CAUTION: This message came from outside Imperial. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and were expecting this email. Dear All, Please find attached an overview of stakeholders for schools, I have scanned it quickly – using a filter it is possible to identify the ones active at EU 27. Maybe some names ring you a bell. Potentially more interesting one seems to me https://www.schoolsforhealth.org/ but let’s hope Katjia will respond positively.. Best wishes, Giovanna [cid:image001.png@01DCC8EB.924B9950] Da: Sassi, Franco <f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk> Inviato: venerdì 10 aprile 2026 11:49 A: zhealth-mgmt <zhealth-mgmt@imperial.ac.uk> Oggetto: [Z-health-Mgmt] FW: Update Collaboration partners Germany From: Wiesen, Daniel <wiesen@wiso.uni-koeln.de<mailto:wiesen@wiso.uni-koeln.de>> Sent: 10 April 2026 09:29 To: Sassi, Franco <f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk>> Cc: Stephanie Stock <stephanie.stock@uk-koeln.de<mailto:stephanie.stock@uk-koeln.de>> Subject: Re: Update Collaboration partners Germany Dear Franco, Thank you very much for your email. Please find my answers below (in red). It would be great if we digitally meet with Stephanie. Unfortunately, we could only do next Tuesday (14/4) at 4pm UK time. Would this work for you? Best wishes, Daniel Am 10.04.2026 um 09:30 schrieb Stephanie Stock <stephanie.stock@uk-koeln.de<mailto:stephanie.stock@uk-koeln.de>>: Dear Daniel and Stephanie, Thank you again for your efforts. Apologies for being slightly pedantic, but I would like to make sure what we propose to do in Germany is not deviating too much from the model we are adopting in other countries. If I understand correctly: 1. BGF is working with vocational schools and could implement an intervention for the older age group (19-25, but starting the intervention in the last year of school, so presumably when kids are 18). BGF is currently delivering a health literacy programme, on which we could piggyback our intervention. In order to align what we are doing with what we are proposing, we would need to do the following: * Ensure some key features of the Z-HEALTH health and digital literacy are added to the existing literacy programme (especially digital literacy may not currently be part of the programme); >> Yes. The within z-Health centrally developed health and digital literacy packages will be translated/adapted if needed and rolled out by the BGF. * Add a component based on device-assisted monitoring and feedback for kids who volunteer to take part; >> Here, we need to make sure that we provide an App and are ideally we need to have sufficient devices (e.g., Fitbits). * Healthy environments and nudges: if we recruit young people at the end of secondary school, they will presumably be exposed to different environments after that, so the option of implementing nudges in physical environments would not be viable. We could instead consider nudges in digital environments, and the use of digital tools to navigate physical environments (e.g. food choice apps). >> Yes. The food choice app comes form Imeprial, if I recall correctly. 1. IFT North is working with younger children, so intervention package 1 is what we would be considering here. The starting point is a self-commitment intervention to prevent addictive behaviours (esp. smoking), delivered in schools nationwide. Alignment with our intervention package would seem a bit more demanding in this case: >> Yes. We agree. The intervention module would need to be translated, adapted, etc. For this implementation, some more resources might be required. * Widen the health literacy training and add a digital literacy component. In this age group, we will be using the CHOICE Foundation approach, which involves the delivery of health literacy training by medical students. Would this be acceptable for IFT North? >>Potentially, we could do this in a subregion (e.g., Cologne with the help of the medical students in Cologne) and check with IFT-North about their contact schools in the Cologne region. * Self-management of digital media use. This could be offered to a subset of kids who volunteer to take part. * Healthy environments and nudges. This would involve changes in the schools’ physical environments and may or may not be possible. >> Changes in the physical environment seem hardly possible. * Resources and services. This is effectively a mental health counselling website built on a model run by the Slovenian Institute of Public Health. This would seem well aligned with the expertise of IFT North, which is strong on psychotherapy, if I understand correctly from their website. But we would need to enquire whether this is something they would feel comfortable doing. >> Needs to be translated and adopted, I guess. In summary, my question to you is: do you think it is realistic to think that the two institutes would be willing to add at least some of the components that would better align the intervention(s) in Germany with the wider intervention models in Z-HEALTH?
