Call for proposals EACEA no. 35/2012)

Joint Project / Structural Measure 544098

(Project No. / Agreement No.)

FINAL REPORT DEADLINE Final Report on implementation of the project (FR) Summary report for publication Financial statement including request for payment and the

financial tables for each budget heading an external audit report on the action's financial statements

and underlying accounts

Two months after the end of the

eligibility period

Structure of the ReportAnnex IV/2: DeclarationAnnex IV/3-5: Report on implementation of the projectAnnex IV/6-8 Statistics and indicatorsAnnex IV/9: Example showing how to fill in the results tablesAnnex IV/10: Table of achieved resultsAnnex IV/11: Summary report for publication Annex IV/12: Financial Statement: instructions Annex IV/13-23: "Financial statement" excel tables (separate excel document)Annex IV/24: Acknowledgement of receiptAnnex IV/25: Check-list

One original (with copy of supporting documentation) and two copies (one of which with copy of supporting documentation) are to be sent by the deadline by registered mail (date as per postmark) to:

Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA)Erasmus+ : Higher Education - International Capacity Building (Unit A4)Mr Klaus HauptHead of UnitBOUR 02/171, Avenue du BourgetBE-1049 Brussels

Please also send an electronic version to: [email protected] when submitting the paper version of the Final Report.

We kindly ask you to enclose with your report, a sample of the most important promotion materials produced during your project (such as publications, brochures, leaflets, reports, etc.) which can provide clear evidence of the outcomes of your project.

mailto:[email protected]

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/2Tempus Project No. ..............................................Declaration

DECLARATION

This declaration should be completed and signed by the following people:

1. the contact person at the co-ordinator (institution);

2. the person who is legally authorised to represent the co-ordinator (institution).

We, the undersigned, certify that we have submitted all the required documentation, including the documents listed in the checklist.

Furthermore, we certify that the information given in this final report and financial statement is correct to the best of our knowledge and complies with the requirements of the provisions of Article I.4 and II.23 (Annex VI) of the grant agreement.

We are aware that amendments to these documents will not be accepted after the date of submission.

Name of the co-ordinator ( institution): Vrije Universiteit Brussel

Name of the contact person: Jan De Schampheleire

Function: Researcher

Done at: Brussels

Date: 12 May 2017

Signature:

Seal of the co-ordinator (institution):

Name of the legal representative: Caroline Pauwels

Function: Rector

Done at: Brussels

Date: 12 May 2017

Signature:

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/3Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the project

FINAL REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT

PART I: ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT

For each section indicated below, please provide a short description of the activities carried out since the submission of the Intermediate Report and describe the main changes that have occurred in the plans described in the Intermediate Report.

Development of programmes and courses

Please indicate which activities have been carried out for the development of the new teaching/training programme(s).

Since mid-2015 to end 2016 the following activities relate to the development of the programme:

(1) On the level of academic content the courses have been further developed, especially those that are thought in Semesters 3 and 4 of the master programme:

(a) Most of this development is based on intensive coaching of the Georgian teachers by the EU teachers via mails and face-to-face meetings, with the Georgian teachers coming for an intensive study-period to the EU and with the systematically held teachers meetings during all project management and all partners meetings in Georgia.

(b) For some courses supplementary partners have been involved as advisers. In Bulgaria the guidance on the course in conflict resolution involved experts of mediation courts; in Germany managers were consulted for the courses on employment and globalisation; in Belgium experts from ETUC gave advice on the EU policy with respect to health and safety.

(c) The Georgian Co-ordination Team (GCT) and the All Partners Meetings (APM) developed and approved on a regular basis proposals for the adaptation of the curriculum: (i) merging related courses on employment relations and on labour markets; (ii) making the order of courses more adapted to the learning process of the students such as putting research methods in the first semester as a compulsory course and an overhaul of the Professional English courses.

(2) On the level of organisation of the master programme many things had to be improved. These issues had to be handled over and over again during all local and international meetings:

(a) Many books and articles still had to be ordered for the teachers and students; many translations still had to be made. Practical and institutional issues had to be solved in order to make this possible. Especially TSU, as a state university, had many difficulties on this level because of dysfunctional and overly bureaucratic rules.

(b) The day-to-day organisation of the students’ secretariat had to be improved step by step, as the Georgian co-ordinators showed no concern for a pro-active management of the joint programme. Each co-ordinator was basically concerned about the students of his or her own university, not seeing the need for an encompassing approach. In particular GAU where the central programme secretariat was located had problems to find and appoint a competent co-ordinator.

The EU partners organised informal meetings with the students in order to confidentially discuss the organisation and relevance of the programme.

(3) Finally, an originally not foreseen level of activity had to be added: taking measures for the fair evaluation of the master programme students. The EU teachers made many remarks and suggestions on this issue, but the Georgian co-ordinators and teachers were very reluctant to adapt. Partly this is due to limited resources of the Georgian universities, but partly also because it seems to be that in Georgia “academic autonomy” is confused with “unnecessity of academic

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/4Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the projectjustification”:

(a) After the first cohort’s first year of the master programme it turned out that there was no overview table available on the points that were given to all students for all courses. When the EU project co-ordinators made this table themselves, it turned out that some Georgian teachers gave undifferentiated (i.c. very high) marks; similarly, the grading of one teacher had a zero correlation to all other grading. In the second year of the master programme there was some, but still insufficient, improvement toward differentiated and correlated grading.

(b) The evaluation of the master thesis is done by one teacher who reads the thesis and by a jury who questions the student after he or she made an oral presentation of the thesis. It was insisted upon that theses should be read by at least two teachers, but in the Georgian context, with teachers being paid per activity, this still proves to be hard to accomplish.

(c) Taking measures for preventing plagiarism also turned out to be a difficult task. The three universities are using plagiarism-detection programmes, but the EU teachers insisted (with little result) that this is not enough. Plagiarism remains a huge problem in Georgian universities. One of the students who had a very good home university reputation and who came to the EU in the context of master thesis preparation, handed in as own work a 100% copied text to the EU teachers.

Restructuring: university management and governance

Please provide information on the activities carried out during this period relating to the introduction of institutional changes in the partner country beneficiaries (institutions) or at national level (capacity, management, governance, quality assurance, links with labour market, etc.).

(Points (2) and (3) of “Development of programmes and courses” are also relevant in this point, as the day-to-day organisation of the master programme and fair evaluation of the students are part of a learning process of the Georgian universities.)

(1) University level. The main institutional change triggered by the project activities is the instalment of a three universities’ accredited, ECTS-based Joint Programme. On paper and as a principle the three universities were very eager to establish such a programme. In practice it turned out that there was very little anticipation on the organisational and academic implications of such a programme.

During Y2 and Y3 of the project, while the master programme was running, the students faced many practical problems, because each university was only concerned about its own students and teachers: teachers changed class hours without all students being informed; evaluations were not communicated to all students and teachers; there was no integrated deliberation of exams result; library books of one university were not available to all students etc. All project management meetings, over and over again had to tackle these issues.

Similarly there were endless discussions, leading to precise guidelines induced by the EU partners according to the project’s LFM on (a) making a common business plan, (b) establishing a common platform for publishing EIGER research, (c) establishing an Alumni network.

The resulting arrangements between the universities (such as the MoU and its detailed annexes) were the products of a long institutional learning process. (See further the points on Outcomes.)

(2) National level. The project activities also had an impact on the national level. The master programme is leading to experts in Georgian employment relations and its adaptation to EU standards. This is exactly what political reform requires: graduates who at the level of government institutions can document and actively support labour market reform and the improvement of working conditions and terms of employment. Two graduates are now working as labour inspectors, which is a new position in Georgia. Graduates will also be able to take up the planned position of labour mediator.

