Partners header

Annex: Form to be used by the Reviewer

Review Report - Panel Programme sector :
Project Number:
Acronym :
Project Assessment

A. Work Done Delete as necessary Comments
a Does the project still significantly contributes to the objectives of the programme? Yes / No
b Is it 'State of the Art' work, in terms of the application? Yes / No
c Is it 'State of the Art' work, in terms of the technology used? Yes / No
d Are the objectives of the project being met? Yes / No
e Are there definite plans for exploitation of results? Yes / No
f. Is there a reasonable balance between the work done and the financial investment in the project? Yes / No
B. Application Results: Scores 1 to 5 [1] Comments
a Are the user needs properly reflected in the user requirements and/or the implementation? 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
b Soundness of knowledge base 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
c Quality of application's approach 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
d Level of potential interoperability 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
e Content quality of deliverables in relation to project objectives 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
f Soundness of the validation phase 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
C. Project Management

g Balanced & consistent methods of approach 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
h Realistic time scales and resource allocation 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
i Effectiveness of project management techniques 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
j Sound schedule of Deliverables 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
k Dissemination of results and/or plans for reaching an effective consensus 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
l Strong synergy / integration between different parts of the project 1 - 2 - 3- 4 - 5

Review Report - page 2 Programme / Area :
Project Nº :
Title :

D. Modifications and Developments since the last Review [2]:

E. View on Project Status:

E. Exploitation / Implementation potential

F. Recommendations for future work:

G. Overall recommendation:
Successful completion Continue
Modify Red Flag

Panel rapporteur: ................................................. Date : .../10/1997

Signature : ..................................................





[1] 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Poor, 3=Satisfactory, 4=Good, 5=Very Good

[2] if applicable


Copyright 1995-2002 by:   ESS   Environmental Software and Services GmbH AUSTRIA