In general, yes. Maybe it would be good if we would have some approximate top down indication for the budget. For example, IFT North made an indication of about need of about 50,000 EUR p.a.
I would also like to get back to you on two questions you have asked me previously: 1. Evaluation: Does the evaluation take place externally from the UK? Or should the evaluation also be conducted in Germany? Stephanie and her team have ample experience here. Imperial is formally responsible for the evaluation work package, but the evaluation of interventions implemented in each country will have to be coordinated with country partners.So each partner leading the implementation of an intervention (you in the case of Germany) will receive some funding to contribute to the evaluation in their own setting.
Ok.
2. Digital components/App: As the planned interventions contain a digital component (i.e., device-assisted monitoring and feedback), I was wondering in what capacity NYU could provide us with the necessary digital framework and programming support (e.g., for adoptions app of local needs). Neither BGF nor ITF have developed an app which we could use. Shall we approach Sebastian Schneider from MPI? NYU will be responsible for designing the digital literacy training and for the self-management of digital media use component of Intervention 1. They do not have expertise on wearables and feedback from health monitoring data. I was planning to develop this component during the course of the project, but it would be good if we could consider existing options. I have been trying to look up Sebastian’s app, but have not been able to find it. Could you point me to some information, if publicly available? I think the key question in this component of the intervention package is how we provide feedback (which is the behavioural component of the intervention) more than how we collect the data, although the latter clearly needs to be addressed as well.
I asked Sebastian to send a short description of the app and the latest link. He promised to send it today and I will forward it to you immediately.
Sorry to have so many questions and thank you for your patience. Franco From: Stephanie Stock <stephanie.stock@uk-koeln.de<mailto:stephanie.stock@uk-koeln.de>> Sent: 09 April 2026 06:27 To: Wiesen, Daniel <wiesen@wiso.uni-koeln.de<mailto:wiesen@wiso.uni-koeln.de>>; Sassi, Franco <f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk>> Cc: zhealth-mgmt <zhealth-mgmt@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:zhealth-mgmt@imperial.ac.uk>> Subject: AW: Update Collaboration partners Germany Dear Daniel, dear Franco, I have nothing to add to Daniel’s answers. Only, that because both partners are willing to use pre-existing interventions with only need minor adaptions and are willing to add one or two jointly developed modules to them we can keep costs rather low. When inviting them and talking to them we kept the financial restraints of such large projects in mind. Additionally, I believe it could be discussed if the interventions could be implemented in other countries (after adapting them to country specific requirements). Best wishes, Stephanie Von: Wiesen, Daniel <wiesen@wiso.uni-koeln.de<mailto:wiesen@wiso.uni-koeln.de>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 8. April 2026 20:03 An: Franco Sassi <f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk>> Cc: Stephanie Stock <stephanie.stock@uk-koeln.de<mailto:stephanie.stock@uk-koeln.de>>; zhealth-mgmt <zhealth-mgmt@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:zhealth-mgmt@imperial.ac.uk>> Betreff: Re: Update Collaboration partners Germany Thank you, Franco. Please find my responses below. @Stephanie: Please feel free to add to them. Thank you. Best wishes, Daniel On 8. Apr 2026, at 18:48, Sassi, Franco <f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk>> wrote: Dear Daniel, Thank you very much for this update. It’s great that both the BGF Institute and IFT North are interested. Of course, we need to assess the budget needs in the wider context of the project. I will try to discuss this tomorrow morning with the management team. Let me ask you a couple of quick questions on the information you have provided: 1. Do I understand it right that they would plan to use their existing health literacy programme as a component of the intervention, and we would be adding further components (at least for a subset of the target group) and evaluate the results of the intervention?