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/5Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the projectMobility and training activities for staff and students

Please provide a description of the activities carried out in order to train staff and/or students from the partner country participating institutions along with an outline of the staff/student mobility scheme implemented in this period.

(1) International mobilities:Three international mobility programmes were foreseen in the project and have been executed according the project’s objectives;(a) Three mobilities for teachers with a course in Semesters 1 and/or 2 of the programme (13 teachers: 4 VUB, 5 OVGU, 4 ECEM);(b) Three mobilities for teachers with a course in Semesters 3 and/or 4 of the programme (9 teachers: 3 VUB, 4 OVGU, 2 ECEM);(c) One thesis preparation mobility for 13 students (4 VUB, 5 OVGU, 4 ECEM).

Teacher mobilities started early 2014 and were finalised mid-2016. These mobilities always included guidance on course development, practical exercises and case studies and course supporting readers by the EU project partners and their colleagues in the respective universities. Meetings and visits to relevant institutions were also organised (e.g. at ETUC in Brussels, at Volkswagen in Germany, at the mediation court in Sofia).

Moreover, APMs and JMs have always been used by the EU project partners as occasions to meet with the Georgian teachers and discuss with them the progress of their course development.

(2) Local mobilities in Georgia:Lack of experience in organising and initiating field research by students somewhat prevented the complete implementation of the concept of “research based education” underlying the EIGER project. A further, not-anticipated circumstance was that in the Georgian university context most teachers are lectures with little or no research experience/background. Being (rather modestly) paid for hours of teaching, little incentives exist to engage in extra-curricula activities.As a result field work related mobilities were limited. Similarly, most students were either not informed on the possibility to do reimbursed field work outside Tbilisi or didn’t have the need for it.

The following activities were developed:

- Study trips of Georgian students in the context of their seminars (16 students) and in the context of preparation of their master thesis (9 students).- EIGER programme promotion trips of Georgian teachers in regional universities (two trips).

Equipment

Please provide an outline of the equipment purchased and explain how it has been used during the project lifetime and who has access to it.

Equipment had to be supplied at three levels:(1) Teachers. As early in the project as possible, every teacher responsible for one or more courses of the master programme was supplied with a notebook. For every course there was a teacher budget for buying books and journals. Teachers spread the usage of this budget.(2) Secretariats. Each of the three universities has a secretariat for the master programme (with GAU being the main secretariat). For each secretariat computers, a printer and a projector (at the disposal of the teachers) were bought.(3) Libraries. Books for the students, together with e-journals, have been bought.

For the development of courses the teachers acquired access to articles databases, handbooks and supporting literature. For each course the students had to have access to all library books and online available articles and excerpts of books. Much attention has been given to developing readers for each

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/6Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the projectcourse. The basic literature for each reader was translated into Georgian. Supplementary literature is in English as this is an exercise for the students.

Fully developing all this however took quite some time. Especially the TSU teachers were having difficulties with the TSU administration, as book orders can only be made via a few suppliers and an elaborate procedure.

The first and (to a lesser degree) the second cohort of students had a hard time: for several courses they did not have all the (translated) literature they needed. By the end of the project all translations were finished. This included the publication in Georgian of John McCornick’s “European Union Politics”. The book will be a basic reference not only in Kakha Shengelia’s course on European institutions, but will be used by everybody in Georgia interested in EU policies and politics.

Dissemination and sustainability

Please describe the actions that have been carried out to disseminate the results of the activities and in order to ensure the future sustainability of these results.

(1) Dissemination.The master programme was accredited only one month before it could start in October 2014. Via the network of teachers and stakeholders it was however already known among many candidate students. The programme is anyhow also announced via the websites and leaflets of the three universities. EIGER has always been included in the promotion campaigns that the three universities make in other regions and regional universities.

In 2015 and 2016 GAU developed a website (www.eiger.ge) that gives a full overview of more detailed overview of the programme, also highlighting the relevance for Georgia’s socio-economic development. The website also offers the students and teachers to publish abstracts or full texts of their research.

The programme is also being promoted to the general public via a three minutes promotion movie available on the social media (November 2016).

There have been several EIGER public meetings highlighting the programme in the context of Georgia’s socio-economic development:

(a) On 2 September 2014 an Open Day was organised at the campus of TSU. Some 80 people assisted at this Official Public Launch of the “European Integration and Georgian Employment Relations programme”. Apart interventions from the project partners introducing the two-year master programme, the vice-rector of TSU and the rectors of GAU and CU, several official representatives such as the head of the EU Representation in Georgia and of the Georgian Office of the International Labour Organisation took the floor to congratulate the project partners with the start of the master programme while wishing a successful further development. Newspapers and audio-visual media covered the event.

(b) On 28 January 2015 a seminar was held on “Future Challenges for the European Social Model(s)”. This was done in Tbilisi City Hall. Some 100 people, among them EIGER students and teachers, representatives of NGO’s, ministries and other officials, participated in the public lecture. The main speaker was Grigor Gradev, then Executive Secretary of ETUC/PERC in Brussels.

(c) On 28 and 29 November 2016 were organised an Autumn School and a Dissemination conference at TSU. The Autum School was attended by EIGER students and alumni. One of its topics was conflict resolution and labour mediation. The Dissemination conference centered on Georgia’s socio-economic development. During the conference, The Fredrich Ebert Stiftung, represented by Irina Seperteladze, and the Department of Tripartite Relations of the Ministry of Labour and Health, represented by Paata Jorjoliani, intervened extensively on the contribution they offer, and will continue to offer to the EIGER master programme.

http://www.eiger.ge/

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/7Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the project(2) Sustainability.The first sustainability activity has been the establishment of the Supervisory Board, which continues as an Advisory Board after the project. This guarantees the involvement of the social partners and other stakeholders in the further development of the project.

The development of a business plan has been a recurrent issue in all meetings and preparations of the second term of the project. This includes (a) making fair previews on (i) the number of students and (ii) the job market possibilities for graduates for the coming years; (b) developing the research component of the programme by (i) offering publication possibilities to the students and teachers and (ii) attracting (small scale) research funding; (c) working out the day to day management of the programme and defining a division of labour between the three universities.

PART II: PROJECT OUTCOMES AND IMPACT

By responding to the following questions, please provide an overview of the overall project achievements, demonstrating how the objective of the project has been met and the impact of the project outcomes.

Overall achievement level and impact

Please indicate which national/regional priorities have been addressed by the project (as outlined in the Call for proposal and original application) and describe the main results achieved by the project in addressing these priorities.

Has the project achieved its set objective and does it match the needs identified in the original application? If yes, could you please describe how? If not, could you explain the reasons why?

Please describe any positive changes, as a result of the project, in terms of institution management, individual behaviour, teaching methodology, course content, teaching/learning processes and any benefits to managers, teaching staff, students and other target groups.

Please describe the opportunities that are being created by the project beyond the specific objectives in particular in relation to graduate employability and/or increased cooperation between university(ies) and the non-academic sector.

Please describe the impact of the project on the reform of higher education in the partner country(ies). Please describe the impact of the project on the economic and/or social reforms in the partner country(ies).

The EIGER programme has addressed Georgia’s 2013 Tempus priority on the development of expertise in social sciences.

To a large extent the EIGER project objectives were achieved:

(1) To create a fully accredited joint master programme in three universities on “European Integration and Employment Relations”. Achieved: the programme started in October 2014 with an accreditation for five years. It is the first joint master programme in Georgia. It is a two-year programme. At present the universities deliver separate diplomas. In the MoU of November 2016 it is specified that the three universities will establish joint diplomas. The MoU was publicly announced during the EIGER Dissemination Conference (Tbilisi, 25 November 2016).

