In the context of the BeCom project one of the core goals is to build capacities in sustainable, Green building practices across partner communities. To ensure that learning, application, and impact are effectively monitored and supported, we propose a three-phase evaluation scheme for Work Package 1 (Green Buildings).

This three-phase evaluation is designed to achieve complementary aims:

1. Knowledge Assessment: To measure the extent to which participants have absorbed the conceptual knowledge and theoretical content contained in the WP1 manual or training materials.
   
2. Self-Evaluation: To empower participants to critically assess a concrete building (or planned building) in their community, applying what they learned to real contexts, reflecting on strengths and weaknesses, and identifying improvement opportunities.
   
3. Benchmarking & Tool Recommendation: To propose and apply a set of five recognized international assessment tools or methodologies for sustainable buildings (e.g. certification systems, rating schemes, performance tools). This allows comparison, cross-validation, and alignment with global best practices.
   

In the following sections of the evaluation package, we will elaborate on:

• 
  The objectives and format of each evaluation phase (knowledge test, self-assessment of a building, and tool-based benchmarking).
  
• 
  Suggested methods, instruments, and scoring rubrics.
  
• 
  How to integrate feedback loops so learners and stakeholders can use results to guide improvements.
  
• 
  Criteria for selecting and adapting the five international tools in consistency with local contexts, while maintaining comparability across countries.
  

This structured evaluation framework ensures that (a) theoretical understanding is verified, (b) practical skills and critical thinking are engaged, and (c) results are anchored in globally recognized standards for sustainable buildings. The evaluation will thus serve both as a learning tool and as a mechanism for fostering continuous improvement and alignment within the BeCom network.

1- Knowledge Assessment

This self-assessment tool is designed to help you measure your understanding and reflect on the knowledge gained through the BeCom Green Buildings materials. It combines factual, interpretative, and applied questions that correspond to the three learning levels described above.

Follow these simple steps to make the most of it:

1. Choose your level.
   • 
     If you are new to the topic, start with Level 1 (Basic Understanding).
     
   • 
     If you already know the key concepts, move directly to Level 2 (Interpretation & Connection).
     
   • 
     If you want to test your ability to apply and adapt what you’ve learned, go for Level 3 (Application & Reflection).
     
2. Answer all questions at your chosen level.
   
   
   Each level includes 5 multiple-choice questions. Select the answer that best represents your understanding. Only one option per question is correct.
   
3. Check your answers.
   
   Compare your choices with the self-correction key provided at the end of the test. Count your total score to see your level of mastery:
   • 13–15 points: Excellent understanding and application
     
   • 9–12 points: Good comprehension with room for deeper analysis
     
   • 5–8 points: Basic awareness; review key sections of the manual
     
   • 0–4 points: Recommended to revisit the BeCom materials before reattempting
     
4. Reflect on your results.
   
   
   Consider which areas were most challenging. Were they conceptual (Level 1), interpretative (Level 2), or practical (Level 3)? Use this insight to guide further learning or team discussions.
   
5. Optional – group use.
   
   
   Trainers, facilitators, or project partners can use the tool collectively to stimulate discussion, compare perspectives, or evaluate group learning outcomes.
   

LEVEL 1 – Basic Understanding

1. 
   The BeCom Green Buildings collection illustrates:
   
   
   a) Commercial architecture for tourism
   
   
   b) The transformation of buildings and places into sustainable, inclusive community assets ✅
   
   
   c) The design of luxury housing
   
   
   d) Digital-only learning programs
   
2. 
   What are the three NEB principles integrated across all case studies?
   
   
   a) Innovation – Profit – Expansion
   
   
   b) Sustainability – Aesthetics – Inclusion ✅
   
   
   c) Mobility – Technology – Governance
   
   
   d) Comfort – Efficiency – Finance
   
3. 
   Most case studies demonstrate that successful green buildings:
   
   
   a) Depend exclusively on new technologies
   
   
   b) Combine ecological design with social and cultural value ✅
   
   
   c) Focus only on reducing emissions
   
   
   d) Ignore local identity
   
4. 
   The Practical Toolkit recommends starting a Green building process with:
   
   
   a) A design competition
   
   
   b) A structural, energy and material audit ✅
   
   
   c) A marketing plan
   
   
   d) Decoration and branding
   
5. 
   “Adaptive reuse” in the BeCom context means:
   
