The overall goals of SIMPATICO are clearly stated and the objectives of the deliverable are also clearly expressed in the scope of SIMPATICO. The deliverables content is consistent with its description in the dissemination of activities.

Particularly, all of the modules in D3.2 - basic methods and tools for user interaction automation - have been designed and introduced into the SIMPATICO architecture so that they collectively contribute to the project’s main objectives. The implementations, although basic, demonstrate that it is possible to build an e-service infrastructure that supports these objectives.

The Citizenpedia framework is a bespoke development for the SIMPATICO project with functional and technical aspects described in D4.1. Good KPIs for the specific e-service are calculated in D6.1. In D6.3 a sound methodology has been defined, which has been shared among the project partners, and is being adopted in the three use-case sites of Trento, Galicia and Sheffield. Specific engagement plans have also been defined for the three use-cases, based on the specific validation objectives and plans. These plans identify good specific exploitation objectives and target audiences, which take into account the variety of services and end-users addressed in the three use-cases. Thanks to the common methodology and guidelines adopted by the three use-cases there are significant opportunities to share not only engagement materials, but also to share lessons learned and best practices, and in general to help maximizing the results of the engagement campaigns. Two main tools have been designed (in D7.2) to facilitate dissemination monitoring. The strategy and its application have been well kept simple and straight to facilitate all stakeholders involved in its execution. Keep the communication open and simple could be the overall recommendation coming from this plan.

The Project Management Plan is consistently and clearly presented. The approach taken by the SIMPATICO team to manage the project is plausible. The Project Management plan includes well developed quality management and quality assurance procedure. Quality management addresses well the issues related to quality assurance, self-assessment and any ethical issues. Good criteria for the assessment of quality are also set up.

Sounds feasible that the project website is one of the main tools for disseminating information about the consortium and the achievements of the project, providing visitors with comprehensive information about its context and objectives. It is deployed in English and it is very good that it is followed by three other web sites managed at local level in each test site. As well, the home page hosts also the links to SIMPATICO social media accounts Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

A useful Public Documents area contains the links to public documents that each visitor can download. Very nice that the website will also be used to involve external stakeholders in the SIMPATICO activities. On the other hand, a good decision is the document repository serving as a primary tool to facilitate exchange of information, and as a web based shared collaborative environment and as a project tracking system accessible to all partners.

The Risk Management strategy is well delineated. Risks are well planned so as to facilitate an effective progress monitoring. Good tool will be used as the Risk Register to record information about risks and it acts as a central repository for all identified potential threats of the project. The risk monitoring and control tasks are described in a detailed manner.

Technical Quality Assurance process during the overall software development and implementation cycle could be better elaborated. The set of collaborative tools that are going to be used in order to assure the requested quality of software are not specifically named.

From a general standpoint the project deliverables are well laid out in the overall context, but the deliverables should be more clearly related to previous and future deliverables in the WP and to deliverables from other WPs; the relation to previous deliverables in the same work package should be more clearly stated.

The expected impact of the projects could be more completely addressed.

Evidence of excellence in overall impact assessment could be further elaborated.