Answers to the following questions
Can the results be generalised?
Can we expect the same results?
Objective(s) of the practice
Is the practice targeting the same LLG priority objective(s) in the donor and in the target context?
(e.g. improving employability, Career Management Skills, supporting people at risk and disadvantaged groups, raising the skills and qualifications of young people, etc.)
Magnitude of the LLG challenge(s) addressed in the target context
Does the same need(s) exist? Do these LLG challenges exist in our setting?
(e.g. Tackling unemployment, facilitate knowledge exchange among practitioners, transition from school education to career selection, etc.)
Does the practice function as a one-stop-shop that addresses multiple LLG challenges?
Are there any similar initiatives that already address these LLG challenges in our context?
What is the baseline prevalence of the LLG challenges in our context? How many people in our context are affected by these challenges?
How does the above compare with the prevalence of the LLG challenges described in the donor situation? Are the problems caused by these LLG challenges as large as in the donor context? What is the difference between the two contexts?
Magnitude of the potential reach of the practice
Did the practice help the organisation in the donor context to achieve its objectives and strategic plan?
Can we reach a large proportion of our target user groups by using this practice? What will be the coverage rate for our main target groups?
Can this practice lead to increased usage rates by our current users/ customers?
Will this practice help our organisation to enhance its services, processes and technological competences so as to attract new user groups?
Does the practice have the potential to lead to higher user satisfaction rates?
Will the practice lead to increased number of users/ increased sales?
Is the practice inclusive in addressing the needs of various target groups?
Comparability of target groups
Do we target the same target groups with those targeted in the original? (e.g. school students, unemployed, adult education, career guidance practitioners, immigrants, etc.)
Is our target population comparable to the population of the original context?
Are there any differences in characteristics that could affect the effectiveness of the practice in the local setting? For instance:
- Cultural factors (lifestyle, beliefs, preferences, behavioural factors, etc.)
- Factors depending on their age, language, ICT literacy, educational background, etc.
- Ethnicity, socio-economic, demographic factors, etc.
Does the practice fit our geographical focus?
Is the practice scalable?
Has it successfully been scaled from local to regional or national level?
Answers to the following questions
Is the context of the target setting appropriate for the uptake of the practice?
How does the practice relate to the key enabling environment in the target context?
Does the objective of the measure match with political priorities of our context?
(e.g. alignment with local/ regional/ national LLG policies or growth strategies, policies promoting ICT and LMI tools, etc.)
Does it conform to existing local/regional/national regulations and policies? Does it have contradicting effects? (e.g. LLG regulations, data privacy regulations, etc.)
Is the practice in line with the national curricula and LLG framework of the target context? It is in line with the ELGPN guidelines?
What are the government's indicators for success of practices that correspond to its LLG priorities? Has the practice yielded similar results in the donor's context?
Is the socio-economic context that has led to the development of the practice similar to this of the target context?
Will the target population be interested in the practice?
Do our target groups demonstrate the needs/ challenges that are addressed by the practice?
Are the aspects of the practice in line with the local/ regional/ national norms?
Does the practice follow a needs-driven / user-centered design approach?
Is the practice inclusive in addressing the needs of various target groups? (e.g. one-stop-shop approach, single access point, etc.)
Is the LMI that is provided by the practice innovative? (e.g. real-time LMI, interoperability with other ICT practices, crowdsourcing of expert knowledge, etc.)
Does the practice use innovative ICT methods that can be attractive to users? (e.g. interactive online tools, social media usage, multimedia, etc.)
Is the practice easy to be used by the target groups? Does it require any training? Is its design user friendly? Can it be used without the assistance of a guidance practitioner? Can it be used from people with low digital skills?
Does the practice ensure personal data privacy?
Support of the LLG system's stakeholder
Can we achieve the necessary LLG stakeholders' cooperation, support and role as in the donor's context?
(e.g. education agencies, employment offices, guidance practitioners, business community, citizens, local authorities, etc.)
Can the local/ regional/ national LLG stakeholders be engaged in the development and delivery of the practice in our context? (e.g. provision of the practice, LMI provision, etc.)
Impact on other affected interest groups/ stakeholders
(since this is a "negative" statement, the lower existence of such impacts is, the higher the score of this factor should be)
Does the practice contradict the interests of any important stakeholders of the local/ regional/ national LLG system?
