Quality Management Process

The Quality Management Process is designed to ensure that the project implementation is of high quality and completed in time, and that the project is guided by data and evidence, focused on achieving its intended impact and outcomes, and able to adapt to any changes or challenges that may arise. The Quality management process comprises all activities that will increase the ability to meet the project expected results identified in the Description of Action (DoA). The quality management process for this project is comprised of 3 key steps:

• Define Quality Characteristics
• Perform Quality Assurance
• Perform Quality Control

5.1 Quality characteristics

The purpose of this step is to identify requirements, specifications, or guidelines that can be used to ensure that products, processes, or services are fit for achieving the desired outcome. These are documented in the present Management Guide and in the Quality Assurance policy. The project defines several quality characteristics to guide its implementation:

• Agile methodology: Ensures flexibility and adaptability through iterative development cycles.
• Data-driven approach: Utilizes a Data Warehouse and collaborative data management methodology for monitoring and piloting tasks.
• Impact-oriented focus: Analyzes operational level data to inform management and strategic levels.
• Regular progress monitoring: Includes check-in meetings, quality assurance reviews, and budget monitoring.
• Evaluation methods: Employs both quantitative and qualitative indicators to monitor and verify activities and results.

These measures will:

• ensure that the project is flexible and adaptable, enabling it to respond quickly to any changes or challenges that may arise;
• ensure that the project is guided by data and evidence, which will help to make informed decisions;
• ensure that the project is focused on achieving its intended impact and outcomes;
• ensure that the project is on track and that any issues are identified and addressed in a timely manner;
• ensure good quality, monitoring, planning and control; and
• to assess the success of the project and to identify any areas for improvement.

5.2 Quality Assurance

Quality assurance in UNITA is a proactive, ongoing process that focuses on preventing quality issues. Key aspects include:

• Establishing quality standards and procedures aligned with the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ESG)
• Developing internal quality assurance systems at the alliance level
• Ensuring compliance with national and European quality requirements
• Promoting continuous improvement and innovation

Quality Assurance activities will be performed by Task Team 1.3 (TT1.3), while the UNITA Quality & Evaluation Board (QEB) monitors the reports and policies of the Task Teams. The monitoring/review of the QA system and its applications will be carried out on the basis of what is summarized in the reports, from the global level (QEB Self-Assessment Report, Progress Report, etc.) to the WPs of the UNITA and constellation projects, collaborating with the actors/bodies in charge of them, in order to consolidate the synergy (top-down, bottom-up and middle-out) through an effective and efficient communication flow. Progress monitoring is presented to the Management Committee on a bimonthly basis using the Status report and every six months to the Governance Board using Progress reports.

Continuous improvement

In the perspective of continuous improvement, the Quality Assurance Strategy, illustrated in the UNITA Quality Assurance Policy – QA structure, putting mission into practice, QA system for Teaching, Research and Quality Management Services – will be reinforced and implemented through the QEB Quality Plan and Gantt Chart. Continuing the constant benchmarking action at every level, procedures and tools for QA will be further implemented to boost transnational cooperation within the Alliance and beyond. Thus, procedures and tools will be further developed and refined, such as:

• the widespread dissemination of the QA Policy;
• the synergy described in the document on QA Actors and Roles;
• the implementation of the Communication Flow Chart and the Quality Review Check List (described in the Quality Control); and
• the dissemination of good practices starting from the shared QA processes, concerning Teaching, Research and Quality Management System.

Constant feedback will make it possible to measure and assess the effectiveness of processes, actions and tools at every level, in close collaboration with the T5.4 UNITA impact observatory. This will be consolidated through practices and tools developed during Phase 1:

• satisfaction surveys of students, staff (administrative and teaching/researcher) and external stakeholders;
• targeted meetings/interviews;
• general and targeted indicators, etc.; and
• Satisfaction Barometer.

5.3 Quality Control

Quality Control is a reactive process that identifies and addresses quality issues after they occur. In UNITA, QC activities include:

• Evaluating joint programs and courses against established quality criteria
• Conducting student surveys and analyzing feedback
• Monitoring key performance indicators at specific checkpoints or after project completion
• Performing at regular intervals quality review checklists
• Addressing identified quality issues through corrective actions

The Quality Review Checklist (QRC), which includes a quality review of the deliverables, will be used by the Project Manager in collaboration with TT1.3 for assessing compliance with the plans in terms of scope, time, cost, quality, project organization, communication, risks and stakeholders satisfaction. Additionally, the Task Team 1.3 will summarize and document the Quality Review Checklist findings and their impact and the QEB will provide recommendations. Finally, QC will be reinforced by an external evaluation in the third year by a European Evaluation Agency, through which good practices can be disseminated and consolidated and weaknesses addressed and resolved.