(2) To create the academic, administrative and financial conditions for a sustainable joint master programme. Achieved: From October 2014 to October 2015 three cohorts of around 25 students each have registered for the EIGER master programme. The first cohort has graduated. The three universities have agreed on a MoU for a period of three years after the project’s period and have developed the details of their co-operation.

(3) To upgrade teachers in the different disciplines of the master programme. Achieved. Achieved: All teachers were coached to teach a valuable course.

(4) To strengthen the empirical relevance of the master programme. Partly achieved: The research of some of the master theses was of good quality; three of the teachers managed to strengthen their research in the EIGER field. Research within the EIGER seminars remains insufficient. It is anyhow hard to

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/8Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the projectestablish research programmes in Georgian universities;

(5) To mobilise stakeholders to adopt social policies and practices in line with EU and international labour standards. Partly achieved: Trade unions, some employers organisations, the International Labour Organisation and NGO’s are supporting the programme. Nevertheless, Georgia has a long way to go in institutionalising employment relations.

(6) To have stakeholders offering job opportunities for alumni of the master programme. Partly achieved: Helped by some of the stakeholders, some of the EIGER graduates are taking up new positions within the framework of Georgia’s improvement of labour standards. A more formalised network of alumni is not well developed yet.

EIGER’s wider objective was: Facilitating Georgia’s policy change in line with European and internationally agreed labour standards and improving the relations between Georgia and the EU, through offering a better education in Georgia of specialists in ‘European Integration and Employment Relations’. Achieved: The programme has established courses and expertise in the field of labour market studies and employment relations. EIGER graduates will be (and in a few cases already are) supporting Georgia in its compliance to the DCFTA with the EU.

Obstacles and shortcomings

Please describe any obstacle and/or shortcoming experienced during the project lifetime and the measures taken by the project team to address them.

Although this project succeeded in achieving its goals, there were innumerable frustrations and disappointments in the course of the development of this project. This was the case on at least four levels:

(1) The Georgian universities’ management. In the intermediate report we already mentioned that: “although the three universities had a principled agreement on their co-operation for the master programme, they initially had very little concerns about the actual development of this co-operation.” During the course of the project, the universities basically continued to think in terms of their own students, their own teachers and teaching style. There never was a pro-active management in establishing a common organisation of the programme.

(2) The Georgian teachers. In one case the knowledge of English of the teacher turned out to be too low for effective communication with the EU teachers. More generally, for most of the teachers there is not that much loyalty between teacher and university, as they are mostly “invited” teachers for one or more courses. Consequently, their feeling of responsibility is toward their courses and not to a programme as a whole. Moreover, they often lack the academic status and authority to fail students, especially for cases of plagiarism.

(3) The Georgian Co-ordination Team (GCT). In the intermediate report we already mentioned that: “The day-to-day communication and co-ordination between the co-ordinators in Brussels and those in Georgia was, and still is, a problem. Although from the start of the project, the Georgian partners have had a strong commitment to realise the master programme and to involve all stakeholders of this programme, the technical and administrative procedures of the project had to be explained repetitively to them.”

In the second half of the project this situation even went worse. The Georgian American University appointed a new co-ordinator who had no experience in project management. Moreover, because of his political ambitions, the president of the GCT became less and less involved, leaving the co-ordination responsibilities to the other members of the GCT.

(4) The EU-partners. With the formal management of the project being chaotic on the Georgian side, the EU-co-ordinators and the other EU partners increased their interventions and guidelines. However, with limited possibility into knowing the actual Georgian background, this even led to more frustration on both

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/9Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the projectsides.

Part of these obstacles have been unavoidable: (a) Georgian universities have limited possibilities for research activities and do not offer academic stability for the large majority of their teachers; (b) in each international project communication at a distance and co-operation between groups of different backgrounds is inherently difficult.

In the end there is one clear shortcoming. In this project we had settled a very strict workplan, which enabled us to start the master programme already in Y2 and which also enabled us to have a first cohort of graduates by the end of Y3. The downside of this approach was that there was little time to discuss and revise the implementation of the project. With more preparation time at the beginning of the project we could have selected some different teachers and we could have made a more coherent Georgian Co-ordination Team (i.c. with a better integration of academic and managerial competencies).

Curricular reform

With regard to new/restructured programmes/courses, please indicate: the level of the programme/course implemented (Bachelor, Master, Doctorate, continuing education, further

education, upgrading, etc.); the type of course (mandatory course in a regular programme or an optional course); the language of the course;

whether the newly developed course is structured according to the three cycle system and using the ECTS; whether a double, multiple or joint degree has been established; whether recognition arrangements between higher education institutions in the EU and in the partner countries

have been established; the target group (students, university staff, managers of education systems, public civil servants, employees in

private sector, etc.) and if relevant, the approximate number of students who already attended; whether the programme/course was formally recognised, the level (institutional, national, etc.) and the form of

recognition (certificate, diploma, degree); the teaching material produced and the method (translated, adapted, developed by the beneficiaries, etc.); whether teaching methods have been reviewed and are appropriate for the new/restructured

programmes/courses; whether assessment measures have been introduced for the new courses (by students for instance);

(1) Master programme. EIGER is a two-year master programme, developed in accordance with the ECTS and the three cycle system.

(2) Accreditation. In October 2014, after an internal evaluation procedures in the three participating universities (CU, GAU and TSU), EIGER was nationally accredited as a programme in social sciences for a period of five years.

[Remark: it would have been be more appropriate if EIGER had been categorised as a programme in “social policy”. At the time this was administratively too complicated. Attempts have since then been made and will still be made to correct the category without having to go through a new accreditation procedure.]

(3) Joint Programme. EIGER is the first Georgian Joint Programme. It involves TSU (as a state university) and GAU and CU (as private universities). From the beginning of the project the aim was to deliver joint diplomas. During the project the universities delivered separate diplomas for the students who were registered in their home university; the annex of the diploma mentioned that the degree was a joint programme of the three universities. At the end of the project the three universities managed to reach an agreement on delivering joint diplomas. At the final Dissemination and Sustainability Conference (November 2016) this important result was publicly announced.

(4) Specific for Georgia. EIGER is a programme sui generis, i.c. on Georgian Employment Relations and the rapprochement of Georgia to the EU. Consequently, no agreement with EU universities has been aimed at.

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/10Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the project(5) Number of students. In Y2 of the project EIGER has had 27 Cohort-1 students for Semesters 1 and 2. In Y3 25 Cohort-1 students continued in Semesters 3 and 4, and graduated; 25 Cohort-2 students went through Semesters 1 and 2. In September 2016, 21 Cohort-3 students were accepted.

(6) Target group. The programme is oriented to students with a background in social sciences and with an interest in the socio-economic development of Georgia.

(7) Language. The courses are given in Georgian. The courses however require a good knowledge of English and it is a criteria in the selection procedure for admittance to the programme. Two courses in professional English support the programme. Students are required to acquire a B2 level of English by the end of their first year.

(8) Teaching method. The teaching material requires home reading of text material. The basic texts are in Georgian; supporting texts are in English. Students are required to write essays and to do small scale research during seminars. The master thesis should be research based and in accordance to methodological requirements enumerated in the master thesis guidelines.

(9) Review and assessment. (a) In February 2015 and 2016 the EU-co-ordinators of the project held surveys among all EIGER students. The results were positive on the content and relevance of the programme, but revealed continuing organisational problems and lack of communication between the three universities. (b) In 2016 the Georgian Co-ordination Team organised meetings with teachers and students. Within the All Partners Meetings several minor changes in the programme were decided upon. The organisational issues of the programme were discussed over and over again. The Memorandum of Understanding between the universities (November 2016) now foresees a clear division of labour and responsibilities in the organisation of the programme.

