TNA Feedback Questionnaire for feedback on the trans-national access. Preliminary questions A1. Name of person filling out this questionnaire A2. Organisation that requested access (if applicable) A3. Project acronym A4. Node involved NOA NodeEISCAT NodeLOFAR NodeCBK-PAS NodeSGO NodeUPS-IRAP NodeROB-GNSS NodeUPC-IonSAT NodeOE NodeIAP NodeINGV NodeDLR-SO Node A5. Access type Physical access Remote only Part I: Feedback concerning the TNA process B1. How did you learn about the TNA call? Direct mailing Project website Social media Colleague or collaborator Other In case of "other", please explain. B2. Did you easily find information regarding the available nodes and instruments? yes no Comments (optional) B3. Did you easily find information about the access procedure and the application form? yes no Comments (optional) B4. Was the application form clear? yes no Comments (optional) B5. Was the effort required to write the application reasonable? yes no Comments (optional) B6. Did you encounter any practical difficulties submitting your application? yes no Comments (optional) B7. Was it clear to you what criteria would be used to select TNA projects? yes no Comments (optional) B8. Was the time between your application and notification of acceptance reasonable? yes no Comments (optional) B9. Was the processes for reimbursements clear before the start of the project? yes no Comments (optional) B10. Users are required to provide an executive report after the end of their project. Were you aware of this when submitting the application? yes no Comments (optional) Part II: Feedback concerning the TNA execution C1. What documentation, training, or support did the node provide before the access period? C2. Were the documentation, training, and support provided before the access period adequate? yes no Comments (optional) C3. Was the provided access period sufficient to achieve the goals of your project? yes no Comments (optional) C4. Were there any technical issues with the instrument(s) or database(s) during the access period that significantly interfered with the execution of the project? yes no Comments (optional) C5. Were there any practical issues other than with the instrument(s) or database(s) during the access period (e.g. network connection problems for remote access)? yes no Comments (optional) C6. What assistance and technical support did the node provide during the access period? C7. Was the assistance and support provided by the node during the access period adequate? yes no Comments (optional) C8. Did the node provide any assistance after the access period (e.g. with analysing and interpreting the collected data)? yes no Comments (optional) C9. Was the data obtained during the project suitable and sufficient for achieving the goals of the project? yes no Comments (optional) C10. Do you have concrete plans for continued collaboration with the node, based on this TNA project? yes no Comments (optional) Final general questions D1. How satisfied are you in general with your experience with the PITHIA-NRF transnational access? 1) It turned out better than expected.2) It achieved all expected results.3) It satisfied most expectations.4) It was only partially successful.5) It was mostly a failure, not much was achieved. D2. Do you plan to submit another TNA proposal in the future (using the same node or another)? yes no Comments (optional) D3. Do you have any further comments or feedback, including about this questionnaire itself?
