Bonus EEIG
BONUS logo E-bulletin Contact us
BONUS 2010-2016
About BONUS
BONUS Secretariat (EEIG)
Steering Committee
Members
Advisory Board
BONUS Forum
Forum of Project Coordinators
BONUS+ and ERA-NET
BONUS+ 2009-2011
BONUS+ projects
BONUS+ background
BONUS+ reporting and change requests
BONUS ERA-NET 2003-2008
Frequently asked about BONUS
Young Scientist Club
BONUS projects
For policymakers
For researchers
Events
News room
Publications
Policy and other links
For members of the public
BONUS Extranet login
Print page
Front page > About BONUS > BONUS+ and ERA-NET > BONUS+ 2009-2011 > BONUS+ background > Feed-back form for Coordinators

Feed-back form for Project Coordinators

This questionnaire is a part of the BONUS+ Mid-Term Assessment. Its purpose is to check if the projects are progressing well, and the Programme central management mechanisms function efficiently. The BONUS EEIG Secretariat will summarize the outcome of this questionnaire and share it the Coordinators. This Summary will be presented to the BONUS EEIG Steering Committee and will serve for improvement of the Programme work. Your input to this questionnaire will also help us to prepare better the coming BONUS calls.


This form is specifically addressed to Project Coordinators.


The filled-in form must be sent before Saturday, 8th of May 2010. You are kindly requested to answer all the questions, even if negative, in order for us to be sure of no information omissions.


BONUS EEIG guarantees confidentiality of the personal information submitted in this survey.


Please note that the questionnaire can not be saved for continuing later on, but  needs to be completed in one session.


   


Your Organization and Internal Management of the Project

Your name:
Project acronym and web page:
Has your project consortium already signed the Consortium Agreement?
If NO, what is the main problem?

Is there a collegial body - a Project Steering Committee or alike established in your project?
If YES, how many times it has convened since the beginning of the Project?
If you wish, please describe and justify briefly your model of the Project organization:


Project Progress

Please assess according to your subjective judgement the status of progress in following parts of the work:

Establishing the consortium management mechanism
Field work (if applicable)
Sample analysis (if applicable)
Data compiling and modelling
Analysis of the acquired information
Scientific publication of findings
Producing the applicable products
Dissemination of findings to the broad public
Training activities
Were any changes made to the research plan after signing the grant agreement? (do not include the changes forced by the funding cuts during the negotiation phase)
If YES, please explain:


Does, according to your judgement, the project work generally evolve at the planned pace?
Please comment on the deviations from the plan (if any):


Collaboration and networking among the Projects

How many times has your project been involved in any collaboration and/or networking activities with other BONUS+ Projects and projects outside BONUS?

How many of these activities have been initiated by:

    Your Project consortium (also if this was a joint initiative)
    Another BONUS project
    BONUS Secretariat
    A project or network beyond BONUS
    Please specify project or network


Where do you see the main value of cooperation among the projects belonging to one programme? (please check no more than 3)

    avoiding duplication of work;
    sharing the infrastructure and data-gathering expenses;
    sharing ideas;
    sharing data;
    joint training activities;
    joint stakeholder activities;
    joint dissemination activities;
    other.
    if other, please specify:
Your recommendation concerning any further cooperation among the BONUS Projects:


Training and Personal Capacity Building

What is the proportion (~%) of the early career scientists in your institution’s team? (We define them as Scientists in the final year of their primary degree, or PhD Students, or Scientists in their first two years of first Post Doc).
What activities addressing personal capacity building your Project already undertook?
Did your project submit a BONUS Joint Training Proposal?
Are you aware of your Project team member participation in the BONUS Young Researcher Club Activities? Your consideration concerning this activity.
Has any PhD dissertation partly involving the BONUS Project material already been prepared? How many?
Has any PhD dissertation partly involving the BONUS Project material already been defended? How many?
Your suggestion for further improvement of the BONUS support to young researchers.