This would be an option for them and it is their regular business giving us access to the pupils of the vocational schools. Yes, we could add a components, such as a misinformation treatment.
1. 2. When you say that they would prefer to participate underthe umbrella of the University of Cologne, do you mean that they will not join as separate partners, but will receive resources through the University? Do you think this should be arranged as a sub-contract, or you would hire the 0.5 FTE who will work with them?
I think they do not want to be listed as separate partners. The easier option is the latter in which every hiring goes through UoC. This seems perfectly ok for them.
1. Let me get back to you tomorrow also on your question about the app.
Thank you so much.
Thank you again for your help. Franco From: Wiesen, Daniel <wiesen@wiso.uni-koeln.de<mailto:wiesen@wiso.uni-koeln.de>> Sent: 08 April 2026 17:27 To: Sassi, Franco <f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk>> Cc: Stephanie Stock <stephanie.stock@uk-koeln.de<mailto:stephanie.stock@uk-koeln.de>>; zhealth-mgmt <zhealth-mgmt@imperial.ac.uk<mailto:zhealth-mgmt@imperial.ac.uk>> Subject: Update Collaboration partners Germany Dear Franco, Stephanie and I talked to two potential partners for the implementation (WP6) in Germany earlier today: The BGF Institut (https://www.bgf-institut.de/bgf-institut/, Markus Birnkammer, Head of BGF’s Prevention Unit, markus.birnkammer@bgf-institut.de<mailto:markus.birnkammer@bgf-institut.de>) and the IFT Nord gGmbH (https://www.ift-nord.de/en/home, Prof. Reiner Hanewinkel, hanewinkel@ift-nord.de<mailto:hanewinkel@ift-nord.de>). As you know, the BGF has access to vocational schools (in North Rhine Westphalia and Hamburg) and does regular educational workshops (up to 12 in the course of the 3 year apprenticeship education) in terms of healthy lifestyles and health literacy. Our intervention could nicely be embedded in their existing programs. IFT Nord gGmbH mostly focussed on addictive behaviors so far and has experience in school class self-commitment interventions to remain nicotine-free (about 7,000 school classes, kids mainly aged 12–15) and have access to schools Germany wide. This may be an option for an intervention with the earlier age group. Both are eager to participate in our EU call. In terms of the collaboration, however, both would like to participate under the "umbrella" of the University of Cologne. Nonetheless, both require obviously some budget. WP6 Budget requirements of BGF and IFT: For implementing the intervention, both would require a 0.5 FTE position for the implementation period plus Material cost of 3,000 EUR per partner per year. WP5 Stephanie’s and my cost, some slight update for Loredana. - 1 FTE PostDoc (90.500 EUR (?) per year) for the entire project duration - 1 Qualified student helper WHB (18,86 hours per week) for the entire project duration: 1,691 EUR per month - Organisation costs for co-creation workshop: About 6.300 Euro (15 Person x 6 x 70 EUR) - Open Access 2,200 EUR per person (cost of publication 750 EUR to 4000) - Travel cost: about 3,000 EUR per person per annum for 2 FTEs - EU Audit cost: 5,000 EUR - Overhead required from the University of Cologne: 25% Some more important questions: 1. Evaluation: Does the evaluation take place externally from the UK? Or should the evaluation also be conducted in Germany? Stephanie and her team have ample experience here. 2. Digital components/App: As the planned interventions contain a digital component (i.e., device-assisted monitoring and feedback), I was wondering in what capacity NYU could provide us with the necessary digital framework and programming support (e.g., for adoptions app of local needs). Neither BGF nor ITF have developed an app which we could use. Shall we approach Sebastian Schneider from MPI? If you like, we could have a short joint call with BGF early next week. Apologies for this long email. Best wishes, Daniel
