The final evaluation report of the "Stress-free E.U. Schools" project summarizes the results of the final project meeting and staff training event. Questionnaires were distributed to partner schools to evaluate the project on five criteria: impact, dissemination, coordination, implementation, and overall assessment. The implementation received the highest score of 99%, while impact received the lowest of 77%. Dissemination improved from the interim report. Coordination maintained a high score of 94%. The overall assessment increased to 96%, indicating partners' satisfaction with meeting expectations. In conclusion, the final evaluation demonstrated partners viewed the project and its implementation positively.

1. E. P. ERASMUS+ / KA2 – Partnerships
Project Title: “Stress-free E.U. Schools”
Final Evaluation Report
Drafted by: Yiannis Zarkadas, Project Coordinator

2. Executive Summary
The final evaluation of the “Stress-free E. U. Schools” Project has been carried out after the implementation of the
Final Meeting of the Project and the Final Short-Term Joint Staff Training Event. These two major milestones
coincided with the Final Dissemination Event that took place in Nea Aghialos, Gr and signaled the end of the
transnational work program of the “Stress-free E. U Schools” Project.
The evaluation procedure followed the methodology that has been selected for the implementation of the Interim
Evaluation and for this purpose a questionnaire that had been designed by the coordinating school was
distributed to all partner schools where it was filled with the responsibility of the schools coordinators after
consultation with the members of the ERASMUS + Team of each School.
Thus, interesting comparative information has been produced which clarifies certain aspects of the
implementation of the project.
The same five axes that had been agreed during the interim evaluation process has been followed with some
additions, which were necessary in order to provide a clearer view to the outcomes of this procedure. The axes
under examination were the following:
A. The impact on its selected target groups,
B. The dissemination process
C. The coordination of the project
D. The implementation of the common work program, and
E. The overall assessment
The graph indicates how the
ERASMUS + Teams evaluated
the project works at the end of
its life cycle.
It is easily observable that the
lowest score has to do with the
achieved impact of the project
and the highest score was given
by the ERASMUS+ Teams of the
partner institutions to the
implementation of the
transnational work plan of the
project.
Apart from that, both
coordination and the overall
assessment achieved
significantly high scores.
The dissemination process
achieved the second lower
score, but it is higher than the
result of the interim evaluation.

3. A side by side examination of the two graphs indicates that:
A. Certain improvement has been achieved regarding the Dissemination procedure, which scored very low in the
interim evaluation.
B. The members of the ERASMUS+ Teams of the partner institutions evaluate with the highest score the
implementation process of the project. This clearly indicates their satisfaction on the work that has been carried
out and the respective results and outcomes.
C. The score of the overall assessment of the project has been improved as well and that follows the high score
that has been given to the implementation.
D. A fall back can be observed regarding the impact of the project, and that is because partner schools have
obtained a clearer, not so optimistic view at the end of the project works.
E. Finally, the coordination seems to maintain a quite acceptable score.
Εικόνα 2: Final Evaluation Εικόνα 1: Interim Evaluation

4. Presentation of the findings
Impact of the project
At the end of the life cycle of the project
partner school seem to assess the impact of
the project in a more realistic way, having
obtained a clearer view on the achieved
impact on the selected target groups.
The project seems to have achieved
significant impact on the pupils of the
partner schools. A quite acceptable score has been given to the impact on the teaching staff of the schools,
though lower than the one of the interim evaluation (95%), which is reasonable, since at the end of the project
teachers should not only demonstrate awareness on pupils’ school stress, but should also exploit techniques and
tools that were produced through the common work of the project to assist their pupils overcome it.
The lowest score has been given to parents and caregivers but after a econd thought it seems that two out of
three of the parents of the pupils seem to take under consideration the introduced factor of school stress
regarding the academic achievements of their children.
The overall score for the impact of the project is the average of the individual scores of each category: AVERAGE
(92, 76, 64) = 77.33
Dissemination of the project
Dissemination of the project was the
aspect that scored quite low on the
interim report, which indicated certain
problems both about the implementation
of the dissemination events and the
project website.
Regarding the website, although fully
operational during the second year of the
life cycle of the project, it remained difficult to post information on each language of the project. Partners were
provided with their passwords and were informed that they should post their activities both in English and their
mother language. Afterwards, through English, all other partners could translate each post to their language.
The whole procedure proved to be complicated and ineffective. Only some posts were uploaded in English and in
Greek by the coordinating school but none was translated to the other languages. A small number of posts were
uploaded by the Lithuanian school as well in their language.
A new aspect of the dissemination process was the development of a FACEBOOK page of the project. Although it
received quite an acceptable score, it was not exploited by the partner schools despite the fact that it was agreed
that all posts should be only in English.
The dissemination events on the other hand, who had scored quite low in the interim evaluation procedure have
received the highest score during the final evaluation by the partner schools, which indicates that significant effort

5. has been given by the organizing schools which led to increased numbers of participants of the selected target
groups.
The overall score is the average of the individual scores of each category: AVERAGE (68, 88, 96) = 84,00.
Coordination
The evaluation of the
coordination process
included two new categories
that should be taken under
consideration after the
completion of the first year
of the life cycle of the
project: the on-time delivery
and the quality of the
reports of the project.
The coordination process
seems to maintain its quite acceptable score, which indicates that this aspect of the project work faced no
particular problems.
The overall score as the average of the individual scores of each category: AVERAGE (92, 100, 96, 96, 92, 92, 88) =
94,00.
Implementation
The implementation of the
project reflects the individual
partners’ contribution to it as
well as their point of view on
the work that has been carried
out during the project life
cycle.
Partners had the opportunity
to assess once more the four
aspects that have been put
under examination.
The organization of the Transnational Meetings obtained the highest possible score, fact that indicates the quite
good experiences obtained by the people who participated in them and the remarkable work that schools have
done regarding this task. During the second year of the project there have been implemented, with the inclusion
of the Final Meeting, three (3) Transnational Meetings, which indeed have been organized and implemented quite
well.
The organization of the Short-Term Joint Staff Training Events - STJSTE achieved also the highest possible score,
which indicates that partners have reviewed their strict evaluation of the STJSTE that have been implemented

6. during the first year of the works of the project. It lso points out that the other three (3) Events that took place
during the second year of the project had been organized quite well and proved fruitful for the teachers that
participated in them.
The deliverables of the project received a very high score through the assessment of the partners, which indicates
that they fulfilled the quality criteria that had been set during the transnational meetings and and met the high
expectations of the partners regarding the final products of the project.
Finally, the implementation of the parallel activities (visits to sites of cultural interest, etc) have achieved the
maximum score, which once more shows that the partners had the opportunity to review their initial strict
assessment regarding the activities that had been carried out during the first year of the project and that the
activities that had been implemented during the second year met the expectations of the participants.
The overall score is the average of the individual scores of each category: AVERAGE (100, 100, 96, 100) = 99,00.
Overall assessment
The overall assessment represents an indicator
through which the members of the partnership
have the opportunity to express their view
about the project, the implementation
procedure and its results.
Following the same methodology with the interim evaluation process, School coordinators were once more asked
to discuss with all the members of the ERASMUS+ Teams of their Schools and try to incorporate the opinion of
their head teacher in their final assessment.
The score that the project has achieved in this indicator is quite high (96%), much higher than the one of the
interim evaluation (85%). It follows the high assessment that partners gave to the implementation, which indicates
that the project have met their expectations and that it has proved interesting and useful for their everyday school
work.