Grill for Action-Research Quality

Pillar 1. Mobilization of the territorial actors and resources.
Objective 1.a. Investigation of the target territory’s actors and resources.
Mean 1.a.1: Compilation and analysis of existing documents and data (scientific and technical, political, legal, etc.) on the target problems.
The documentation used to define the project of action-research is sufficient (considering quantity and quality) to give a global initial vision of the target problems. It is based on coherent theoretical grounds.
The documentation used to define the project of action-research is sufficient to give an historical perspective of the target problems.
The diversity and quality of documentary sources allows the main dimensions of the object of action-research to be considered, and to build a theoretical framework of the links between them.
The documentation has been jointly analyzed by all the project promoter team.
Mean 1.a.2: Account of existing bodies and actions linked to the general subject of the project. Drawing up of a map of territorial actors involved and of the logics of existing networks.
The project promoter team has updated a repertoire or map of territorial actors involved in the problems being tackled.
The repertoire or map of territorial actors corresponds with the territorial reality and is adequately updated.
The repertoire or map of territorial actors has been jointly analyzed by the project promoter team.
It has been taken into account the available evaluations about past actions on the same problem.
It has been taken into account main territorial actor’s and inhabitant’s mental representations.
Objective 1.b. Organization of actors/researchers partnerships.  
Mean 1.b.1: Organisation of work meetings with researchers and actors which can be potentially involved in the action-research at the beginning of the projects.
The project promoter team has made a wide dissemination of the project to promote the involvement of other actors and researchers that might be concerned in the project.
The make up of the final action-research team must come from an open climate and mutual trust between the various actors involved.
The final composition of the action-research team ensures that the sectors concerned are adequately represented.
The final composition of the action-research team ensures that the disciplines concerned are adequately represented.
Mean 1.b.2: Work themes definition with the collaboration of all the participants.
The themes of work have been agreed by all participants involved.
Participants have jointly developed an action-research project which is accessible for and known by all of them.
Topics addressed take in account the responsibility of each participant and of the interest they represent.
Pillar 2. Mutualisation of the whole of competences and knowledge.
Objective 2.a. Multidimensionality of the action-research.
Mean 2.a.1: Drawing up of a synthesis of documents and data (state of the art) accessible to all participants.
A synthesis document containing the "state of the question" with regard to the problems being tackled has been jointly elaborated at the origin of the project.
This synthesis document is accessible to all the participants.
Participants have jointly read, analyzed and agreed the synthesis document.
Elements in the territory which are not under the control of the action-research team has been well addressed.
Mean 2.a.2 Implication of several research teams of different disciplines or multidisciplinary research teams.
The final action-research group is made up of actors and researchers from different sectors and disciplines.
Team coordination is provided by an expert in the basic thematic field of the project regardless if he/she is an actor or a researcher
Mean 2.a.3 Making up multidisciplinary diagnostics articulating quantitative and qualitative methods and considering the notion of “territory” from a global point of view (historic, geographic, economic, sociological,… dimension).
They have been employed quantitative and/or qualitative methods which are suitable for the purpose of the action-research.
It has been considered the territorial dimension of the problems being dealt, i.e, has been taken into account the effects on individuals and on the territories from a global approach.
The specificity and the level of administrative governance in a territorial level were taken into account.
Objective 2.b. Co-learning.
Mean 2.b.1 Training and awareness-raising by researchers of territorial actors on research methods and tools.
Territorial actors know and know how to use methods and research tools that will be used in the project.
There have been celebrated training sessions on methods and research tools for the territorial actors who need additional training.
Mean 2.b.2 Training and awareness-raising by territorial actors of researchers on specific features of the project target territory and population.
Researchers know the main features of the territory as well as of its population.
There have been celebrated training sessions on the main features of the target territory and its population for researchers who need additional training.
Mean 2.b.3 Collaborative participation of researchers and territorial actors in the implementation and development of the investigation.
There have been designed or adapted accessible and friendly computer tools for the pooling of available information or for the collection of new information.
The use of these tools is adequate: participants know them and they used them effectively.
The use of technologies of information and communication is adequate regarding the needs of communication between participants.
There have been designed or adapted other non computer participatory tools enhancing collaborative work.
Participants to whom other members can address questions if necessary have been clearly identified.
Competences and knowledge is being carried out completely and correctly: actors have appropriated the tools and researchers are aware of territorial dynamics and actor’s logics of action and constrains.
It has been built a system of communication capable of representing to all involved actors, in a complete and coherent manner, both the philosophy of the process of development and the active contents.
In general, the communication between participants is sufficient and adequate.