Governance reform

Were changes at institutional level introduced (establishment of units, new faculties, international relations offices, etc.)? If so, what is the statute of the new unit(s) within the institution(s) concerned? What kind of financial support and staffing arrangements will be provided in the future? Did the project introduce any reforms in university governance (i.e. decision process, autonomy, accountability)? If yes, please describe these reforms and the institutional support given by academic and local authorities. Were changes in the national higher education structure and system supported by the project (establishment of representative bodies, associations, agencies for quality assurance, development of roadmaps for national reforms, national certification and qualification systems, etc.)? If yes, please describe the project contribution to the reforms and the involvement and support given by local authorities.

(1) The joint programme forced the three universities to co-operate on an organisational level. The co-operation is formalised with the Memorandum of Understanding and its annexes (November 2016). The Advisory Board of the programme is the body from where all academic and organisational issues of the programme will be directed upon. The Board includes each time two academic representatives of each university, plus the stakeholders (employers, trade unions, NGO’s).

(2) The MoU is the actual legal bound between the three universities. The Advisory Board can in effect only make decisions as far as they are backed-up by the three university’s presidents. After the term of the MoU (September 2019) the continuation of the master programme will depend on its financial viability for the private universities, and, more generally, in its proven success in attracting research, in supporting labour related government reform and in further offering jobs to graduates. Especially continuing to develop the research component is a challenge for Georgian universities, and the EIGER programme is forcing the three universities to further develop this component.

Links with society

Did the project help to strengthen the role of higher education institutions in society at large (contributing to the development of lifelong learning, addressing the knowledge triangle, establishing links with the labour market, etc.)? If yes, please describe how these links have been institutionalised.

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/11Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the project

A large part of Georgia’s active population is either self-employed with a low and basically informal income or employed with a low wage and with no job security. Measures to guarantee health and safety at work are largely absent or not applied. Government policy is however changing toward establishing and applying rules and regulations for labour and employment. The DCFTA with the EU actually imposes these reforms.

The EIGER master programme directly connects with societal needs and with those parts of government policy that applies DCFTA rules. EIGER graduates have the basic expertise to be involved in governmental reforms on labour market regulation, social-economic policy and labour inspection. Job opportunities are also offered in the field of HR departments of companies, in employers’ organisations, in trade unions and in international organisations such as the ILO. The Memorandum of Understanding between the EIGER programme, the ILO and the Ministry of Health, Labour and Social Affairs for the training of labour mediators has been signed and is being executed.

Mobility and training activities for staff and students:

Please describe how the mobility and training activities have contributed to the achievement of the project objectives.

Please describe the selection criteria used for mobility and training and indicate how the home institutions evaluated and recognised this mobility or took it into consideration, once it had been carried out.

In the framework of student mobility and with regard to the recognition of study periods abroad, have agreements been signed between the universities? Was the mobility part of a credit transfer system comparable to the ECTS system? Was it in the framework of a double, multiple or joint degree? If yes, please provide details. If it was not, please indicate on what basis the results achieved by the students were officially recognised?

Please comment on the assessment of the students' performance by the hosting universities/enterprises and on how the students assessed their stay at the host institution.

(1) Teacher mobility. The staff selected for retraining is equal to the staff assigned to the various courses of the master programme. During the preparation phase of the project the teachers for all courses were already internally selected by the faculty boards of the three universities. This selection was made based on the teachers’ specialisation, interest, present workload, and expected future availability. In the first months of the implementation of the project about one third of the previously selected personnel was replaced, based on an update of the availability. After these initial changes the same team of teachers continued participating in the project and the master programme.

[The teachers responsible for Year 1 (Semester 1 and 2) of the master programme developed their courses, basically during their trips to the EU-partners (Brussels, Magdeburg and Plovdiv, March and July 2014). They had a final review of their courses during their trip in July 2015. The teachers responsible for Year 2 of the Master programme started the development of their course during their trips to the EU-partners in February and July 2015. They had a final review of their courses during their trip in July 2016.]

The main issue for the EU-universities (VUB in Brussels, OVGU in Magdeburg and ECEM in Plovdiv) was NOT to have direct transfers of Western handbooks and education material. For Georgia it was essential to develop its own research and its own data in the area of employment relations. Consequently, the EU-universities wanted Georgian staff to take advantage of the research based education in their institutes. Meetings and discussions with several researchers and EU-professors have been organised. Access to the course material and literature of the EU courses was given.

Specifically for the courses organised as seminars, attention was given to set up research that allows to develop Georgian case studies. E.g. the Bulgarian co-ordinator presented several case studies in conflict resolution in Bulgarian factories. The methodology of such case studies could be used to make similar case studies in the Georgian situation. In addition, visits to various institutions (local government bodies, EU-institutions), factories, and musea (e.g. industrial archeology) were also organised.

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/12Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the project(2) International student mobility. Fifteen mobilities were foreseen for Georgian students to come to VUB, OVGU or ECEM, as part of their thesis preparation. On 18 and 19 November 2015 twenty students of Cohort-1 made public presentations of their research project. After each presentation there was a discussion with the public of Georgian and EU teachers, and stakeholders. In the end 13 students were selected by the jury of the GCT and the EU teachers.

Already in the selection it became clear that the students had difficulties in formulating a realistic research project and a falsifiable hypothesis. During their stay the students had several individual and collective meetings with the respective EU teachers. By the end of their stay each of them had the basic structure of their thesis and an outline of how to organise their research.

The feedback of the students and EU-teachers was also used to improve the curriculum (i.c. having the research method courses earlier in the programme; adding more small scale research exercises in the programme).

(3) Local student mobility. The use of local mobility has been lower than planned. Two trips were organised in the context of employment relations and industrial conflicts. Nine students used mobility grants in order to do surveys outside Tbilisi.

Equipment

How has the equipment been used during the project lifetime and how has it contributed to the project outcomes? What are the future plans for the use, maintenance and insurance of all the equipment purchased in the framework

of the project?

(1) During the project. The purchased equipment has been essential to establish the environment of the programme. This includes (a) the ICT for the teachers’ research (literature and surveys) and teaching; (b) the literature and library access for the teachers; (c) the ICT for the secretariats; (d) the literature for the students, physically available in the library and electronically via the teachers.

Although administratively the translation of literature is under “other cost” in effect this is vital equipment for the students. For all courses basic literature has been translated to Georgian, while supplementary literature has to be red in the original language (mostly English). The Georgian students have the competence to read and speak English but they are also in a learning process. Offering them part of the literature in translation facilitates the further reading in English.

Equally, it was important to provide all courses in print. Students who have to learn with electronically available material only, learn badly. Working with physical material is essential in the teaching and learning process.

(2) After the project. The maintenance and future elaboration of the equipment for the master programme is one of the specified tasks of the Advisory Board. For this purpose the academic members of the Board will have meetings with the teachers and students, and will seek support of the academic authorities for the maintenance and level of quality of the equipment.

Academic and administrative management of the project

Could you please describe to what extent the institutions from the European Union and partner country(ies) participating in the project were involved and the support they provided, be it academic or administrative?

Did you encounter any difficulties in the management of the project? If yes, please indicate the type of problems and the solutions identified to address them.

(1) Planning. VUB (Brussels, presided by Jacques Vilrokx) was the general co-ordinator of the project. Each of the Georgian universities had a co-ordinator. Together with a national co-ordinator they made up the Georgian Co-ordination Team (GCT). OVGU (Magdeburg), ECEM (Plovdiv) and VUB, were foreseen to be coaches for the Georgian teachers in developing their courses. USC (Santiago de

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/13Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the projectCompostela) took up the role of quality controller of the project.

