Deliverable D6.2: Quality Plan Date of Delivery: M2 Authors: Eleni Toli (UoA) Dissemination level: PU WP: Work package number Version: 1.0 Keywords: Quality assurance, internal procedures, templates, key performance indicators Description: This is the Quality Plan for the SUCRE project FP7-ICT-2011-8 Coordination and Support Action SUCRE (SUpporting Cloud Research Exploitation) Project No.: 318204 Project Runtime: 10/2012 09/2014 Copyright SUCRE Consortium 2012-2014
Document Metadata Quality Assurors and Contributors Quality assuror(s): Giovanna Calabró (ZPH) Contributor(s): Ariana Polyviou (SILO) Version History Version Date Description 0.1 30/10/2012 ToC 0.2 06/11/2012 Management Structure, Collaboration Mechanisms 0.3 10/11/2012 Deliverables, Report Production 0.4 21/11/2012 Support of dialogue, Key performance indicators 0.5 30/11/2012 Executive Summary, Introduction, Key performance Indicators 0.6 03/12/2012 Implementation of comments from Quality Assuror 1.0 04/12/2012 Final version submitted to the EC SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 2 of 22
Disclaimer This document contains description of the SUCRE project findings, work and products. Certain parts of it might be under partner Intellectual Property Right (IPR) rules so, prior to using its content please contact the consortium head for approval. In case you believe that this document harms in any way IPR held by you as a person or as a representative of an entity, please do notify us immediately. The authors of this document have taken any available measure in order for its content to be accurate, consistent and lawful. However, neither the project consortium as a whole nor the individual partners that implicitly or explicitly participated in the creation and publication of this document hold any sort of responsibility that might occur as a result of using its content. This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The content of this publication is the sole responsibility of SUCRE consortium and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. The European Union is established in accordance with the Treaty on European Union (Maastricht). There are currently 27 Member States of the Union. It is based on the European Communities and the member states cooperation in the fields of Common Foreign and Security Policy and Justice and Home Affairs. The five main institutions of the European Union are the European Parliament, the Council of Ministers, the European Commission, the Court of Justice and the Court of Auditors. (http://europa.eu.int/) SUCRE is a project partially funded by the European Union SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 3 of 22
Executive Summary Effective Quality Plans establish the prerequisites of Quality, help monitoring the related processes, transfer those prerequisites from individual assignments to overall project results, and thereby essentially contribute to the sustainable success of a project. SUCRE establishes a coherent set of guidelines by which all aspects of the project are managed and measured. Some of the items are strategically important in nature, while others answer to day-to-day complications that could arise during the project s timeframe. In all cases, however, the use of guidelines can ensure better collaboration among the consortium members, individuals and groups. It can also ensure that the entire consortium is responsible for and engaged in the work that is produced by the project. There is a widely held misunderstanding that Quality Plans and related guidelines result in more work, in addition to the tasks that a partner has contractually to carry out. SUCRE partners on the contrary believe that the use of these guidelines will reduce overhead, ease the work of the SUCRE management not only for the Coordinator but also for all partners and, increase the efficiency and quality of the work carried out in this Support Action. SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 4 of 22
Table of Contents 1 Introduction... 7 2 Management and Coordination Structure... 7 2.1 Project Coordinator... 7 2.2 Project Management Board... 8 2.3 Work package Leaders... 8 2.4 Quality Assurance Manager... 9 3 Support of Dialogue and Information Exchange... 10 3.1 Magazine Production Flow... 10 3.2 EU-Japan Experts Group... 11 3.3 Papers of General Interest... 11 4 Collaboration Mechanisms... 11 4.1 Mailing lists... 11 4.2 Document Repository... 12 4.3 Internal Wiki... 12 4.4 Monthly calls... 13 5 Deliverables... 14 5.1 Editing Guidelines... 14 5.1.1 Logo... 14 5.1.2 Templates and Formats... 14 5.2 Document identification and versioning... 15 5.3 Deliverable development plan... 15 5.4 Deliverable Production Plan and Review process... 16 6 Report Production... 18 6.1 Semi-annual Report... 18 6.2 Periodic Management Report... 19 7 Quality Assurance Metrics... 20 7.1 Measurement Methodologies... 20 7.2 Key performance indicators... 20 SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 5 of 22
List of Figures Figure 1: SUCRE Management Structure... 9 List of Tables Table 1: SUCRE Documentation and templates names... 14 Table 2: Deliverable production flow... 18 SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 6 of 22
