Dear Daniel,
Thank you for the clarifications you have provided. My understanding is that we can get reasonably close to the intervention model adopted elsewhere in the project, so I would be
inclined to go ahead. We will circulate a preliminary budget breakdown this afternoon, so you will be able to see what resources would be available. I think we have been able to allocate adequate resources to cover both interventions and your contribution
to the wider project.
We would envisage establishing subcontracts between UoC and the two Institutes, because this would be a more transparent way of managing the resources needed for the interventions,
and will also enable us to name the two institutes as being formally involved in the project (although not as partners). I would be grateful if you could clarify whether the IFT request of 50k per year corresponds to the 0.5 FTE coordinator you mentioned previously
or is additional to it.
Regarding Sebastian’s app, I think there have been a misunderstanding. The description Sebastian has provided shows that this app would do similar things to what the NYU app does
in the intervention component labelled as “self-management of digital media use”, which is different from the “device-assisted monitoring and feedback” component which I thought you were asking about. The former is for younger kids (12-18), while the latter
is for the slightly older age group. As Sebastian’s app would overlap with the NYU app, I don’t think we could propose to use it. We do need a platform for collecting data from wearable devices (the second component listed above), but I think we have now found
an option in Norway, so we should be covered on that too.
You will receive an email later about the state of the proposal and budget.
Franco
From: Wiesen, Daniel <wiesen@wiso.uni-koeln.de>
Sent: 10 April 2026 09:29
To: Sassi, Franco <f.sassi@imperial.ac.uk>
Cc: Stephanie Stock <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?
Daniel
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:
-
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.
-
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.
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).
Please find my responses below.
@Stephanie: Please feel free to add to them. Thank you.
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:
-
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.
-
-
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.
-
Let me get back to you tomorrow also on your question about the app.
>> Thank you so much.
Thank you again for your help.
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.
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.
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.