The management of the project was foreseen to be headed by VUB and the Georgian national co-ordinator. All executive decisions were foreseen to be taken in the joint meetings (JM) of VUB and the GCT. All strategic decisions (i.e. academic decisions) had to be taken during the All Partners Meetings (APM), i.e. including all EU-partners.

(2) Practice. In effect the GCT was functioning in a problematic way: (a) the members often ignored or forgot the decisions that were taken in the JMs or APMs; (b) from the monthly meetings of the GCT often no minutes or incomprehensible minutes were communicated; (c) the GCT often neglected communicating with their university authorities, resulting in unrealistic plans; (d) in the mid-term of the project GAU replaced its original co-ordinator with a totally inexperienced co-ordinator; (e) in the last year of the project the president of the GCT delegated much of his responsibilities to other GCT members, making the GCT headless.

Needless to say, all this made co-ordination difficult. Making other changes in the GCT would only have complicated the co-ordination even more.

Instead, the number of international meetings was increased, with direct meetings between the EU teachers and the Georgian teachers and between the VUB co-ordinators and the Georgian university authorities. Especially Eckhard Dittrich (OVGU, DE), Krastyo Petkov (ECEM, BG) and Carlos Machado (USC, ES) gave supplementary support to the project.

During the last year of the project some of the research oriented teachers that were not members of the GCT started to play, informally, a more prominent role in the management of the project.

In this time-consuming way the objectives of the project were realised.

Remark. The financial management of the project was inherently quite complicated and time consuming (i.c. mobilities with multiple invoices, personnel costs with multiple contracts, invoices in Georgian writing requiring extra explanation for the EU-side). It was, we think, successfully managed by Shuyu Hou (BE) and Manana Salukvadze (GE), assisted by Ana Chorgolashvili and Tamuna Mangoshvili.

Dissemination and Sustainability

How did you achieve a multiplier effect of the project? Do you think that the successes will go beyond the immediate target group, for example to the wider education system, local economy and society?

Do you think that the beneficiaries (institutions) will be able to sustain and develop the achievements of the project? If yes, what measures were set up or are planned to support this continuation? What obstacles were there and what measures were taken to address them?

Do you foresee any future co-operation between the beneficiaries of your project? How do you plan to use the results of the project in the future? What measures have been taken to formalise or institutionalise links with local non-university partners?

In dissemination and sustainability a distinction has to be made between four levels:

(1) The teaching of the curriculum in European Integration and Employment Relations. The key items of the EIGER master programme (employment relations, fair employment conditions, health and safety at work, and taking the EU as an inspiration for socio-economic development) are also key elements in many political discussions and in policy renewal in Georgia. The DCFTA with the EU simply requires this renewal. In this respect there will be a growing need for experts in labour issues and social welfare. The EIGER programme incorporates the very few Georgian teachers who can actually answer to this need.

(2) The scientific research that backs-up the curriculum. Several of the teachers in the EIGER programme are strongly research oriented: i.c. Iago Kachkachishvili (TSU) on work and values, Marina

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/14Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the projectMuskhelishvili (GAU) on employment relations and industrial development, and Ana Diakonidze (TSU/CU) on labour markets. They are also scientific entrepreneurs, establishing their own research institutes, addressing (foreign) research funds, attracting their own temporary staff.

Nevertheless, the research component in all Georgian universities is fairly weak. Most of Georgian professors are paid by the number of hours they lecture; they are “readers” not researchers. Very few Georgian institutional incentives are given to them to do research. As a result, further developing the research component of the EIGER programme is a hard and uncertain endeavour.Remark 1. From VUB side in February 2016 we handed in an Erasmus+ project, OBSERVE, on establishing labour market institutes in Georgia and Moldova. The proposal was however rejected.Remark 2. VUB and CU are also part of the EUCA-INVEST Erasmus+ project on developing “crea-labs” in Georgian and Kyrgyz universities. In this respect, CU as a private university, is trying to develop research based education.

(3) The formula of a joint degree programme of the three universities. The EIGER project succeeded in establishing a joint degree master programme, which is a significant innovation in the Georgian university landscape. The three universities have a MoU to continue the programme for at least three years to come (October 2016-September 2019). In the Advisory Board the three universities, the social partners and other stakeholders are represented.

Co-operation between the universities after September 2017 is uncertain. It cannot be foreseen to what extent each academic member of the Board will be supported by its university management. The basic problem is that the private universities might set higher tuition fees than the state university. It is possible that the master programme will then be continued by one or two of the present participating universities. Another possibility is that other universities will be interested to join the consortium.

(4) The institutionalised co-operation with non-university partners. Within the Advisory Board the EIGER master programme is supported by the employers and trade unions. There also is the MoU between the EIGER master programme, ILO and the ministry of Health, Labour and Social Affairs on the training of labour mediators. Further co-operations are to be expected.

Although these co-operations will be formalised, they will probably continue to be of a small scale.

Gender balancePlease explain to what extent the principle of equal opportunities has been taken into account in the project implementation (i.e. gender analysis carried out, presence of women in decision-making bodies, balanced percentage share of women among the teachers or the enrolled students, etc.). Describe how the project helped to promote gender balance and to identify and address factors influencing gender discrimination.

(1) In the Georgian Co-ordination team there has been full gender balance. The financial management of the three separate Georgian universities and the general financial Georgian management was exclusively female. The EU project management was exclusively masculine.

(2) The group of EIGER teachers is composed of ten women and eight men.

(3) Among the students of the three EIGER cohorts there are 70% women, 30% men. This reflects the female dominance (not only in Georgia) among students in social sciences. The selected group of students to come to the EU partner universities for their master thesis preparation was composed of three men and ten women.

(4) In the EIGER Advisory Board there is full gender balance.

Unexpected outcomes/ spin-off effects

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/15Tempus Project No. Report on implementation of the project Did the project implementation produce any unexpected outcomes or spin-off effects, either positive or

negative? If yes, please describe them.

There were three unexpected spin-offs of the EIGER project:

(1) The active support of the ILO and the Ministry of Health, Labour and Social Affairs led to a MoU in training EIGER graduates to become labour mediators.

(2) Two EIGER teachers, Marina Muskhelishvili and Ana Diakonidze, created the NGO “Georgian Institute for Research in Employment Relations and Industrial Development” (GINRID).

(3) The publication in Georgian of John McCornick’s “European Union Politics” (2011) as a reference for academics and the general public.

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/16Tempus Project No. Statistics and indicators

Statistics and Indicators

This section aims to gather statistical data and indicators of performance covering the entire project duration

Main targets

Please tick the appropriate box YES NO N/ATeacher trainingPlease indicate whether your project has links, targets or objectives related to teacher training x

VETPlease indicate whether your project has links, targets or objectives related to Vocational Education and Training

x

Education levels addressed by the projectPlease indicate whether your project has links, targets or objectives related to programmes at :- Bachelor level x- Master level x- Doctorate level x

Training and mobilities

Enter the code of the partner country concernedin the first lines and figures in the second and third:

Training of partner country staff and students(Country of origin)

Number of academic staff from the partner country’s Higher Education Institutions trained/retrained

CountryCode: GE

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

Please indicate the number of teaching staff (professors, assistants with teaching tasks, etc.) trained and/or retrained during the project lifetime:

Number Male

8NumberFemale

11

Number of non-academic staff from the partner country’s Higher Education Institutions trained/retrained

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

Please indicate the number University administrative staff (librarians, staff from the International Office, IT specialists, etc.) trained during the project lifetime:

Number MaleNumberFemale

Number of staff from the partner country’s non Higher Education Institutions trained/retrained

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

Please indicate the number of staff of non HEI (enterprises, NGOs, Chambers of Commerce, Government, local administration, etc.) trained during the project lifetime:


Number of students from the partner countries who have attended programmes/courses developed in the framework of the project

CountryCode: GE

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

Please indicate the number of students from the partner countries that have been trained and/or retrained in the programmes/courses developed by the project during the project lifetime:

Number Male 20NumberFemale 53

Academic/administrative Staff mobility(Country of origin)

Number of partner country - EU mobility flows of more than 2 weeks CountryCode:GE

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

Please indicate the number of partner country staff mobility flows from the partner country to the European Union during the project lifetime:



(Host country)Number of EU - partner country mobility flows of more than 2 weeks Country

Code BG:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

Please indicate the number of European staff mobility flows from the European Union to the partner country during the project lifetime:

Number Male 1NumberFemale

(Country of origin)Number of partner country – partner country mobility flows of more than 2 weeks

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

Please indicate the number of staff mobility flows within the same partner country during the project lifetime:


And between two different partner countries: NumberMaleNumberFemale

Student mobility(Country of origin)

Number of partner country - EU mobility flows of more than 2 weeks CountryCode GE:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

Please indicate the number of partner country student mobility flows from the partner country to the European Union during the project lifetime:


(Host country)Number of EU - partner country mobility flows of more than 2 weeks Country

Code:CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

Please indicate the number of European student mobility flows from the European Union to the partner country during the project lifetime:


(Country of origin)Number of partner country – partner country mobility flows of more than 2 weeks

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

CountryCode:

Please indicate the number of student mobility flows within the same partner country during the project lifetime:


And between two different partner countries: NumberMaleNumberFemale

Links to European Higher Education policies

Please tick the appropriate box YES NO N/ADiploma supplement xPlease indicate whether the project contributes to the introduction of procedures for the issuing of diploma supplements in the partner country university/ies.

Adoption of a system based on three main cycles, undergraduate (Bachelor), postgraduate (Master) and Doctorate xPlease indicate whether your project contributes to the adoption of a system based on three main cycles.


Introduction of double/multiple or joint degrees xPlease indicate whether in the framework of your project the institutions involved plan to develop/issue double/multiple or joint degrees.

Establishment of an ECTS system xPlease indicate whether your project contributes to the introduction and/or development of the European Credit Transfer System at the co-beneficiary partner university(ies).

Promotion of quality assurance procedures at institutional or national level xPlease indicate whether the project contributes to the enhancement of the partner country university/ies strategies for quality assurance. For information on the ‘Standards and guidelines for quality assurance in the European higher education area': http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/Docs/00-Main_doc/050221_ENQA_report.pdf

Qualification frameworks xPlease indicate whether the project contributes to the development of national qualification frameworks and implementation at university level, in line with the European Qualification Framework's principles.

Lifelong learning policies and approaches xPlease indicate whether your project contributes to developing lifelong learning approaches

Modular curriculum structure xPlease indicate whether your project contributes to the promotion of modular curriculum structure.

New teaching and learning methods xPlease indicate whether the project contributes to the development of new teaching/learning methods at the partner country university/ies.

E-Learning xPlease indicate whether the project contributes to the development of an e-learning strategy at the partner country university/ies.

University/Enterprise cooperation xPlease indicate whether the project foresees the implementation of co-operation activities between the partner country university/ies and the private sector.

Links to the labour market in degree programmes xPlease indicate whether the new/restructured curriculum/curricula is/are being developed in order to respond directly to the needs of the local and national labour market, i.e. through internships, intensive training in the field, etc.

Links with other EU education programmes xPlease indicate whether your project is directly linked to EU educational Programmes other than Tempus such as Erasmus Mundus or the Life Long Learning Programme.If yes, please indicate to which EU educational programme your project is linked:

The HUMERIA-project. www.humeria.eu

http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/Docs/00-Main_doc/050221_ENQA_report.pdf

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/19Tempus Project No. ..............Table of achieved Outcomes

Table of achieved results

Title and reference number of the work package (WP)

Indicators of achievement and or/performance as indicated in the project proposal

Activities carried out for the achievement of this result (entire project period):

Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date

Place Description of the activity carried out Specific and measurable indicators of achievement

Changes that have occurred in this result since the previous approved report:

EXAMPLE

USE ONE TABLE

PER WORK

PACKAGE: ADD AS

MANY TABLES

AS NECESSA

RY

Insert the title and reference number as indicated in your project proposal

Insert the indicators of achievement and/or performance as indicated in your project proposal

Act

ivity

nu

mbe

ras

indi

cate

d in

th

e pr

ojec

t pr

opos

al Insert the activity title as indicated

in the project proposal

State where and when the activity

took place

Provide a briefdescription of

the activity carried out

Describe any change to the activity plan described in the previous approved report

Insert specific indicators (qualitative and quantitative) which measure the

achievements of the activity result



Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP01. Management

Indicators of achievement and or/performance as indicated in the project proposal Minutes of all the meetings.

Activities carried out for the achievement of this result (over the entire project period):

Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date Place Description of the activity carried out Specific and measurable indicators of achievement

01.01 Project co-ordination Brussels

12/2013 11/2016 BE Daily communication and co-ordination Minutes of the meetings. See www.labour-relations-georgia.eu under “News and events”, password: 8!Eiger01.02 Project co-

ordination Georgia12/2013 11/2016 GE Communication and co-ordination,

monthly GCT meetings01.03 Joint Meetings 02/2014 09/2016 GE 4 meetings between the Project

Management Team (PMT, presided by Jacques Vilrokx), the Georgian Co-ordination Team (GCT) and the Georgian teachers.

Ad hoc meetings 12/2014 09/2016 GE - EACEA-Tempus meeting in Brussels. February 2014)- 2 meetings between the PMT and the Georgian teachers and students of the running master programme.- 2 meetings for end of project co-ordination.

01.04 All Partners Meetings

12/2013 05/2016 GE, DE, BG

4 meetings between the PMT, the GCT, the Georgian teachers and the EU-partners.

http://www.labour-relations-georgia.eu/



01.05 Plenary Annual Meetings

11/2014 11/2015 GE 2 meetings between the PMT, the GCT, the Georgian teachers and the EU-partners and the Project Supervisory Board (PSB)

01.06 Plenary Closure Meeting

11/2016 11/2016 GE 1 meeting between the PMT, the GCT, the Georgian teachers and the EU-partners and the Project Supervisory Board (PSB)

Autumn School and Dissemination Seminar

11/2016 11/2016 GE Meeting between the project partners and the stakeholders

01.07 Audit >11/2016 >11/2016

Audit included in this Final Report

Changes that have occurred in this outcome since the previous approved report

Ad hoc meetings, Autumn School and Dissemination Seminar. Some of the Joint Meetings enlarged with other EU partners.

Please add as many tables as necessary



Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP02. EU Institutions

Indicators of achievement and or/performance as indicated in the project proposal - Minutes of all the meetings with respect to the training mobilities and the progress of the course writing.

- English syllabi of the courses.


Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date


02.01 Training mobilities for Georgian teachers

02/2014

08/2016 BE 16 days training mobilities for Guranda Chelidze (3) and Kakha Shengelia (4) in Brussels.

Minutes of all the meetings with respect to the training mobilities and the progress of the course writing.

02.02 Short descriptions of the courses

12/2013

03/2014 GE To make a short description of the chapters and used literature of the course.

02.03 Writing of the courses 12/2013

10/2015 GE, BE To make a full syllabus of the course in Georgian and in English.

English course syllabi www.labour-relations-georgia.eu under “Master programme”.

02.04 Translation of core course material

04/2014

11/2016 GE To have the core course literature translated in Georgian (outsourced to an external professional translator).

Register of all logistic material.