1 Introduction The intention of this document is to describe the Quality Management Procedure that the project team will follow to assure and control the quality of all processes and deliverables produced during the SUCRE project life span. It will also provide guidelines for adequate implementation and thereby assure that certain quality standards in the performance of our tasks are fulfilled. Although provision has been taken and several of the procedures described below have also been included in the Description of Work and in the Consortium Agreement, a dedicated Quality Plan was considered as important reference point for the whole consortium. The work in SUCRE is organized and planned in a result-driven way and rests on the collaboration, consensus and joint decision making between partners. These principles are implemented through the SUCRE Quality Plan that covers many activities of the project and defines procedures concerning various managerial, scientific and administrative aspects of the project (e.g., deliverable production, deliverable review, activity-specific processes, internal communication mechanisms, metrics to be used as indicators of the project performance). The ultimate objective of this Quality Plan is to describe a common modus operandi for all partners and thereby ensure the production of concrete and high quality results in line with the project plans. 2 Management and Coordination Structure The lean management structure in SUCRE reflects the fact that the consortium maintains focused goals and has balanced activities among its members. The objective of the SUCRE management procedures will be to optimize resources in terms of budgetary, strategic and technical efficiency. The description of roles below is an extract from the DoW. In addition to this, and in order to cover all aspects related to management of the project, detailed descriptions of rights and obligations have also been included in the Consortium Agreement. 2.1 Project Coordinator Prof. Alex Delis will be the coordinator of the project and will be supported by the coordination team of UoA. The coordinator s main responsibilities are to the following: SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 7 of 22
Assure the project s deliverables quality and the process leading to them, Manage the project s decision-making process, Chair the Project Management Board (PMB), leading the set of activities to be carried out by this committee, Coordinate technical/support activities amongst work-packages, Serve as the only interlocutor of the Consortium with the European Commission, Act as the Financial Officer within the Consortium and manage the preparation of financial statements for the Commission). 2.2 Project Management Board The Project Management Board (PMB) will consist of one top-level delegate from each partner for strategic decision-making. The PMB will inherently include the Work Package Leaders (WPL) as well. Main responsibilities of the PMB will be the following: Definition of overall project strategy, Fulfillment of Commission s requirements: presentation of progress and financial reports, Daily budget and work-plan monitoring, and variation of contractual terms and/or schedules, Decisions on long-term exploitation plans, Conflict resolution within the consortium: project coordinator will chair, Technical coordination and decision-making: assessment of the technical work, interchange of technical information amongst partners, submission of deliverables, etc., Risk management. 2.3 Work package Leaders The detailed Work Plan of SUCRE (included in the DoW) describes the assignment of WPLs, specific deliverables related to each work-package and sets clear project milestones. These will become the fundamental criteria for making decisions on the project relative to progress per partner as well as per deliverable. Main deliverables have been scheduled to coincide with project SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 8 of 22
milestones points and specific meetings of the PMB to enable major Go/No- Go decisions to be made. Work Package Leader s main responsibilities include: Technical management of their Work-Packages, including consecution of deliverables and milestones, liaison with task leaders. Each WPL will be also responsible for the quality assurance of documents and deliverables produced, Technical reporting to the PMB, Communication exchange amongst the partners involved in their workpackage. A Task Leader (TL) has been designated for each of the tasks composing the work-packages, performing the technical management of the corresponding activities: planning, monitoring and reporting to the WPL. Each individual partner will be ultimately responsible for the delivery of technical and administrative outputs assigned to it. Figure 1: SUCRE Management Structure 2.4 Quality Assurance Manager The SUCRE Quality Assurance Manager (QAM) will be responsible for the implementation of quality procedures established with this Project Quality Plan. Together with the Project Coordinator, the QAM will continuously guide, track and monitor the quality of project s activities, and products in terms of compliance to SUCRE quality standards. The QAM will ensure that objectives are met and assure the quality of the final product (considering quality the fulfillment of initial requirements). As part of this continuous monitoring and SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 9 of 22