Pillar 3. Responsibility of participants and involved institutions.
Objective 3.a. Organization of a collaborative management of the project.
Mean 3.a.1 Creation of an evolving steering committee gathering the different active participants (researchers and actors). Organization of sub-group teams gathering researchers, involved institutions representatives and territorial actors according to the defined themes. Elaboration of a work programme that defines interim objectives and impacts on the territory.
It was created a steering committee in which are represented the active participants of the project.
The steering committee has established a work plan that defines intermediate objectives and impacts of the project on the territory and which is accessible to all participants.
The steering committee meets regularly to monitor the plan.
There have been created working subgroups formed by actors and researchers for the realization of specific tasks.
The work subgroups have delineated work plans that define their intermediate objectives and deadlines for implementation. These work plans are accessible to all participants
The work subgroups periodically meet to follow up on their work plans.
The steering committee manages scientific, action and financial aspects in a well balanced manner.
Mean 3.a.2 Creation of an autonomous consultancy ethical council that guarantees a proper implementation of the project.
It has been established a consultative group on ethical issues that ensures the correct implementation of the project.
Genders issues are correctly addressed.
Mean 3.a.3 Evolving hierarchy of data access according to the degree of responsibility of each participant.
It has been established an evolving hierarchical data access system on the basis of the responsibilities of each participant.
The access to data is well correlated with the need to provide data from all territorial actors.
Objective 3.b. Deontology and autonomy of participants.
Mean 3.b.1 Observation of deontological principles of research in Human and Social Sciences (anonymity of surveyed individuals, observation of rules on statistical secrecy, transparency of the investigation objectives, feed-back of results to participants, and autonomy of territorial actors from the funding bodies).
The action-research respects the anonymity of individuals.
Action-research objectives have been jointly built, whatever modification has been jointly discussed.
The action-research respects the rules of statistical confidentiality.
The objectives of the action-research are transparent.
Territorial actors and researchers have autonomy from the funding entities.
Deliverables (publications, tools, etc.) must be validated by all participants.
Written scientific deliverables must respect international formal rules.
It has been created a committee of users that validates the ongoing action-research specially the results.
Mean 3.b.2 Setting up of a chart, accepted by all participants, that lays down the deontological principles, the collaborative organization of the work to be performed, the degree of autonomy of researchers and actors within the project framework with respect to the institutions for which they work, and transparent use of the results.
It has been set up a chart establishing a set of guidelines and general orientations on the deontological principles, the collaborative organization of the work to be performed, the degree of autonomy of researchers and actors within the project framework with respect to the institutions for which they work, and transparent use of the results.
Principles of copyright sharing have been clearly set.
The chart has a high degree of acceptance by all participants.
Pillar 4. Common property of the results of the Action-Research.
Objective 4.a. Regular evaluation of the impact on the territory.
Mean 4.a.1 Implementation of a “Quality Plan”, with interim visible objectives to be achieved, allowing the regular measurement of the evolution and impact of the action-research.
There has been established a "Quality Plan" of the action-research process.
Main assessment indicators have been agreed form the start of the project.
Deadlines of the Quality Plan and the financial means to perform it have been jointly negotiated.
Eventual consequences for not respecting the quality Plan, has been discusses, agreed and explicitly reflected in the Quality plan.
Mean 4.a.2 Communication at different stages of the action-research of interim reports to all participants and the concerned population.
The work subgroups perform reports to be used as instruments in implementing the consensus of social actors, though a process of negotiation that outlines the goals and provides a transparent account of advantages and disadvantages.
The periodic activity reports and they are accessible to all concerned population.
The steering committee performs periodic reports on the evolution of the project as well as on their results, and they are accessible to all concerned population.
The steering committee carefully and transparently monitors the financial aspects of the project.
Mean 4.a.3 Observation of the results of the developed decision making toolkit on the decisions taken in the whole territory. Observation of the dynamics followed by the population to take ownership of the results.
It has been established a system for monitoring the impact of the action-research on the territory.
The unwanted aspects and the added valued of the project have been anticipated.
Considering main population’s needs impacts, general results of the territorial project are positive.
Considering the empowerment of population, general results of the territorial project are positive.
The research-action project contributes to increase scientific knowledge.
Objective 4.b. Durability of the implemented actions.
Mean 4.b.1 Implementation of a specific work group in charge of preparing the continuation of the action-research, both in terms of monitoring the developed actions and in terms of developing new action-research projects, on the basis of the work dynamic established within the work sub-groups.
There has been constituted a specific work group in charge of preparing the continuation of the action-research.
A data base to be used in other territorial projects in the medium and long term has been built.