This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Project implemented by the Foundation'.




Associated with document Ref. Ares(2017)3511284 - 12/07/2017
Ref. Ares(2019)6047330 - 30/09/2019
Proposal Evaluation Form
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Evaluation
Summary Report -
Horizon 2020 - Research and Innovation Framework Programme
Research and
innovation
actions/Innovation
actions
Call:
H2020-SC1-2017-Two-Stage-RTD
Funding scheme:
RIA
Proposal number:
754919-2
Proposal acronym:
UPRIGHT
Duration (months):
48
Universal Preventive Resilience Intervention Globally implemented in schools to improve and promote mental
Proposal title:
Health for Teenagers
Activity:
SC1-PM-07-2017
Grant
N.
Proposer name
Country
Total Cost
%
%
Requested
ASOCIACION CENTRO DE EXCELENCIA INTERNACIONAL
1
ES
926,710
23.92%
926,710
23.92%
EN INVESTIGACION SOBRE CRONICIDAD
2
FONDAZIONE BRUNO KESSLER
IT
661,250
17.07%
661,250
17.07%
3
Urzad Marszalkowski Wojewodztwa Dolnoslaskiego
PL
447,500
11.55%
447,500
11.55%
NORGES TEKNISK-NATURVITENSKAPELIGE UNIVERSITET
4
NO
308,686.25
7.97%
308,686.25
7.97%
NTNU
5
EMBAETTI LANDLAEKNIS
IS
141,250
3.65%
141,250
3.65%
6
AARHUS UNIVERSITET
DK
701,250
18.10%
701,250
18.10%
7
HASKOLI ISLANDS
IS
687,568.75
17.75%
687,568.75
17.75%
 
Total:
 
3,874,215  
3,874,215  
Abstract:
Schools provide a unique location to implement universal programs for promoting mental health and wellbeing. Universal Preventive Resilience
Intervention Globally Implemented In Schools To Improve And Promote Mental Health For Teenagers (UPRIGHT) project aims to deploy and
evaluate a holistic inclusive intervention for a whole school environment. UPRIGHT general objective is to promote mental wellbeing and prevent
mental disorders by enhancing resilience capacities in youths, through a holistic approach addressing early adolescents, families and education
professionals. UPRIGHT conceptual framework is structured in four different domains (effective coping skills, self-efficacy; social emotional
learning; mindfulness; positive parenting skills). Three of the domains target youths and teachers, whereas the last one is for families. The project
consists of 4 main building blocks: 1) co-creation (co-design, co-production and co-customization) of the intervention in EU regions; 2) deployment
of resilience interventions; 3) process and outcome evaluation; 4) transfer learning on implementation of positive culture of mental wellbeing to
future regional, national and pan European programs. The UPRIGHT program will be implemented in 5 pilot sites across Europe representing
different regions and income countries: Poland (Lower Silesian), Spain (Basque Country), Italy (Trento), Denmark (Denmark) and Iceland
(Reykjavik capitol area). Schools of the pilot regions already have committed their participation (Letter of intent included in part4-5 of the proposal).
Evaluation Summary Report
Evaluation Result
Total score: 14.00 (Threshold: 12)
Form information
SCORING
Scores must be in the range 0-5.
Interpretation of the score:
The proposal fails to address the criterion or cannot be assessed due to missing or incomplete information.
1 Poor. The criterion is inadequately addressed, or there are serious inherent weaknesses.
2 Fair. The proposal broadly addresses the criterion, but there are significant weaknesses.
3 Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well, but a number of shortcomings are present.
4 Very good. The proposal addresses the criterion very well, but a small number of shortcomings are present.
5 Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion.Any shortcomings are minor.
Criterion 1 - Excellence
Score:  4.50 (Threshold: 4/5.00 , Weight: -)
The following aspects will be taken into account, to the extent that the proposed work corresponds to the topic description in the
work programme:
Clarity and pertinence of the objectives

754919-2/UPRIGHT-12/07/2017-11:40:57
1 / 3


Associated with document Ref. Ares(2017)3511284 - 12/07/2017
Soundness of the concept, and credibility of the proposed methodology
Extent that proposed work is beyond the state of the art, and demonstrates innovation potential (e.g. ground-breaking objectives,
novel concepts and approaches, new products, services or business and organisational models)
Appropriate consideration of interdisciplinary approaches and, where relevant, use of stakeholder knowledge

The proposal fully addresses the scope of the call. The objective of this project is to promote mental health and well-being by addressing early
adolescents, families, teachers, and the culture of the school. The holistic whole-school approach and the focus on enhancing resilience are
known to be effective in school mental health promotion. The innovative parts of this proposal are the active co-creation methodology involving
adolescents, families, teachers, and policy makers and the adaptation of the program to the specific characteristics and needs of different
European regions. The mixed method evaluation is convincingly described, especially the qualitative part. The two-wave evaluation strategy
allows to adapt and improve the intervention in step 2.
Some minor shortcomings have been identified by the evaluation panel, such as the vagueness of the descriptions of the co-creation
procedure and the intervention framework developed in phase 0. More detailed information about this framework would help to clarify how the
authors plan to combine intervention strategies (Cognitive behavioural therapy vs. mindfulness).