assessing process and if needed, the QAM will propose an updated set of guidelines, rules, procedures and metrics governing the project operation. During the project s kick off meeting, held in October 2012 in Brussels, the consortium appointed Ariana Polyviou from Singular Logic as Quality Assurance Manager. 3 Support of Dialogue and Information Exchange 3.1 Magazine Production Flow In order to assure the quality of each issue of the SUCRE Magazine, a brief document with guidelines was drawn up in advance. The main guidelines are summarized below: 1. Each issue of the magazine will focus on a specific theme selected by the Editorial Board from a list of hot topics identified jointly by the SUCRE partners and the cloud and open source experts that collaborate with the project. The definition of high profile selection of articles will be guaranteed by the strong and long experience and technical background matured in the cloud and open source environment by the panelists of the Editorial Board. 2. Further to the selection of each specific theme, the Call for Abstracts will be circulated and channeled through appropriate mailing lists, individual contacts, media partners, etc. 3. The abstracts received will be forwarded to the Editorial Board experts, who will have a final word on which are to be accepted and published and/or rejected. Authors will be notified accordingly. 4. Finally, upon the reception of final papers, firstly the content will be, again, revised by the Editorial Board panelists, who, at this stage, will be fully supported by a professional, native speaking journalist, highly experienced working in the multi-cultural, transnational and committeerun environments of EU collaborative projects, not to mention her work as professional translator of English-Japanese technical articles. The Magazine will be also a direct channel for SUCRE project outputs such as action points from position statements from the workshops and will voice the various user communities interviewed by the SUCRE partners to better understand their needs and expectations. Thus, the SUCRE partners will handle careful discussions to establish a clear project brief, especially to define the style and tone of articles and a template for their structure that SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 10 of 22
works across different media. In this sense, a contract with a professional designer has been signed already. The collaboration and synergies between the above described actors shall ensure the requested professional approach and open communication, which guarantees the delivery of high-quality articles and overall design of the Magazine. 3.2 EU-Japan Experts Group Bringing together experts from different countries and coordinating the effort to produce useful recommendations is a challenging task. The work of the group has to be prepared and supported in the best possible way. For this reason, SUCRE, together with the experts participating in the EU-Japan Experts Group, has drafted a charter governing all processes of the group. The charter sets the common ground, by defining objectives and goals of the EU-Japan Experts Group. It also defines composition, structure, roles, operational procedures and work plan. By providing clarity within the group on who is doing what when it is ensured that objectives are understood and goals are achieved. The work of the EU-Japan Working Group will be also supported by a collaboration wiki, which will allow for a continuous discussion and information flow among the members. 3.3 Papers of General Interest SUCRE members are highly encouraged to distribute among the consortium any information related to the project objectives: articles from the technical press, workshop or conference results, expert groups outcomes, white papers, specific working documents, etc. For this purpose the consortium will make use of the collaboration mechanisms described in the next chapter. 4 Collaboration Mechanisms 4.1 Mailing lists Electronic Mail (e-mail) will be the most common way of exchange between partners and among all consortium members. It is recommended that each participant (or at least his Administrative Assistant) look at his/her e-mail at least once a day to see if there is any mail awaiting attention. SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 11 of 22
For a better organisation of the internal communication, SUCRE has set up the following work package-specific mailing lists: wp1-sucre@di.uoa.gr wp2-sucre@di.uoa.gr wp3-sucre@di.uoa.gr wp4-sucre@di.uoa.gr wp5-sucre@di.uoa.gr In addition, a general SUCRE members list, an Editorial Board list and an Experts Group list have been created: all-sucre@di.uoa.gr sucre-eb@di.uoa.gr sucre-experts@di.uoa.gr Concrete instructions about the mailing list participation will be provided to any new member who will be invited to join the lists above. All lists are managed by the project coordinator. Communication with the external world is of course of outmost importance for a Support Action. A dedicated email account has been created and this will be a one-stop shop related to any inquiry about the project: info@sucreproject.eu In addition to the above a list of contact details of all partners has been created, which includes name, phone number at work, mobile phone number, email and Skype ID. This list will be only for internal use and for facilitating a smooth communication among the partners. 4.2 Document Repository Formal communication channels and formats will be established with the help of a project virtual collaboration environment managed by UoA. It will help ensuring rapid and robust transfer of information (general but also project related), results, data, dialogue, reports and cost claims between the partners. For security and permanent access reasons the consortium has decided to use SVN. 4.3 Internal Wiki A Wiki-based content management system will be set up and dedicated to collaboratively create, edit, link and organize documentation material SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 12 of 22