Project Quality Review Process

Quality Review Process Members

• UNITA Executive Coordinator (EC)
• Quality & Evaluation Board (QEB)
• Task Team 1.3 (TT1.3)
• UNITA Offices (UO)
• Work Package Co-leader (WPL)
• Task Co-Leader (TL)
• Task Team Members (TT)
• Governance Stakeholders (GS)
• Beneficiaries

Quality Review Process

• Step 1: The process starts with a meeting between members from TT1.3 and the UNITA Executive Coordinator (EC), in which the process and the role of the participants are explained and the Quality Review Checklist (QRC) is presented.
• Step 2: After this meeting, two (2) processes will be running at the same time:

1. The QRC will be sent to the (EC) to be used to assess the project's compliance with the planned activities (and related outputs) in several domains – Scope, Schedule, Cost, Quality, Risk, Issues & Decisions, Communication, Project Organization, and Stakeholder Satisfaction. Each question has the indication of who should be responsible for its answer and who/what should be consulted in order to obtain it; and

2. At the same time, Surveys created to assess the Satisfaction of the Governance Stakeholders and the Beneficiaries – Students, Teachers, Researchers and Academic Community – are sent to the respective target audience. The results from these Surveys are collected and analyzed by the TT1.3.

Once the QRC is completed by the EC, he sends it to the TT1.3, so that the results from the Surveys can be added to the Stakeholder Satisfaction’s Domain.

• Step 3: It is up to TT1.3 to make the first analysis of the QRC and make a first Draft of the Quality Report. By email or through a meeting, TT1.3 shares the Draft with the EC, so that questions/doubts/comments can be solved and added to the Report. After, a Final Draft is made by the TT1.3, of both QRC and the Report, with preliminary suggestions/recommendations to the findings, and sent to the QEB for approval.
• Step 4: It is up to the QEB to carry out the analysis of the Report and complete the "Recommendations" sheet in the QRC, making any suggestions for improvement that it deems necessary.
• Step 5: Once approved, the Report is sent to the EC, and it is up to him to identify the actions, with the responsibles and deadlines, needed to implement the QEB recommendations and inform about them, both the QEB and the Management Committee (MC).
• Step 6: To complete the process, the Management Committee (MC) is in charge of the recommendations approval.

All documents for the quality control can be found here.

Quality Control Roles and Responsibilities

Main Roles	Responsibilities
Task Team 1.3 (TT3.1)	Responsible for the kick-off evaluation, monitor and support the process evolution, provide information in some domains of the Quality Review Checklist (QRC), collect and merge the contributions of other members - surveys results - , prepare the latest version of the QRC, propose recommendations and prepare the Report.
WP Co- Leaders (WPL) & Task Co- Leader (TTL)	Provide information to the EC, and answer several questions in the QRC Domains.
UNITA Offices (UO)	Provide information related to costs and human resources.
Task Team Members (TT), Governance Stakeholders (GS) and Beneficiaries	These UNITA members will provide information, throughout surveys, that will allow to answer questions related to satisfaction and documentation knowledge.
UNITA Executive Coordinator (EC)	Fill in the answer to some questions in the various QRC domains and, approve the latest version of the QRC and of the Report, before they are sent to the QEB. Also identifies the responsibles and deadlines for the actions, to comply with the Quality recommendations, and support their implementation.
Quality & Evaluation Board (QEB)	Review and makes the final approval of the Report. Suggests more recommendations if needed.
Management Committee (MC)	Is informed of the Quality Review Report and approves the Quality recommendations.
Governance Board (GB)	Is consulted by the MC and is informed half-yearly in the Project Progress Report.

The following RASCI table defines the responsibilities of those involved in quality control:

RAM(RASCI)	TT/TTL/WPL/	EC	TT3.1	QEB	MC	GB
Performing Quality Control	S	I/C	S	R	I	I
Implementing Quality recommendations	R	S	S	C	A	C

Consolidated Responsibilities Assignment Matrix (RAM/RASCI)

RASCI	Description
R	Responsible
A	Accountable
S	Supports
C	Consulted
I	Informed

Deliverable Quality Review Process

All deliverables must be finalized and submitted, within the deadlines defined in the Grant Agreement, and submitted to the European Commission. The content of each Deliverable Report depends on the type of provided information, and, as a general principle, the responsibility for the content is always with the author(s).

To ensure the quality of the deliverables, a Deliverable Quality Review Process was created, evolving two tools for the assessment:

• Checklist: o ensure that all the required elements are present in the Deliverables,and identify any missing components, errors, or inconsistencies.

In this Project, the Deliverables' Reports should always meet the following set of quality criteria: Content; Formatting; Accuracy; Readability; Relevance; Visuals; Accessibility; Functionality; Timeliness; and User experience.

• Peer review: a process in which team members review and evaluate each other's work. It can help to identify any errors or omissions, and assure consistency and high standard for the deliverables, providing feedback to the Task Team members.

In this Project, the Peer Review is processed individually. Three (3) Reviewers will be selected, outside of the QEB and the Task Team/Work Package from where the Deliverable Report is from. Of these 3 reviewers, only 1 or 2 (depending on the Deliverable) will carry out the assessment, living the rest in reserve, in the event of unforeseen circumstances.

This Deliverable Quality Review, is also used as information to the QRC, for the Project Quality Report.

Deliverable Review Process

• Step 1: At least, 15 days before the deadline, described in the Grant Agreement, is allocated time for the WPL, to send the Deliverable drafting to Quality Review, to the Peers.
• Step 2: The Quality Review should be done in one (1) week and sent to the WPL, as for the Report's author can have time to collect the comments/suggestions from the Peer Reviewers and decide what changes/actions to the document are to be undertaken.