(e.g. National Employment Agencies, National agencies for various levels of education, etc.)
Institutional capacity and compatibility
Which organization will be responsible for the provision of the practice in the local setting?
Is the practice consistent with the mission and ideology of our organisation?
Is the practice in line with the current strategic plan of the organisation? Does the organisation have a strategy plan for the promotion of ICT and LMI tools?
Is the practice reciprocal to existing practices of the organisation? Does it overlap or contradict with existing practices?
Can we support/ achieve the same organisational structures, necessary for the implementation of the practice?
Is the implementing organisation motivated to learn and open-minded to new practices?
Are there any possible barriers due to the structure of the organisation that will implement the practice in the local/ regional/ national context?
Answers to the following questions
Can the practice be implemented in the local/ regional/ national context?
Is the capacity to implement the intervention comparable?
Can it work for us?
Existence of supporting legal and regulatory framework
Is the practice, in the donor's context, attached to any specific LLG legislative framework? Is it the outcome of or directly connected to a local/ regional/ national LLG policy?
Is the practice compulsory by law or voluntarily used in the donor's context? How is it going to be offered in our context?
Is the necessary legislative context in place in our own setting? (e.g. policies integrating ICT tools and LMI in LLG interventions)
Is the practice a result of a local/ regional/ national/ European initiative? Do similar political initiatives exist in the target context?
Existence of legal prerequisites for the replication of the practice
(since this is a "negative" statement, the lower existence of such prerequisites is, the higher the score of this factor should be)
Is the practice open for use by other organisations or countries?
Is the practice the outcome of a public or a private organisation?
Are there any IPR, copyright, private data restrictions that affect the implementation of the practice in our context?
Does donor organisation support an open data policy?
Role and availability of required LMI aspects
Does the utilisation of the LMI by the practice serve the LLG needs and priorities of our local/ regional/ national context as well as those of the organisation that will implement the practice? (e.g. effective job matching, personalised educational advice, occupational information, etc.)
Do we have experience in offering similar LMI?
Is the LMI that is required for the development and implementation of the practice already available in our context?
Are the processes and collaborations with internal and external actors required for the development of the LMI, easily replicable in our context?
(i.e. processes and collaborations for the LMI gathering, validation, reliability, update, etc.)
Does our organisation have already established connections with the required LMI sources and stakeholders?
Do stakeholders who hold important LMI in our context, follow an open data policy?
Does the required LMI fall under any specific data privacy regulations?
Role and easiness of use of required ICT aspects
Does the organisation that will implement the practice, have experience in utilizing similar ICT tools and processes for the provision of LMI? (e.g. online counselling, online wiki, interactive tools, etc.).
Does the practice require any complex technological infrastructure?
Does the practice require any technological aspects that are protected by copyright regulations?
Is the practice built on open source software that is freely available?
Availability of resources necessary to deliver the practice
Which organisation will be responsible for developing and offering the practice in our context?
Does the organisation have the administrative and enforcement capacity to deliver the practice in our context?
Are the human resources adequate for the initial development and the routine application of the practice?
Are our human resources adequately trained in aspects that revolve around the required LMI and ICT usage? If not, is their training feasible?
Is the practice based on any guidance model or theoretical approach, on which our human resources have experience?
Are the financial resources adequate for the initial development and the routine application of the practice? (i.e. considering staffing requirements, technology required, training, administrative support, promotional actions, etc.)
Is the technological infrastructure required for the development and application of the practice available? If not, is it easy to acquire such infrastructure in terms of time and costs?
Adaptability of the practice
Will our target groups accept the practice in its current format?
Is the language of the practice appropriate for our target audiences? Does it have to be translated?
Is the practice adaptable to the reality of our context?
Is the practice adaptable to the characteristics of our target groups?
Can we adopt only certain features of the practice?
Existence of other barriers and implementation risks
(since this is a "negative" statement, the lower existence of such barriers is, the higher the score of this factor should be)
Other local barriers and implementation risks such as:
- Potential resistance to change from the target users and the LLG stakeholders.
- Lack of provisions for people with inadequate digital skills.
- Inability to apply the mitigation strategies that were used in the donor's context regarding possible obstacles for the development and application of the practice.
- Political volatility in the local / regional/ national context.