Public Deliverables

Home - Public Deliverables

Public Deliverables

Summaries

D1.1 – Project Reference Manual and Tools

This report focuses on providing the PRoTECT ’s consortium partners with a complete and efficient commonly shared operational methodology, a set of management rules and guidelines to be adopted in order to manage and carry on the activities and fulfil the contractual obligation towards the European Commission, reducing the overhead and increasing the efficiency and quality of the work carried out.

The document aims to provide:

  • procedures, rules, standards and best practices to be adopted in PRoTECT for the complete management of processes;
  • templates to produce high-quality deliverables and reports for the PRoTECT project;
  • explanation and rules concerning the PRoTECT online platform, a supporting workspace supplying also the need for a project repository dedicated to exchange documents and more in general, to store the whole material produced within the project activities;
  • process to make sure that contents and presentation of all deliverables produced in PRoTECT are consistent;
  • a list of rules to ease the flow for an effective communication and collaboration between partners as well as for external communication and dissemination of a project results (i.e. the procedures for meetings, for progress reporting, etc.);
  • standard format for meeting organisation and reports.Moreover, in the document the Boards and Committees, which have been established in PRoTECT to effectively manage and address the different aspects of the project, are described.


Click here to read the full version of the report.


End of this deliverable


 D1.2 – Risk Management and Quality Assurance

Since Quality Assurance and Risk Management are parts of the overall project management process a brief overview of the PRoTECT management context is initially provided in this document. The overall Project Management structure of PRoTECT is presented and detailed descriptions of the Quality and Risk Management roles are provided.

PRoTECT quality assurance strategy can be summarized in the following commitment: “The PRoTECT Consortium recognises that dedication to quality is vital to the PRoTECT Project mission and essential for delivering consistent results”. Core quality assurance objectives are quality work and deliverables and keeping project in track (in line with DoA). Moreover, PRoTECT Consortium commits that all project activities will be carried out in compliance with established ethical principles and the applicable law.

In his effort to achieve quality assurance objectives, the PRoTECT Quality Manager will have a number of quality assurance tools and processes, namely:

  • Quality assurance tools
  • Supporting Documents, like the CA, DoA, GA and relevant project deliverables).
  • Templates.
  • Quality Dashboard consisting of a KPIs, a Deliverables and Milestones, an APs, and a PMs Worksheet.
  • Detailed Task Work plans (DTWs).
  • Document Management System (DMS).
  • Quality assurance processes
  • Quality evaluation process.
  • Deliverables review procedure.The PRoTECT Consortium is aware that a variety of risks may impact project schedule and project objectives, and may even lead to contractual issues. For this reason, a Project Risk Management Plan is included in this deliverable focusing in risk assessment, monitoring and mitigation actions. A Risk Register available to all PRoTECT will be used to carry out the aforementioned actions.

Finally, it is important to note that any rules and regulations presented within this Project Risk Management and Quality Assurance are supplementary to the Consortium Agreement as well as the Grant Agreement. Many items regulated there are NOT repeated here, but should be taken into account.


Click here to read the full version of the report.


End of this deliverable


 D3.1 – Description of Best practices and Technologies

Deliverable 3.1 constitutes the first tangible outcome of WP3 whose aim it is to capture and assess the technology landscape underpinning the PRoTECT project.

In this deliverable entitled “Description of Best practices and Technologies” we will distill industry-strength tools as well as good/best practices based on a systematic literature review (SLR) with a focus on protection of public spaces in safe and secure cities;

In particular, this deliverable reports on the results of a systematic literature review on the state-of-the-art and the state-of-practice of technologies, methods and techniques, and associated good- and best-practices for the protection of urban spaces. In addition, it collects previous efforts in the protection of public spaces and previous work from the ENLETS network and EFUS members. Research results from previous H2020 projects and with high TRL level (6 and above) have been assessed as part of our technology evaluation framework that will be developed in the remaining deliverables of WP3.

The deliverable is organized in four logical parts in order to analyze, contrast and evaluate the urban space security techs and solutions from three points of view.