02.05 Provision of logistic support for teaching

04/2014

11/2016 GE To supply a notebook, books, articles and printing-credit to the teachers.



None.





Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP03. Employment




Activity

N°Activity

TitleStart date

End date



02/2014

10/2016 DE, BE 16 days training mobilities for Ana Diakonidze (3), Akaki Tsomaia (3), Tea Giorgadze (3) and Vakhtnag Surguladze (1) in Magdeburg (plus parallel mobilities to Magdeburg for Eckhard Dittrich, who as emeritus of OVGU, lives in Bielefeld) and Brussels (meeting with ETUC experts).

Minutes of all the meetings with respect to the training mobilities and the progress of the course writing.www.labour-relations-georgia.eu


12/2013



10/2016 GE,DE To make a full syllabus of the course in Georgian and in English.



04/2014




03/2014









No activity for Funding of seminars (03.06).




Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP04. Work and organisation




Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date



02/2014

07/2016 BE 16 days training mobilities for Ramaz Paresashvili (3), Tamta Marghania (3) and Ana Diakonidze (3) in Brussels.

Minutes of all the meetings with respect to the training mobilities and the progress of the course writing. www.labour-relations-georgia.eu


12/2013



07/2016 GE,BE To make a full syllabus of the course in Georgian and in English.



04/2014




03/2014









None.




Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP05. Welfare systems




Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date



02/2014

06/2016 DE 16 days training mobilities for Beka Natsvlishvili (3), Iago Kachkachishvili (3) and Nino Shatberashvili (2) in Magdeburg (plus parallel mobilities to Magdeburg for Eckhard Dittrich, who as emeritus of OVGU, lives in Bielefeld).

Minutes of all the meetings with respect to the training mobilities and the progress of the course writing.www.labour-relations-georgia.eu05.02 Short descriptions of

the courses12/2013



06/2016 DE To make a full syllabus of the course in Georgian and in English.



04/2014




03/2014









No activity for Funding of seminars (05.06).



Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP06. Legal aspects




Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date



02/2014

10/2016 BG, BE 16 days training mobilities for Marina Kvachadze (3), Nino Chubinidze (3) and Gia Liluashvili (3) to Plovdiv (plus parallel mobilities to Plovdiv for Krastyo Petkov, who as emeritus of ECEM, lived in Sofia). The last mobility of Nino Chubinidze was to Brussels for meetings with ETUC experts.



12/2013



10/2016 GE,BG To make a full syllabus of the course in Georgian and in English.



04/2014




03/2014



06.06 Funding for research in seminars

10/2014

10/2016 GE To fund the student travel costs for the seminars. Course of Nino Chubinidze.





Final report and financial statement Annex IV/30Tempus Project No. ..............Table of achieved OutcomesChanges that have occurred in this outcome since the previous approved report

None.




Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP07. Social economic aspects




Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date



02/2014

10/2015 BG 16 days training mobilities for Maya Gonashvili (3), Beka Natsvlishvili (3) and Bakar Berekashvili (3) to Plovdiv (plus parallel mobilities to Plovdiv for Krastyo Petkov, who as emeritus of ECEM, lived in Sofia).



12/2013



10/2015 GE, BG To make a full syllabus of the course in Georgian and in English.



04/2014



03/2014




None.








Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP08. Industrial Relations




Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date



02/2014

08/2016 BE 16 days training mobilities for Marina Muskhelishvili (3), Tato Khundadze and Maya Gonashvili (3) in Brussels.



12/2013



08/2016 GE,BE To make a full syllabus of the course in Georgian and in English.



04/2014




03/2014



08.06 Funding for research in seminars

10/2014

05/2015 GE To fund the student travel costs for the seminars. Course of Marina Muskhelishvili.





Final report and financial statement Annex IV/33Tempus Project No. ..............Table of achieved OutcomesChanges that have occurred in this outcome since the previous approved report




Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP09. Research methods

Indicators of achievement and or/performance as indicated in the project proposal - Minutes of all the meetings with respect to the training mobilities and the progress

of the course writing.- English syllabi of the courses.


Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date



02/2014

05/2015 BE, DE, BG

One 16 days training mobility for Lia Tsuladze in Magdeburg (plus parallel mobility to Magdeburg for Eckhard Dittrich).



12/2013



05/2015 GE,BE, DE, BG

To make a full syllabus of the course in Georgian and in English.



04/2014




03/2014









None.




Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP10. Professional English




Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date


10.01 Short description of the courses

12/2013 03/2014 GE To make a short description of the chapters and used literature of the course.


10.02 Training mobility for Georgian teacher

06/2015 07/2015 BE 16 days training mobility for Nino Bolkvadze (1) in Brussels.

Minutes of all the meetings with respect to the training mobilities and the progress of the course writing.


Training mobility for Nino Bolkvadze in Brussels.






Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP11. Master thesis




Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date


11.01 Guidelines for the master thesis

12/2013

03/2014 GE To write the thesis guidelines. English course syllabi www.labour-relations-georgia.eu under “Master programme”.

11.02 Master thesis mobilities 02/2016

04/2016 BE, GE, BG

13 selected students came for three weeks to the EU-partners and did research for their thesis.

Master theses.

11.03 Thesis research budget 10/2015

11/2016 GE Travel costs budget for the individual theses (9 students) Master theses.


None.






Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP12. Implementation of the master programme

Indicators of achievement and or/performance as indicated in the project proposal - Accreditation

- Number of students; student gender balance- Student evaluation of the master programme on (a) course content, (b) administration and organisation


Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date


12.01 Accreditation 02/2014

10/2014 GE To make a full description of the master programme that is accepted by the Georgian Accreditation Center.

Accreditation by the Georgian Accreditation Center

12.02 Organisation of programme secretariat

10/2014

11/2016 GE To establish a secretariat that handles the practical day-to-day organisation of the master programme.

Student evaluation by VUB. www.labour-relations-georgia.eu under “Master programme”.

12.03 Organisation of programme library

10/2014

11/2016 GE To establish a library that offers all required documentation of the master programme courses.

Student evaluation by VUB. www.labour-relations-georgia.eu under “Master programme”.

12.04 Programme website 06/2015

11/2016 GE To have a website that centralises (1) all student information on the master programme: (2) all research information on European Integration and Georgian Employment Relations.

www.eiger.ge


None.







Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP13. Dissemination

Indicators of achievement and or/performance as indicated in the project proposal - Stakeholders’ attendance to EIGER public meetings

- References in the media to the EIGER master programme.


Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date


13.01 Organisation of stakeholders’ involvement

12/2013

11/2016 GE Organising the attendance of stakeholders in All Partners Meetings and public lectures. Membership of stakeholders in the Project Supervisory Board.

Attendance as specified in the minutes of the PSB meetingswww.labour-relations-georgia.eu

13.02 Project website and e-journal

12/2013

11/2016 GE Developing and maintaining the website. During project: www.labour-relations-georgia.euDuring and post project:www.eiger.ge

13.03 Media strategy 02/2014

11/2016 GE Developing a network of interested journalists and public figures.

During project: www.labour-relations-georgia.euDuring and post project:www.eiger.ge


Presentation of EIGER in Moldova (October 2015).Dissemination conference (November 2016).











Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP14. Exploitation

Indicators of achievement and or/performance as indicated in the project proposal

- Establishment of an Advisory Board (at the end of the project).- University business plans- Involvement of other universities in the master programme.


Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date


14.01 Alumni social network 12/2013

11/2016 GE Associating the alumni of the master programme into a network.

Network membership and attendance to meetings.

14.02 Business plans of universities

12/2013

11/2016 GE Calculating the required number of students, tuition fees, developing a job market for alumni.

Business plan report on www.labour-relations-georgia.eu

14.03 Instalment of an Advisory Board

02/2014

11/2016 GE The stakeholders of the Project Supervisory Board becoming the members of an Advisory Board to the Master Programme.

