Learning from Our Network: Grapes of Change

An example of a CERV DAPHNE project to inspire you

 

Within this article we would like to support your inspiration and giving some tips to structure your future CERV proposal. In 2027, DAPHNE will be a potential call and you can take some ideas from an existing design of a project managed by one of the member of our network. So, let's deep the knowledge around Grapes of Change. 

Grapes of Change has been approved in the call 2024 of DAPHNE. The project is built around a systemic logic: preventing and contrasting gender-based violence through layered intervention.

This logic shapes how activities are distributed across WPs and how impact is conceptualised: 

Pillar 1: Awareness & Cultural Reform (Prevention Layer)

The first pillar focuses on structural prevention. Instead of limiting intervention to training sessions, the consortium designed:

• a methodology and monitoring system to observe GBV patterns in the sector over time

• a structured baseline study, aligned with GREVIO national reports

• evidence-informed targeted intervention choices

• implementation of new workplace practices to shift organisational culture

This approach strengthens the needs analysis credibility under CERV and Impact it is observed, measured and adjusted.

For proposal designers, this is a key takeaway: under CERV, prevention must be operationalised through structured data collection and regulatory alignment, not only awareness campaigns. The awareness in CERV proposals should be contestualized and a key tips is represented by KPI: higher numbers and concrete actions to reach them. The access to the target is crucial. 

Pillar 2: Empowerment & Support for Victims (Recovery Layer)

The second pillar addresses the response dimension. The project integrates:

• counselling pathways

• legal assistance mechanisms

• secure and confidential reporting systems

• strengthened links with existing local services

From a design perspective, this is not framed as an isolated service block, but as part of a coordinated ecosystem response. Under CERV-DAPHNE logic, this layered model:

• reinforces victim-centred credibility

• improves qualitative KPI dimensions

• connects advocacy with tangible protection mechanisms

Balancing advocacy with operational support is often delicate in rights-based proposals. Grapes of Change manages this by clearly separating prevention and response logic, while keeping both strategically interconnected. This interconnection is the key to have a succssful WP which both the EC and the evaluator will approve. 

Pillar 3. Shattering Stereotypes (Structural Change Dimension)

The third structural component focuses on long-term cultural transformation.

The main target involved are:

• women workers and managers

• entrepreneurs

• young people entering the sector

• education ecosystems

The objective is not limited to behavioural awareness, but to break structural stereotypes and encourage leadership pathways, including STEM engagement.

For CERV writers this dimension is crucial because it moves the project beyond reactive measures into transformative impact, increasingly valued within evaluation grids. As we already reported above, the achievement and involvement of target is crucial for this kind of project. In case you are thinking about a cascade funding (thrid party support in your budget), pay attention about the criteria of involvment of those subjects. 

Budget Logic: Coherence Between Narrative and Allocation

In Grapes of Change, with a total budget exceeding €2 million, financial distribution has been designed to closely mirror the project’s systemic ambitions and partnership structure. Resources are allocated in a largely paritetic (balanced) way among partners, ensuring shared ownership of implementation and impact. At the same time, a significant share of resources is concentrated in the core implementation work packages, while management costs remain proportionate to the governance complexity and dissemination is adequately funded without overshadowing operational impact.

A distinctive feature of the project is the presence of pillar-focused vertical partners, each responsible for specific thematic areas and receiving dedicated budget allocations to ensure effective access to and engagement with target groups. This structure recognises that impact generation depends on specialised actors capable of activating concrete communities and ecosystems.

The geographical distribution of the budget also reflects a strategic logic. For example, within Italy alone, four different partners receive budget allocations linked to their capacity to access and mobilise national stakeholders and beneficiaries. This multi-actor national approach strengthens territorial outreach and ensures that engagement is not centralised in a single organisation but distributed across complementary networks.

Partnership Design: Functional Complementarity

The consortium is not built on geographic representation alone.

Each partner reinforces a specific impact dimension:

• organisations with strong community reach support outreach KPIs

• methodological actors lead structured capacity-building components

• policy-oriented partners strengthen institutional credibility

Under CERV, partner architecture and KPI credibility are inseparable. Outreach targets must be structurally supported by each partner’s ecosystem and networks.

KPI Strategy: Beyond Participation Metrics

CERV proposals are often scrutinised on projected outreach.

Grapes of Change integrates:

• quantitative indicators (individuals reached, stakeholders engaged, materials produced)

• qualitative metrics linked to behavioural and institutional change

• benchmarks related to policy uptake and long-term adoption

Importantly, KPIs are embedded across WPs rather than isolated in a final section. This strengthens internal coherence between activities and expected results.

A Strategic Example for CERV Designers

Grapes of Change does not limit itself to awareness campaigns. It integrates advocacy, training, policy development and measurable impact within a rights-based European framework.

For us, it represents a strong example of how CERV, particularly the Daphne strand, can be used strategically to build structural change rather than isolated interventions.

If you are working on Gender Equality, Daphne or Union Values proposals, one takeaway is clear: credible impact under CERV requires early partnership mapping, realistic KPI architecture and a layered intervention model.

The project is still ongoing, and we will continue sharing methodological reflections as implementation progresses.

If you are designing a CERV proposal and looking for partners experienced in gender equality, impact measurement or dissemination strategy, feel free to reach out.