Background and methodology Clause Samples
Background and methodology. The Council of Europe (▇▇▇) and in particular its European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) is delivering technical support to the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) of the Kingdom of Spain in the scope of the action “Promoting Cyberjustice in Spain through change management (PHASE II)”, supported by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme1. The general objective of the action is to increase the accessibility and the quality of justice in Spain by promoting the implementation of cyberjustice through strategic and knowledge-centred approach, comprehensive change management and unification or full interoperability of alternative systems deployed by the MoJ and the Autonomous Regions with devolved competencies for the administration of justice. One of the specific goals of the action is to support the Spanish authorities in developing strategic proposals on improving the judicial organisation in the context of digitalisation. Spain, already at the forefront in the development of Cyberjustice in Europe, is preparing substantial reforms related both to organisational changes in the judicial map and court system organisation and to the digital procedures. In particular, three new acts are under preparation: • a new Law on Procedural Efficiency2; • a new Law on Digital Efficiency3 • a new Law on Organisational Efficiency4; Within this framework, the current study aims at investigating solutions implemented by various European systems for promoting organisational and digital efficiency, incorporating information on key aspects, from the judicial map, human and material resources, the need for legal changes, technological capabilities, to the implications for guaranteeing the access to justice as recognised by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The table of contents for the study and the list of questions of interest introduced in the next section have been finalised with the Spanish MoJ, following a series of joint virtual workshops with CEPEJ experts, where the first two of the draft laws mentioned above have been presented and discussed along with related topics of interest. As a mean of identifying relevant practices in ▇▇▇ member States, and collecting initial information about them, the team prepared a series of questions which were included in an 1 Regulation (EU) 2017/825 2 See project outline: https://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇.▇▇/es/ElMinisterio/GabineteComunicacion/Documents/220412%20Presentacio%C C%81n%20PL...
Background and methodology. PRECIOUS is a system developed for different stakeholders. While its core functionality is to improve the life of its users in terms of health-aspects, during the course of the project we’ve tried to approach this key feature by creating a platform that has the potential to enable all important stakeholders to interact with each other. Thus, while the majority of this report deals with evaluation from the perspective of its end-users, we’ve decided to also evaluate another important aspect for future endeavours of PRECIOUS: it’s capability to target developers as potential content-providers. There are different ways to gather information about developers’ views on such a platform. However, in order to be able to really understand their perspectives and issues with this central idea, it is necessary for them to gain hands-on experience on our provided tools first. For this reason, we’ve created a simulated environment of our platform and decided to let developers try and work with it in a Hackathon. A Hackathon is an event for programmers or others involved in the development process where they have to reach a specific goal in a limited timeframe. Putting developers in a situation of pressure and then evaluating the results in turn also gives certain credibility to whether our core idea of a central mHealth platform is realistic and usable. Therefore, we’ve asked developers to create an mHealth app prototype that could potentially be included in our ecosystem during a 24h coding marathon. Our evaluation consisted of two stages: first, during and after the Hackathon, we have conducted qualitative interviews as well as a survey regarding the attendees background, previous experience, general ideas about frameworks and specific questions targeting concept and functionality of our simulator, to be analysed by means of Thematic Analysis. Second, we evaluated the results themselves, i.e. the apps that were presented at the end of the Hackathon, and tried to gather conclusions from these implementations. We’ve also awarded the best evaluated ideas according to previously defined criteria. The remainder of the Hackathon-related evaluation is as follows: In the next chapter, we will briefly describe the development tools and environment we’ve created as well as their relationship to the PRECIOUS ecosystem. We then continue by briefly depicting the Hackathon event itself, followed by outlining the results of the implementations and our evaluation. Finally conclusions...