concerning mainly the production of the reports. Several wikis offer rich functionalities; the coordinator is in charge of identifying and implementing the one that suits the SUCRE needs in the best way. 4.4 Monthly calls Internal Conference calls will be organized on a monthly basis among all SUCRE partners. This call will be one of the main tools for monitoring work and ensuring qualitative outcomes. In order to organize it in the most effective and successful way, the following principles should be respected: The date, time, expected duration, agenda and names of participants should be communicated in advance. This is the responsibility of the project coordinator. If any documents are required for the better preparation of the meeting, these must be distributed by e-mail at least one week before the call. All participants have to make sure that they join the meeting on time and can dedicate the time reserved for the call. If a partner foresees that he/she is unable to join the call, he/she should communicate this to the Coordinator and ensure a replacement for the call. The calls will be held using either the facility offered by the Greek Universities Network (GUnet) or Skype. Depending, however, on the partners feedback after the first calls, the use of other tools can be investigated as well. In any case this information has to be agreed with all partners and communicated well in advance before the call. The conference calls will be held always in the third Thursday every month. The dates for the calls in the first months of the project are: 22 November 2012 20 December 2012 17 January 2013 21 February 2013 21 March 2013 If the majority of partners cannot attend, the possibility to move the date exists. This has to be agreed and communicated at least 10 days in advance to ensure participation of all partners. SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 13 of 22
5 Deliverables The project coordinator and the Quality Manager are responsible for ensuring that all SUCRE documents and particularly all SUCRE deliverables are controlled and revised effectively. This includes the control of the document template, the identification, the delivery process and the overall formal deliverable quality. 5.1 Editing Guidelines 5.1.1 Logo The consortium has evaluated and agreed on a number of variations of the project logo. The main logo, which has to be used, is shown on the cover of this document. It is also available on the SUCRE website and in the dedicated folder in the project document repository (along with the other versions), from where it can also be downloaded for an easier future use. 5.1.2 Templates and Formats The consortium has already agreed on basic models for the production of official documentation. For compatibility reasons it has been decided to use the formats shown in the table below: Documentation Type MS Word Documentation Template Name SUCRE_deliverable_Template.doc YYMMDD_Call_Agenda.doc YYMMDD_Call_Minutes.doc MS Powerpoint Presentation MS Excel-Financial Progress Report Template SUCRE_presentation_template.ppt SUCRE_FPR.xls Table 1: SUCRE Documentation and templates names The templates can be also found in the dedicated folder in the project document repository, from where they can also be downloaded for an easier future use. SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 14 of 22
All partners understand the importance of using the templates above including all elements they feature (cover page, layout, format, tables, etc.) 5.2 Document identification and versioning In the frame of the SUCRE project, a unique document identifier will be introduced to ensure effective identification and versioning of each document. This identifier has the following format for deliverable documents: <Project Name>_<Del. ID>_<Del. Name>_<V.X.X> Example: SUCRE_D6.2_QualityPlan_V0.1 For non-deliverable documents the identifier is as follows: <Project Name>_<WPnumber>_<Doc. type>_<v.x.x> Example: SUCRE_WP5_PressRelease_V0.1 When a document is issued for the first time, it has to be defined as a draft (version 0.x), if it requires formal approval. Usually, the approval process requires that a document will be circulated for comments among the interested partners. Upon receiving the comments by the specified deadline, the author will make the proper modifications, therefore changing the version sub-number, without affecting the main number. The main version number (the first figure before the. ) is increased by one unit only if a different version of the document is delivered to the EU Commission, or if major modifications have significantly altered the contents of the document. The editor must not forget to update the version number in all its occurrences in the document. It order to avoid by all means distributing two different documents with the same version number, the right to changing the versioning number remains only to the author of the document. Every time a group of people is working on a document and is making modifications on it, the new version must contain a clear indication of what has been added, modified or removed, and by whom. For this reason every partner working on a document has to use the track changes facility offered by most document editing tools. 5.3 Deliverable development plan The partner responsible for a deliverable will issue a plan, which will describe the main objectives of the deliverable and allocate specific tasks in the report to the appropriate contributors. SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 15 of 22