Membership list of the Advisory Board

14.04 Involvement of other universities

06/2015

11/2016 GE Inviting other universities to public events. Inviting teachers of other universities as guest lecturers and as jury members of the Master theses.


None.





Title and reference number of the work package (WP) WP15. Quality Plan

Indicators of achievement and or/performance as indicated in the project proposal Standardised quality control methods and indicators.

Surveys among the teachers and students


Activity N°

ActivityTitle

Start date

End date


15.01 Follow-up of all meetings

12/2013 11/2016

ES Attending all major meetings. Review of the minutes. Reviewing the project progress. Organising a survey among the teachers on the usefulness of their mobilities..

Reports in the minutes of the meetings. See www.labour-relations-georgia.eu under News and events.

15.02 Reporting on quality control

12/2013 11/2016

ES Reporting to the Project Supervisory Board. Quality Report included in this Final Report.

15.03 Students survey 02/2015 03/2016

BE, GE Electronic survey by VUB co-ordinators among the students, evaluating the organisation of Semester 1 of the master programme.

Reports in the minutes of the meetings. See www.labour-relations-georgia.eu under News and events.15.04 Teachers survey 04/2015 04/201

5BE, GE Qualitative face-to-face survey among the teachers,

evaluating the quality of the programme and the quality of the students.


None.






Final report and financial statement Annex IV/42Tempus Project No. Summary

Report for Publication

SUMMARY REPORT FOR PUBLICATION

Project title

The organisation of a common two-year master programme in three Georgian universities on “European Integration and Georgian Employment Relations”

Objectives (as indicated in the project proposal)

(1) To create a fully accredited joint master programme in three universities on “European Integration and Employment Relations”.(2) To create the academic, administrative and financial conditions for a sustainable joint master programme.(3) To upgrade teachers in the different disciplines of the master programme.(4) To strengthen the empirical relevance of the master programme.(5) To mobilise stakeholders to adopt social policies and practices in line with EU and international labour standards.(6) To have stakeholders offering job opportunities for alumni of the master programme.

Outcomes



(1) The master programme is the first joint master programme in Georgia (Tbilisi State University, Caucasus University and Georgian American University). It started in October 2014 with an accreditation for five years. The number of students per cohort is between twenty and twenty-five. At present the three universities deliver separate diplomas.(2) In November 2016, the three universities agreed on a Memorandum of Understanding for a period of three years. In this period they will together continue the master programme and further develop their co-operation. They will also establish joint degrees.(3) All Georgian teachers were coached by the EU teachers in the expertise of their course.(4) Three of the Georgian teachers managed to strengthen their research in the EIGER field. The research of several master theses was of very good quality. Research within the EIGER seminars remains insufficient.(5) Trade unions, some employers and NGO’s are supporting the programme. Nevertheless, Georgia has a long way to go in institutionalising employment relations.(6) Two of the EIGER graduates are already taking up new positions within the framework of Georgia’s improvement of labour standards.

Activities

(1) Intensive coaching of the Georgian teachers by the EU teachers, basically via regular face-to-face meetings.(2) Involving employers, trade unions and NGO’s in co-defining the research needs of the programme. Mobilising the stakeholders to promote the programme.(3) Instalment of a three universities’ accredited, ECTS-based Joint Programme. (4) Attracting and selecting students.(5) Evaluating and adapting the curriculum.(6) Improving the organisation and day to day management of the programme.(7) Intensive guidance of 13 Georgian students by the EU teachers for the preparation of their master theses.(8) Developing a common business plan business plan for the universities.(9) Establishing an Advisory Board for the project.(10) Organising seminars for the stakeholders and the general public.

Achieved results



The master programme is the first Joint Programme in Georgia. It offers a fully new range of courses in the field of labour market studies and employment relations. EIGER graduates will support Georgia in its socio-economic research and policy and in its compliance to the DCFTA with the EU.

Future developments

(1) The joint master programme, as managed by the three Georgian universities, will continue for at least three years after the programme. After this period the universities might change their co-operation. As expertise in labour markets, employment relations and socio-economic development will probably continue to be essential in Georgian policies, the academic expertise settled by the project will probably continue to develop in Georgian universities.

(2) The biggest challenge will be developing research in the field of labour and social economic development. Our project involved at least three teachers who proved to be able to attract research in this field. Nevertheless, developing the research component of Georgian universities remains a hard endeavour.

Other remarks

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/45Tempus Project No.

Financial Statement

FINANCIAL STATEMENT

Instructions

In addition to this form, you are requested to fill in the Financial Statement and accompanying financial tables in the "Financial Statement" excel file published on the website.

Please note that the excel file is composed of 11 different excel worksheets. Please go through each one of these worksheets and fill in the financial tables. For each budget heading, you must declare all expenditure incurred by the project during the eligibility period, both paid by Tempus and co-financed.

The "Financial Statement" excel file is composed of the following excel worksheets:

Annex IV/13: Financial Statement and Request of Payment of the balanceAnnex IV/14: Country codesAnnex IV/15: Staff CostsAnnex IV/16: Travel Costs and Cost of StayAnnex IV/17: Equipment CostsAnnex IV/18: Printing and PublishingAnnex IV/19: Other CostsAnnex IV/20: Expenses > Euro 25,000Annex IV/21: List of Partners and ExpertsAnnex IV/22: Indirect CostAnnex IV/23: Co-financing and exchange rate

The financial tables are protected and pre-formatted but you can insert rows according to your needs. Please note that the relevant information has to be encoded manually in the financial tables. Please avoid copy-paste. Please check the calculations carefully and ensure that the declared amounts are correct. Amendments to the declared amounts will not be accepted after submission of the report.

Please note that for invoices in a currency other than EURO the equivalent amount in EURO must be indicated on the invoice. Any conversion of actual costs into EURO shall be made by the co-ordinator at the monthly accounting rate established by the Commission and published on its website (http://ec.europa.eu/budget/inforeuro) applicable on the month of the first pre-financing until the second pre-financing is received, after which the rate of the month of the second pre-financing must be applied.

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/24Tempus Project N. Acknowledgment of receipt

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT

This page of the form will be returned to you on receipt of your implementation report and financial statement. Therefore please enter your name and address in the box above. Please remember to send in this page with each of your reports.

For internal use onlyTempus Project No.

under the Tempus programme.

Yours sincerely,

Done at ........................................, Date ...............................

Your name: Jan De Schampheleire

Complete address: Pleinlaan 2

...................BE - 1050.... BrusselCountry code Postal code City

Final report and financial statement Annex IV/25Tempus Project N. Checklist

CHECK-LIST

WHAT INFORMATION NEEDS TO BE SENT ?

Declaration: duly signed by the contact person and the legal representative of the co-ordinator (institution) – Annex IV/2

Final report on implementation of the project – Annex IV/3-5

Statistics and indicators – Annex IV/6-8

Table of achieved results – Annex IV/10

Summary report for publication – Annex IV/11

Financial statement: Annex IV/13-23 (please complete the financial statement in the separate "Financial Statement" excel file: make sure that all excel sheets, if required, are duly filled in)

Supporting documents for expenditure ‘Paid from Tempus’ and/or ‘Co-financed’ only for equipment purchase and staff costs subcontracting where the total value of the purchase/subcontract is more than EUR 25 000 and for staff costs where a higher salary rate (see Annex 3 of the Guidelines) has been applied.

Acknowledgement of receipt – Annex IV/24

Documents

tempusprojecteiger.files.wordpress.com€¦ · Web viewFinal report and financial statementAnnex IV/44. Tempus Project. No. Financial Statement. Final report and financial statement