   
   a) Demolishing outdated structures
   
   
   b) Reusing existing buildings for new sustainable and social purposes ✅
   
   
   c) Relocating industrial plants
   
   
   d) Selling heritage assets to fund new builds
   

✅ Scoring (0-5): 4–5 Excellent | 2–3 Basic | 0–1 Review recommended

LEVEL 2 – Understanding & Interpretation

1. 
   Why is community participation central to all BeCom examples?
   
   
   a) It reduces project costs
   
   
   b) It ensures local ownership and long-term social value ✅
   
   
   c) It satisfies EU regulations only
   
   
   d) It replaces professional expertise
   
2. 
   Across the cases, education is used mainly to:
   
   
   a) Promote tourism
   
   
   b) Foster behavioural change and environmental awareness ✅
   
   
   c) Train only engineers
   
   
   d) Replace traditional schools
   
3. 
   What do SolarHaus and CERC have in common?
   
   
   a) Both are luxury eco-resorts
   
   
   b) Both act as learning hubs linking sustainability with inclusion ✅
   
   
   c) Both focus solely on aesthetics
   
   
   d) Both are privately owned corporate buildings
   
4. 
   The Zollverein and Pavlos Melas cases show that:
   
   
   a) Heritage can hinder sustainability
   
   
   b) Reuse of heritage sites can drive cultural, economic and ecological renewal ✅
   
   
   c) Industrial areas should be sealed off
   
   
   d) Regeneration is only possible in cities
   
5. 
   According to the Toolkit, integrating multiple sectors (politics, economy, society, education, environment) helps because:
   
   
   a) It complicates governance
   
   
   b) It creates holistic, resilient and replicable solutions ✅
   
   
   c) It delays implementation
   
   
   d) It focuses narrowly on architecture
   

✅ Scoring (0-5): 4–5 Good | 2–3 Partial | 0–1 Review concepts

LEVEL 3 – Application & Critical Thinking

(Evaluates ability to apply BeCom lessons to new contexts.)

1. 
   If your town wanted to follow BeCom principles, what should come first?
   
   
   a) Political branding
   
   
   b) A participatory diagnosis of community needs and building potential ✅
   
   
   c) Purchasing green tech equipment
   
   
   d) Outsourcing all planning abroad
   
2. 
   To make a project both sustainable and inclusive, what is essential?
   
   
   a) Isolating the design team
   
   
   b) Integrating environmental, cultural, and social goals from the start ✅
   
   
   c) Focusing only on cost efficiency
   
   
   d) Avoiding collaboration
   
3. 
   Which of the following best represents a regenerative approach (beyond sustainability)?
   
   
   a) Neutral impact on environment
   
   
   b) Actively improving ecosystems and social well-being ✅
   
   
   c) Minimizing regulation
   
   
   d) Returning to industrial production
   
4. 
   When adapting a BeCom model to a rural area, the most adaptable strategy is:
   
   
   a) Use of local materials and crafts with community co-design ✅
   
   
   b) Importing advanced equipment only
   
   
   c) Building large complexes
   
   
   d) Prioritizing aesthetics over function
   
5. 
   What does BeCom ultimately teach about green buildings?
   
   
   a) They are primarily technological achievements
   
   
   b) They are holistic instruments connecting people, place and planet ✅
   
   
   c) They serve as symbolic showcases only
   
   
   d) They are expensive experiments
   

✅ Scoring (0-5):
5 = Advanced application | 3–4 = Proficient | 0–2 = Needs reflection

2- Green building Self-Assessment Tool

How to use this tool #

For each question, choose a score from 0 to 4:

0 ❌ Not at all

1 🔴 Very limited

2 🟠 Basic progress

3 🟢 Good achievement

4 🌟 Excellent / fully achieved

Add notes, examples, or evidence in the space provided.

Write improvement actions you would like to take. At the end, add up the scores per dimension (max 20).

🌍 Environment #

Criterion	Guiding Question	Score (0–4)	📝 Notes / Evidence	🔧 Improvement Actions
Energy efficiency ⚡	Does the building minimize energy demand (insulation, passive design, efficient systems)?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Renewable energy ☀️	What % of energy use comes from renewable sources?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Water management 💧	Are there systems for rainwater harvesting, greywater reuse, or water-saving fixtures?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Materials 🧱	Are local, recycled, or low-carbon materials used?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Biodiversity 🌱	Does the building support green roofs, gardens, or local ecosystems?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4