In part I, this deliverable reports on the systematic literature review provides the state of art regarding technologies, techniques and design solution for the protection of urban areas. We have taken into consideration not only academic outlets, but also, “grey” literature stemming from industrial papers, reports, outlets, websites, etc. Part II collects and analyzes the best practices from the LEAs in EFUS cities based on a survey. The literature survey is then complemented in part III with a thorough overview of the projects from the European-Community to further analyses and understand show the problem of protecting public spaces we face, as well as initial results from the identified projects. Lastly, there is an overview of existing commercially available technologies for different threats to protect urban spaces.


Click here to read the full version of the report.


End of this deliverable


 D3.2 – Technology Evaluation Framework

For decades, terrorism has been a reality in many European countries and a continuous threat to a great number of European cities. It seriously threatens the safety, rights and liberties of citizens and values of democratic states. Acts of terrorism bring about long-term negative effects for cities and high social costs. There is an increased feeling of insecurity among locals and visitors (EFUS, 2005).

In this context, the PRoTECT project (funded by the European Union’s ISFP, from November 2018 until December 2020) aims to strengthen local authorities’ capability in protecting public space against terrorist attacks by offering an overarching concept where tools, technology, training and field demonstrations.

Five European cities of the PRoTECT consortium, namely Eindhoven (Netherlands), Brasov (Romania), Vilnius (Lithuania), Malaga (Spain) and Larissa (Greece) implemented and tested the EU Vulnerability Assessment Tool (EU VAT) provided by DG Home and the manual that was developed in Work Package 2 of the PRoTECT project. Workshops were organised in which each municipality assessed vulnerabilities of actual public space events (generally cultural and social events).

One of the next tasks in the PRoTECT project was the development of a framework to assist a municipality in finding and evaluating technologies and best practices for mitigating a vulnerability. The European Technology Evaluation Framework (EU TEF) was developed in PRoTECT project for this purpose and is explained in this document. The framework offers eight (8) steps in which a municipality is guided through various processes of soliciting information on solutions from multiple providers, evaluating the solutions based on the acquired information, carrying out operational exercises in table-top sessions, and conducting live demonstrations of the solutions. The EU TEF can be used to evaluate any form of technology (e.g. technological and social innovative solutions).

The EU TEF was developed to suit the needs of the five PRoTECT municipalities but can be used by any city that wants to gather information on and evaluate technologies for protecting public space. It is however, important to have completed a vulnerability assessment before using the EU TEF (for instance, by using the EU VAT).


Click here to read the full version of the report.


End of this deliverable


D5.5 – 1st Workshop Results

This report describes the PRoTECT First European Seminar that took place in Brasov, Romania, on July 17-18, 2019. Specialists from several states and European organizations in the field of law enforcement, security and terrorism discussed action scenarios against terrorism.

During the seminar, the discussions focused on the development and implementation of security for risk areas, with an emphasis on crowded urban areas, as well as the cooperation of all the factors involved in the management of incidents that endanger public safety, being presented including a European manual vulnerability assessment and its application.

The world café methodology was also successfully used, as most participants were involved in the discussions, all contributing with their professional expertise and input to the different security aspects under debate.


Click here to read the full version of the report.


End of this deliverable


D5.6 – 2nd Workshop Results

This report describes the PRoTECT Second European Seminar, that took place online, due to the current situation regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. Three sessions of two hours and a half were organised on 15, 16 andv17 July 2020 by Efus and DITSS, and with contribution of consortium partners and with the participation of an audience that consisted of different sectors and countries.

The online seminar had feature exchanges on best practices and technologies that were developed by law enforcement agencies, local authorities, European-funded projects and the private sector. It has given local authorities insights on what criteria to consider when selecting a solution to aid the protection of their public spaces. The web seminar was divided into three sessions, together aiming to provide an overall picture on public spaces at the policy, strategic and practitioners’ level.


Click here to read the full version of the report.


End of this deliverable