This plan will also include a draft structure of the future deliverable, and therefore it will contain following elements: Table of Contents Person responsible for the deliverable (Deliverable Author) Persons in charge of each chapter/section (Contributors) Person in charge of the quality check of the deliverable (Quality Assuror) A timetable for the deliverable development, setting deadlines at least for: o submission of contributions o production of the first draft (version 0.1) o internal review (partners comments) o production of final draft of the Deliverable o submission of the final draft to the Quality Assuror o production of final version of the Deliverable o delivery to the Coordinator (who will send it to the Commission) The partner responsible for the deliverable should take into account realistic timing for the submission of inputs, and therefore propose the plan with sufficient advance, in order to meet the established date for its submission to the Commission, as per the Contract. 5.4 Deliverable Production Plan and Review process Each deliverable is associated to a Work Package and tackles a specific subject. The partner responsible for the deliverable nominates the Deliverable Author, jointly with the Coordinator and the Work Package Leader. The author will create the document and co-ordinate the work of the partners involved. The work package participants also agree on the person who will perform the quality check of the document (Quality Assuror). The first step of the deliverable production is the definition of the document structure. This structure, which will be actually the Table of Contents (ToC) of the document, has to take into account the short deliverable descriptions included in the DoW. The production of the ToC is the responsibility of the deliverable author. In the same version of the document the author will define what contributions are expected from each partner engaged in this process. Along with the ToC the author will also provide an initial set of instructions SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 16 of 22
related to the contributions and input (content, format, timeline), and will propose the schedule for the meetings he/she may consider necessary for the development of the deliverable. The author sends the document structure to all work package partners and the Quality Assuror for comments and approval. Upon receiving the comments and input from the different contributors, the author will merge them into a single document. This first draft will then be circulated and asked for a second round of comments: each partner will check its consistency with the plans and give their feedback and approval. This iterative procedure will be repeated as necessary, until approval is given by all involved partners (Work Package internal review). After this exchange, a final draft will be prepared by the author and will be sent to the Quality Assuror for the official review and validation. In turn, the Quality Assuror will send comments and proposed changes (if any) to the Author. Upon receiving the comments from the Quality Assuror, the author incorporates them into the deliverable, produces the final version of it and sends it back to the Assuror for the very final check. The Assuror checks if all comments have been applied and sends the deliverable to the Author and the work package leader with a declaration of approval. The author sends the deliverable to the Project Coordinator. The Project Coordinator sends the deliverable to the PMB for approval. The PMB approves the Deliverable. Finally the Project Coordinator sends the deliverable to the Commission. In summary, all deliverables prepared by the SUCRE consortium, before being submitted to the European Commission, must undergo a three-steps review: 1. Work-package internal review 2. Quality Assuror official review 3. PMB review and approval For the successful performance of the procedure above, the following deadlines have been agreed: SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 17 of 22
Date What Who M1 Day 1 Deliverable Author nomination Quality Assuror nomination Deliverable owner WP leader Coordinator M1 Day 5 Document Structure ToC Deliverable Author M1 Day 10 M1 Day 22 First draft of Deliverable to WP members & Quality Assuror Final draft of Deliverable to Quality Assuror for final review Deliverable Author Deliverable Author M1 Day 26 Final version of Deliverable to PMB Deliverable Author M1 Day 29 Approval of Deliverable by the PMB PMB M1 Day 30 Sending the Deliverable to the EC Coordinator Table 2: Deliverable production flow If the above dates correspond to a holiday, the deadline is postponed to the morning of the first working day after the deadline. 6 Report Production It is a contractual requirement to submit to the European Commission at the end of each year the Periodic Management Report. In addition to this and in order to better monitor all activities, SUCRE partners have committed themselves to submit to the Commission in the time between two Semi- Annual Reports (i.e. in months 6 and 18 of the project). Partners will be also asked to send a six-months effort reporting. However, this information is not submitted to the European Commission on a sixmonthly basis, but only at the end of the official reporting period. 6.1 Semi-annual Report For the production of the semi-annual reports a dedicated Wiki will be set up. The Wiki will have a clear structure, based on the work packages and tasks of the project. The project coordinator indicates any inactive work packages or SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 18 of 22
