Dear Reference Site Coordinators

Please be kindly reminded that the deadline to perform the three peer reviews is tomorrow end-day. See the instructions below.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to get back to us.

Kind regards

The WE4AHA Team

Dear Reference Site Coordinator

Thank you once again for your interest in the EIP on AHA call for Reference Sites and for your support in the peer review evaluation.

The next stage of the process will be for the evaluation team to undertake a peer review evaluation of three applications. 

For this, we apply a very open and transparent approach based on trust and confidence. This is why we share all applications with you.

I.                     The common shared folder

For the evaluation, you have:

• the evaluation table where you can see which peer Reference Sites applications have been assigned for evaluation* 
• the folder with all applications
• the Information and Guidance document in case you have doubts
• the offline version of the evaluation form.

*A short explanation how to interpret the table: the number next to the name of your RS are the numbers that you are assigned to evaluate.

Example: 

Gard Turkey is kindly requested to peer evaluate the applications from Pays de la Loire, Cairo and Lisbon.

II.                   The evaluation form

The Peer Review evaluation comprises three parts:

(a) Ensuring the application meets the two basic criteria (quadruple helix model and the contribution to the EIP on AHA horizontal initiatives)

(b) Reviewing each of the 6 criteria and awarding a score for the level you believe represents where the Reference Site is against the criteria

(c) Providing an overall score for the application by totaling the score they have awarded for each of the 6 criterion.

Peer Review evaluations should be submitted online using the RS evaluation online form. 

The Peer Review evaluation is an important element of the process as it provides the opportunity for an independent and objective review of the Reference Site to be undertaken. This may allow the Reference Site to identify potential areas for future development or to confirm actual areas of strength and good practice, which could benefit other Reference Site Regions as part of their bench learning and growth.  Peer Review evaluators should therefore ensure they provide sufficient comments and information to justify the score given for each criterion. The level and quality of information and comments will be important as this will be used to provide feedback and help Reference Sites to understand why a particular score was given, which could be different to the Self-Assessment score it awarded itself.

III.                 Timeline

Peer Review evaluations should be completed and returned by 10th January, at the latest.

Following the Peer Review evaluation an independent Moderation Panel will be appointed to review each of the evaluations. As a final step, the consensus score will be discussed and agreed with the European Commission.

We fully understand that this process is in the middle of the holiday season and you might have booked already a longer break. If you think you will be unable to complete and return the evaluation by this date please contact we4aha@funka.com by 20 December at the latest so that we can make alternative arrangements for the evaluation.

If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to write an email to we4aha@funka.com. We will do our best to respond within 48 hours.

We look forward to receiving your Peer Review evaluations by 10^th January. 

The WE4AHA Team

Anett Ruszanov | EU Project Manager 

Direct: +32.493.34.46.35
anett.ruszanov@funka.com 

Funka Nu AB
Brussels
www.funka.com 

Funka Accessibility Days in Stockholm April 1-2, 2020