2017-01-19 QA Audit 2 Finland

Roles, responsibilities and resources including contingency planning for key staffers

PM Mats Lindstedt 100% first year, 75% last year and >50% 2017

Travelling takes a lot of time, more time to support partners than planned. No major risk for underprioritizing the project due to other responsibilities.

Jonna is the main backup for the PM role. There is also a team at CSC that knows about the project and that has the necessary skills. The other WP leads are also very self propellant on their respective areas. The informal contacts around the project that Mats has been keeping up is what could fall in worst case.

There is quite a bit of documentation around WP1 that can be used for a hand-over in worst case.

Present main responsibility lies in the follow-up and encuragement of the WP’s work during the rest of the project.

Jonna Korhonen more involved in the WP4 participation. Has new responsibilities at work that takes full time.

For now there is little time needed, lack of time not a problem. Participation in WP4 at a low level.

Using existing networks as a ground for marketing of EMREX.

If problems arises it is possible to take in someone else into the project.

Other itemes, outside the project but that aims at making EMREX a success at Finish univeristies will take som time and effort.

• Integration with new SIS (Peppi and ???)
• Using EMREX for domestic transfer.
• Integration with idp (HAKA)

QM Reijo Soréus

5-10%, other responsibilities takes priority often. The audit is focused in time. Normally not much QA activities outside the audit unless there are specific quality issues coming up.

Deliveries

External supplier is contracted to fix any bugs found in the system.

Financing only covers EMREX during the project period, no descision on the future yet. Ongoing preparations for a descision regarding a financial solution.

Planned activities, their goals and time plans (and how these relate to the overall goals and time plans)

-

Monitoring and reporting of progress

Quarterly reporting to the steering group.

Yearly and extra reports to EACEA, written as well as informal reporting.

All under Control.

Quality indicators and procedures for assessment

Risk analysis, monitoring and reduction activities

Denmarks participation is no longer a project risk.

Student participation seems to reach our goals, especially compared to the theoreticals. Basic data has been difficult to get.

High dependencies on individuals for all partners, but especially so at CINECA. Needs to involve more individuals and spread the work. More and quicker response when needed.

Challenge how to ensure that the work on the final report will progress as needed.

How stakeholder acceptance has been ensured

EU – happy at the moment

• The larger student mobility digitilization group will want to see a successful solution, interested in the working solution
• The national Erasmus offices want a smoother mobility
• We are invited to diverse meetings in Brussels with the Erasmus network where we get a lot of positive feedback
• EWP want to see a compatible solution

Ministeries

• Depending on the country, there are domestic uses of the EMREX solution
• Steering group is where we meet the ministeries and where we get their feedback

Universities

• Administrators save time and resources, meet them at the Stakeholder forum as well as through national contacts (WP4)
• IT functions meetings through the national networks regarding admin systems, processes for student accounts etc.

Students

• User friendly, reliabel solution, feedback through the surveys

Other organisations

• Groningen Declaration are interested in our solution and can help us in continuing in EMREX 2. Also verification about us doing the right thing

Internal stakeholders

• All WP needs coordination and feedback as well as help keeping up the momentum, done through project group meetings and QA

Agenda and notes WP3/FI