tasks. Each work package leader is responsible for asking for input for each task, collecting and consolidating it. Particular attention will be given to the level of granularity. All partners must do a detailed presentation of the work performed and the tasks accomplished in the reporting period. Partners have also to declare any deviations or delays in the delivery of tasks, as well as any contingency plans related to this. Partners will have to submit any information related to the semi-annual report within 20 days after the end of the reporting period. The Project Coordinator integrates all input and produces the consolidated version of the report. The final check will be performed by the Project Coordinator, the Work Package Leaders and the Quality Manager of the project. The review process must be finalized within 60 days after the end of the reporting period. After this the Coordinator submits the report to the European Commission. 6.2 Periodic Management Report The Periodic Management Report will be delivered according to the format required by the EC and will be composed by the following parts: a) a publishable summary of the work progress towards meeting the objectives of the project, b) achievements and attainment of any milestones and deliverables identified in Annex I, c) any deviations between the work expected to be carried out and the work actually carried out, d) an explanation of the use of resources, e) the Forms C s or financial statements from each beneficiary, together with a summary report consolidating the claimed Community contribution in an aggregated form. The report template will be uploaded by the Coordinator to the project s SVN. Partners will have to submit any information related to their activities in the reporting period within 20 days after the end of the reporting period. The Project Coordinator integrates all input and produces the consolidated version of the report. The final check will be performed by the Project Coordinator, the Work Package Leaders and the Quality Manager of the project. The review process must be finalized within 60 days after the end of the reporting period. After this the Coordinator submits the report to the European Commission. SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 19 of 22
7 Quality Assurance Metrics To follow the progress of the project activities on a regular basis and better understand potential difficulties, delays and/or deviations to the original plan, the SUCRE partners have tried to quantify, and thereby measure, a number of quality parameters related to the project. 7.1 Measurement Methodologies Three different ways of measuring performance will be used to monitor the project: Quantitative Description: This stands for very clear quantitative indicators with a numerical target. Example: Number of participants. Report Description: This typology of measurement indicates that the performance indicators are both, quantitative and qualitative. Thus, for having a better evaluation, a more detail analysis is needed. Example: Interaction between SUCRE and Cloud & Open Source initiatives Interviews and user interaction analysis Description: For all indicators including the user interaction and satisfaction it is impossible to evaluate the success status without an analysis of real user behavior. For this reason, this class of indicators will be used where the users interaction is needed. Example: Attendee satisfaction. 7.2 Key performance indicators In the following we present the main indicators for the quality assurance in the SUCRE project. They have been split in three categories, according to the main activities of the project: management, research and dissemination. Management Activities (MA) Indicators MA1 Number of Project Management Board physical meetings Quantitative MA2 Number of Project Management Board remote meetings Quantitative SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 20 of 22
MA3 Prompt preparation and circulation of meeting agendas and minutes Report MA4 Number of successfully completed Tasks Quantitative MA5 Number of raised disputes Quantitative MA6 Number of Risks/Deviations tackled Quantitative MA7 Number of delayed Deliverables Quantitative MA8 SA1 Prompt preparation of project internal reports (Consortium Agreement, Quality Plan, etc.) Scientific Activities (SA) Indicators Interaction between SUCRE and targeted Communities (Public Sector and Health Care provisioning Industry) Report Report SA2 Number of projects involved in SUCRE activities Quantitative SA3 SA4 SA5 Number of external organizations involved in SUCRE activities Number of external experts involved in SUCRE activities (EU- Japan Experts Group, Editorial Board Interaction between SUCRE and Cloud and Open Source initiatives Quantitative Quantitative Report SA6 Acceptance of the project findings from the user communities Qualitative SA7 Acceptance of the project findings from the technical/industrial communities Qualitative SA8 Interactions with other Experts Groups Report SA9 Number of Stakeholders interviewed Quantitative SA10 Number of experts accepted the invitation as tutor at the SUCRE Young Researchers Forum Quantitative SA11 Number of Experts Group physical meetings Quantitative SA12 Number of Experts Group remote meetings Quantitative SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 21 of 22
SA13 Number of abstracts received for the magazine Quantitative SA14 Number of revisions of the project Deliverables Quantitative SA15 Number of Deliverables rejected in project s review Quantitative SA16 Citations to project deliverables or related publications Quantitative Dissemination Activities (DA) Indicators DA1 DA2 Number of external participants at SUCRE Community targeting Workshops Number of external participants at the SUCRE EU-Japan Workshop Quantitative Quantitative DA3 Successful participation and attendee satisfaction Interviews, user analysis DA4 Number of participants at the SUCRE Young Researchers Forum Quantitative DA5 Successful participation and trainee satisfaction Interviews, user analysis DA6 Quantity of Promotional and dissemination material produced Quantitative DA7 Promotional and dissemination material produced Quality DA8 Impact of website (number of hits, unique visitors, length of stay, most popular pages, peaks, etc through web statistic module) Quantitative SUCRE D6.2 Quality Plan Page 22 of 22