👥 Society #

Criterion	Guiding Question	Score (0–4)	📝 Notes / Evidence	🔧 Improvement Actions
Accessibility ♿	Is the building accessible to diverse groups?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Affordability 💸	Are the spaces affordable and inclusive?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Wellbeing & beauty 🌺	Does it provide healthy air, light, and inspiring design?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Community use 🏘️	Is it designed for community activities?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Participation 🤝	Were citizens involved in design and decisions?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4

📚 Education #

Criterion	Guiding Question	Score (0–4)	📝 Notes / Evidence	🔧 Improvement Actions
Learning opportunities 🎓	Does the building act as a ‘living lab’?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Educational programs 📖	Are there workshops or tours linked to it?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Digital learning access 💻	Is there e-learning material connected?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Competence building 🛠️	Do users gain practical eco-skills?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Knowledge transfer 🔄	Is experience shared with others?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4

💶 Economy #

Criterion	Guiding Question	Score (0–4)	📝 Notes / Evidence	🔧 Improvement Actions
Operational savings 💡	Does the project reduce long-term costs?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Local economy 🏪	Were local suppliers/workers engaged?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Green jobs 👷	Has it created or supported jobs in green sectors?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Innovation 🚀	Does it integrate innovative green technologies?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Economic resilience 🔐	Is there a plan for long-term financial sustainability?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4

🏛️ Politics & Governance #

Criterion	Guiding Question	Score (0–4)	📝 Notes / Evidence	🔧 Improvement Actions
Policy alignment 📜	Is it aligned with municipal/regional/EU policies?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Partnerships 🤝	Are there partnerships with authorities, NGOs, academia, business?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Replication potential ♻️	Can the design be replicated elsewhere?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Transparency 🔎	Are processes open and documented?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4
Recognition 🏅	Has the project received support or awards?	☐0 ☐1 ☐2 ☐3 ☐4

📊 Summary of Scores #

Dimension	Total Score (out of 20)
🌍 Environment	____ / 20
👥 Society	____ / 20
📚 Education	____ / 20
💶 Economy	____ / 20
🏛️ Politics & Governance	____ / 20

3- Tool Recommendation

The BeCom project promotes an open, inclusive, and transferable approach to learning and assessment. For this reason, it is essential to select tools that are freely accessible and can be used by communities, educators, and practitioners.

Below you will find an overview of both conventional international tools and open, free alternatives that best fit the BeCom philosophy.

3.1. OpenGreen Building Assessment Tool (OpenGreenMap / GBCe-inspired) #

Description: An open, community-based assessment framework inspired by European Green building criteria.
Access: Free and editable online.
Key Areas: Energy efficiency, land use, materials, well-being, community participation.
Website: https://www.opengreenmap.org
Open, adaptable, and participatory — ideal for community-based evaluations.

3.2. EDGE – Excellence in Design for Greater Efficiencies #

Developed by: International Finance Corporation (World Bank Group)
Access: Fully free online platform for design and performance assessment.
Website: https://edgebuildings.com
Key Areas: Energy, water, and materials efficiency.
Features: Quick calculations and user-friendly interface for comparing design options.
A simple, educational tool to estimate environmental impact and promote awareness.

3.3. SBTool – Sustainable Building Tool (iiSBE) #

Developed by: International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment
Access: Free for educational and research use (Excel templates available).
Website: https://www.iisbe.org/sbtool
Key Areas: Energy, resource use, social and cultural quality.
Features: Flexible, transparent structure adaptable to national or local contexts.
Highly customizable; integrates environmental, social, and economic criteria.

3.4. Level(s) – European Framework for Sustainable Buildings #

Developed by: European Commission
Access: Completely free and open.
Website: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/circular-economy/levels_en
Key Areas: Life-cycle performance, energy, water, comfort, health, costs, and social value.
Features: Common European reference framework aligned with the Green Deal and New European Bauhaus.
Official EU framework — comprehensive, educational, and adaptable across contexts.

3.5. Heat Project #

Developed by: Mathemagenesis – Educational Research and Training Organization (EU-funded project)
Access: Free educational resources available online (partially open access).
Key Areas: Climate change education, urban heat and resilience, sustainable urban design, and community awareness.
Website: https://mathemagenesis.com/project-view/heat-project/

Features: Interactive online learning platform and serious game promoting understanding of how urban form, materials, and human activity influence heatwaves. Designed for blended (online/classroom) learning and adaptable for different European contexts.

An accessible and engaging educational tool to raise awareness of climate resilience and the relationship between buildings, public space, and climate adaptation — complementary to technical sustainability assessments.