Collaboration with the Programme management and reporting

How would you judge the overall activity of the BONUS Secretariat with regards achieving the objectives of your Project?
More specific comment:



Of which aspects of the BONUS Secretariat work so far helped your Project the most? (please tick no more than 3)

    assistance with management of your project;
    assistance with reporting;
    arranging project networking;
     including annual BONUS Conference;
    support to joint training activities;
    arranging joint infrastructure usage;
    arranging joint stakeholder activities;
    helping with communicating the project outputs to the potential users;
    helping with financial reporting;
    helping with project management;
    helping with data sharing;
    securing programme visibility and dissemination of its results to broad public;
    other.
Additional comment, if necessary:



In what respect do you expect more support from the Secretariat during the latter phase of the Project? (please tick no more than 3)

    assistance with management of your project;
    assistance with reporting;
    arranging project networking;
    including annual BONUS Conference;
    support to joint training activities;
    arranging joint infrastructure usage;
    arranging joint stakeholder activities;
    helping with communicating the project outputs to the potential users;
    helping with financial reporting;
    helping with project management;
    helping with data sharing;
    securing programme visibility and dissemination of its results to broad public;
     other.
Additional comment, if necessary:

Did you or any of your Project’s WP leaders encounter any significant problems in using the BONUS EPSS as a reporting medium?
Comment, if necessary:



Stakeholder Activities

Does your Project’s research plan contain any specific stakeholder involvement?
Would you attribute the science performed in your project to more basic or applied?


Comment and specify, if necessary:
Would the product(s) of your Project be directly applicable by the potential user(s)?

Comment and specify, if necessary:
Did your Project already arrange any stakeholder activity?
If YES, please specify:


If ‘YES’ in previous, where do you see the main value of that (those) activity(s)? (Please tick no more than 2)

    promoting the project to the potential users;
    mapping the potential stakeholders of the science done in your Project;
    adjusting the project outputs to the user needs;
    attracting potential moderators to develop your Project’s output into an applicable project;
    educating the stakeholders thus making them more accessible for the knowledge-based solutions generated by your Project;
    seeking agreement of the contrasting stakeholder interests;
    finding additional funders of your research;
    activity happened to be pretty formal, did not pay back the effort;
    other.
    If other, please specify:

To which of the categories below your project’s model stakeholder would belong?

    state governance;
    local governance;
    private commerce;
    NGO;
    other.
    If other, please specify:

To which of the sectors your project’s model stakeholder would belong? May check two if difficult to make choice.

    transportation;
    communication;
    energy;
    health care;
    military and security;
    environment and nature protection;
    food and agriculture (except fisheries);
    fisheries;
    regional development and spatial planning;
    other.
    If other, please specify:
Would you name any specific entity that already is, or could potentially become a user of your Project’s results?
What kind, if any, assistance with stakeholder consultation activities you would expect from the BONUS Secretariat?


Science Popularizing

Does your Project’s research plan contain any specific science popularizing activities?
Has your Project been already involved in any kind of these activities?
If YES, please specify:
What kind, if any, assistance with science popularization activities you would expect from the BONUS Secretariat?


The Format of Future BONUS Projects

All BONUS+ projects are similar in format: length up to 3 years, budget ceiling up to EUR 2 million, at least two countries represented.

Would you agree that with continuation of the BONUS Programme, format of projects could become more diverse depending on the specifics of the particular call theme?

If YES, please identify which of the proposed additional alternatives might be the most useful, or describe your own model. (Please check three most appealing.)

    up to one year long assignments for limited number of experts to synthesize knowledge on a particular matter (the typical outcome would be a monograph);
    up to one year assignment for limited number of experts to perform the foresight analysis in particular field;
    up to one year project to elaborate a particular clearly identified applied task;
    fewer but larger projects with higher budget ceiling;
    in addition to the research projects, some projects that would support long-term ecological observation programmes in the Baltic region, on parameters not included into the traditional environmental monitoring;
    in addition to the thematic calls, competition for one-few avant-garde awards for total bottom-up projects. The main selection criterion here is innovativeness of the idea;
    projects that would support advancement of the research infrastructures and observation techniques, possibly with SMEs as participants;
    more Programme funding shall be reserved for joint training activities;
    other.
Please describe your proposal for diversification of project format.


© 2012 BONUS Baltic Organisations' Network for Funding Science EEIG Disclaimer Sitemap Poutapilvi web design - P4 - julkaisujärjestelmä