Criterion 2 - Impact
Score:  5.00 (Threshold: 4/5.00 , Weight: -)
The following aspects will be taken into account:
The extent to which the outputs of the project would contribute to each of the expected impacts mentioned in the work
programme under the relevant topic
Any substantial impacts not mentioned in the work programme, that would enhance innovation capacity, create new market
opportunities, strengthen competitiveness and growth of companies, address issues related to climate change or the
environment, or bring other important benefits for society
Quality of the proposed measures to:
- exploit and disseminate the project results (including management of IPR), and to manage research data where relevant
- communicate the project activities to different target audiences

The experts’ panel notes that the proposal shows a very high potential for improving the mental health and well-being in youth in both the short
and long term, thereby creating a strong evidence base for mental health promotion in European schools. The dissemination plan and the
communication strategy is well elaborated. Anticipated barriers are outlined along with strategies to overcome them. The evaluation panel
appreciates the high variety of tools for knowledge transfer and knowledge translation and that the intervention materials will be downloadable,
free and open access.

Criterion 3 - Quality and efficiency of the implementation
Score:  4.50 (Threshold: 3/5.00 , Weight: -)
The following aspects will be taken into account:
Quality and effectiveness of the work plan, including extent to which the resources assigned to work packages are in line with
their objectives and deliverables
Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation management
Complementarity of the participants and extent to which the consortium as a whole brings together the necessary expertise
Appropriateness of the allocation of tasks, ensuring that all participants have a valid role and adequate resources in the project
to fulfil that role

The work packages of the project are well described and the tasks are adequately allocated across the team members. The deliverables are
clearly related to specific tasks and resources assigned to work packages are in line with their objectives. The members of the consortium
have relevant expertise in each of the interventions proposed, as well as in their assessment. An appropriate risk management strategy is
described. While expressing minor concerns regarding the short timespan (9 months) for the work packages 2 and 3, the expert panel very
much appreciates the use of regional intervention teams. The team-based approach will facilitate the implementation of the project activities
and increase the overall impacts.

Scope of the proposal
Status:  Yes
Comments (in case the proposal is out of scope)
Not provided
Operational Capacity
Status:  Operational Capacity: Yes
If No, please list the concerned partner(s), the reasons for the rejection, and the requested amount.
Not provided
Exceptional funding of third country participants/international organisations
A third country participant/international organisation not listed in General Annex A to the Main Work Programme may
exceptionally receive funding if their participation is essential for carrying out the project (for instance due to outstanding
expertise, access to unique know-how, access to research infrastructure, access to particular geographical environments,
possibility to involve key partners in emerging markets, access to data, etc.). ( For more information, see the Online Manual )
Based on the information provided in the proposal, we consider that the following participant(s)/international organisation(s) that
requested funding should exceptionally be funded:
(Please list the Name and acronym of the applicant, Reasons for exceptional funding and the Requested grant amount.)

Not provided
Based on the information provided in the proposal, we consider that the following participant(s)/international organisation(s) that
requested funding should NOT be funded:
(Please list the Name and acronym of the applicant, Reasons for exceptional funding and the Requested grant amount.)

754919-2/UPRIGHT-12/07/2017-11:40:57
2 / 3


Associated with document Ref. Ares(2017)3511284 - 12/07/2017
Not provided
Use of human embryonic stem cells (hESC)
Status:  No
If yes, please state whether the use of hESC is, or is not, in your opinion, necessary to achieve the scientific objectives of the
proposal and the reasons why. Alternatively, please also state if it cannot be assessed whether the use of hESC is necessary or
not because of a lack of information.

Not provided
754919-2/UPRIGHT-12/07/2017-11:40:57
3 / 3


 
 
  
Digitally sealed by the European Commission
Date: 2017.07.12 11:46:01 CEST
 
This document is digitally sealed. The digital sealing mechanism uniquely binds the 
document to the modules of the Participant Portal of the European Commission, to the 
transaction for which it was generated and ensures its integrity and authenticity. 
Any attempt to modify the content will lead to a breach of the electronic seal, which can 
be verified at any time by clicking on the digital seal validation symbol. 
 
Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111