INTERACT ENPI is a project funded by the European Union Summary of the Workshops www.interact-eu.net.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Implementation Structure DG AGRI, October 2005
Advertisements

EuropeAid PARTICIPATORY SESSION 1: 3 topics Each table chooses its topic: o Managing reality (Blue) o Assessing performance (Yellow) o Monitoring & reporting.
Bucharest – 18/9/2013. Procurement procedure of the awarding contracts by the Beneficiaries / Partners shall be in compliance with the procedural procurement.
This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH RCBI ‘handover’ meeting Romania-Ukraine-R.Moldova ENPI CBC Programme Bucharest.
This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Amman – 23 April 2012 RCBI ‘handover’ meeting Jordan.
This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH RCBI ‘handover’ meeting Estonia-Latvia-Russia ENPI CBC Programme Riga, 20 March.
This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH RCBI ‘handover’ meeting Latvia-Lithuania-Belarus ENPI CBC Programme Vilnius,
This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH RCBI ‘handover’ meeting Partner Country involvement Poland-Belarus-Ukraine ENPI.
EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD AND PARTNERSHIP INSTRUMENT - ENPI CROSS-BORDER COOPERATION PROGRAMMES.
Research and Innovation Summary of MS questions on the Commission's proposal for DG Research & Innovation Research and Innovation Rules for Participation.
Better governance at local level Guidelines for responding to a call for proposals 1.Grants to strengthen capacity and development initiatives at District.
Good Evaluation Planning – and why this matters Presentation by Elliot Stern to Evaluation Network Meeting January 16 th 2015.
The LIFE Integrated Projects
EU Wetland conservation policy. Communication on the Wise Use and Conservation of Wetlands (1995) => first European document dedicated exclusively.
Changes in the project Joint Technical Secretariat Seminar for Beneficiaries and Partners August, 2013 Rezekne, Latvia.
Harmonised Implementation Tools - HIT Towards simplification and streamlining of programme implementation 23 October 2013 | Stockholm.
Information and Publicity Requirements Kirsti Mijnhijmer, Joint Secretariat Lead Partner Seminar 24th March 2015, Svolvær, Norway.
Comprehensive M&E Systems
Large Scale Projects Aleksejs Šaforostovs LSP Project Manager Joint Technical Secretariat.
DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT IDEAS
Culture Programme - Selection procedure Katharina Riediger Infoday Praha 10/06/2010.
Project Implementation Monika Balode Joint Technical Secretariat Lead Partner Seminar 16 October 2009, Šiauliai.
Strasbourg 05/06/07 Strasbourg 31/07/07 EUROPEAID Non-State Actors and Local Authorities in Development WTD: WORKING TOGETHER FOR DEVELOPMENT.
Evaluation plans for programming period in Poland Experience and new arrangements Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, Poland Athens,
Technical Assistance Strategy Romania-Bulgaria Cross-Border Cooperation Operational Programme Technical Meeting&Joint Approval Committee, Bucharest,
IPA Funds Programme Management sept Bölgesel Rekabet Edebilirlik Operasyonel Programı’nın Uygulanması için Kurumsal Kapasitenin Oluşturulmasına.
Croatian Experience with Management of EU Funds Nataša Mikuš, Deputy State Secretary Central Office for Development Strategy and Coordination of EU Funds.
Regulatory requirements in the current programming period Funchal, 18 November 2010.
Workshop II Monitoring and Evaluation INTERACT ENPI Annual Conference December 2009 | Rome.
EU Funding opportunities : Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme Justice Programme Jose Ortega European Commission DG Justice.
111 Synthesis of Questionnaires. Thematic concentration  Most of the new member states support the suggested principle while maintaining the element.
IPA Funds Monitoring and Evaluation December Bölgesel Rekabet Edebilirlik Operasyonel Programı’nın Uygulanması için Kurumsal Kapasitenin Oluşturulmasına.
Transport Enhancing TEN-T funding Pawel Stelmaszczyk Special Envoy for European Mobility Network DG MOVE Warsaw, 18 December 2013.
ACP S&T Programme - Stakeholder conference October Implemented by the ACP Secretariat Funded by the European Union EDULINK - ACP Science and.
Orientation for new Lead Partners and Partners Information & Publicity Requirements Lead Partner and Partner Seminar 12 June 2008 – Voss, Norway Kirsti.
First meeting of the south-south-eastern ENPI CBC NIPs networks Florence, 23 June 2009 WORKSHOP Promoting viable and effective trans-national partnerships.
Paulius Baniūnas Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Lithuania EU Structural Support Management Department Monitoring and Analysis Division SYSTEM OF.
PRIME MINISTRY REPUBLIC OF TURKEY TURKISH STATISTICAL INSTITUTE Foreign Relations Department Projects Group TurkStat Meeting of the Policy Group on Statistical.
The partnership principle and the European Code of Conduct on Partnership.
Application procedure From theory to practice Dieter H. Henzler, Steinbeis-Transfercenter Cultural Resources Management, Berlin.
1 Project Coordinators’ meeting March 2010 TEMPUS MONITORING POLICY.
REGIONAL POLICY EUROPEAN COMMISSION The contribution of EU Regional/Cohesion programmes Corinne Hermant-de Callataÿ European Commission,
Grant Application Form (Annex A) Grant Application Form (Annex A) 2nd Call for Proposals.
Status and role of International Department (Slovak experience) MGSC Meeting Luxembourg 23 – 24 March 2012 SOSR.
Interreg IIIB Trans-national cooperation: Budget comparison : 440 million EURO 420 m EURO (Interreg IIC prog.) + 20 m EURO (Pilot Actions)
EVALUATION OF THE SEE SARMa Project. Content Project management structure Internal evaluation External evaluation Evaluation report.
Technical Assistance Office TCP Projects 2005 Contractual and Financial Management Administrative and Financial Handbook Prepared by IA, 14/12/2001 SOCRATES.
11/06/20161 Transport sector - Preparing for next programming period: SEA as part of ex-ante conditionality and ex-ante evaluation Adina Relicovschi Senior.
Croatia: Result orientation within the process of preparation of programming documents V4+ Croatia and Slovenia Expert Level Conference Budapest,
EuropeAid/152087/DD/ACT/LB Cultural activities 2016 Information Session 13 th June 2016.
EU - China 11 Guidelines for Applicants rules for applications European Union Delegation to China & Mongolia Beijing Information Session 14 th November.
ROUND TABLE “Exchanging Experience in Absorption of the European Funds: Perspectives for Bulgaria and Poland” 1 April 2011, Sofia Tomislav Donchev Minister.
Karelia ENPI CBC September the 6th 2011 St. Petersburg Document EG Chairs and ITAs 12/4.4/Info 1.
Monitoring Expert, NEEMO GEIE
Eligibility and evaluation
EUROPEAID/121737/D/SV/RO - Training in Project Cycle Management, Procurement and Contracting of Pre-Accession Projects and Management of EU Structural.
Tempus Monitoring Policy
PRAG PRACTICAL GUIDE FOR CONTRACT PROCEDURES
Drafting the Guidelines for applicants
Līga Vecā Liliana Olivia Lucaciu Colm McClements May 2006 Bucharest
PROJECT MANUAL Galina Georgieva Project Officer
Guidelines on participation in EU External Assistance Programmes
Summary of key findings Inga Pavlovaite
ETC reflected in the reports issued by the HLGS
EXTERNAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMMES
Guidelines on participation in EU External Assistance Programmes
State of Play Programme level
NDPHS Work Plan for 2012 NDPHS 8th Partnership Annual Conference
Role of Evaluation coordination group and Capacity Building Projects in Lithuania Vilija Šemetienė Head of Economic Analysis and Evaluation Division.
DG Justice and Consumers
Presentation transcript:

INTERACT ENPI is a project funded by the European Union Summary of the Workshops

INTERACT ENPI is a project funded by the European Union Evaluation and selection Worshop I

Key questions: Amounts devoted to the calls appears limited in view of number of applications received. If allowed, increase of the amount finally contracted must be coherent with human resources => proper monitoring must be ensured. Financial allocations and project sizes

Key questions: Low maximum grants in some priorities are not attractive for applicants when compared to the effort needed to build an application. Statistics broken down per partner will help to identify gaps. Financial allocations and project sizes

Key questions: Application forms perceived as difficult by potential applicants and partners. Not always the adaptations made to PRAG have brought simplification. Elaboration of single application forms programmed to ensure correctness => avoids unnecessary mistakes. Application package

Key questions: Translations of application forms into national languages proved very useful => reduction in number of questions put forward to JMA. Better no translation than a bad translation!!. Application package

Key questions: Forecast 2 nd call => simplification (e.g., reduction in number of annexes, requirements for supporting documents). Boomerang effect: more requirements lead to time- consuming administrative check. Applicant responsibility: ”no grants are for free”. Application package

Key questions: Still not full capacity to draft applications. Capacity building outside calls. Capacity building also for Member States (mostly EU15) => PRAG as ”terra incognita”. Better results shown in cases where JTS in place and national authorities have been actively involved. Support to applicants

Key questions: Financial support for attendance to partner forums. Limitations in number of attendants from hosting country in order to have balanced participation. Involvement of national authorities and availability of multinational staffed JTS. Support to applicants

INTERACT ENPI is a project funded by the European Union Monitoring and evaluation Worshop II

General approach  Practical  Effective  User oriented  Complementary to EC own monitoring and evaluation activities

Monitoring – Main challenges  Lack of template for annual implementation report  Need to better develop templates for reporting at project level (annexes VI and VII) – Defining clearly what is expected from projects  Existence of cultural differences in interpreting monitoring (process) and data  Define sampling methodologies (which to monitor during field visits? Checklists to be developed)  Lack/limited financial resources (i.e. for field visits)  Understand who does what and define the different roles and responsibilities (different views about the involvement of NCPs/NIPs in monitoring projects)  Build capacities at beneficiary and partner level) (training sessions for beneficiaries and partners + tutoring (face2face) + manuals)

Indicators  Programmes have to be very pragmatic (taking into account technical assistance budget, sometime limited)  Limited number of indicators  Indicators about communication activities (at programme level) (to be included in the communication plan)

Evaluation: what?  Effectiveness of information activities following to the launch of a call for proposals  Calls for proposals (to draw lessons learned)  Horizontal/cluster evaluation (projects with same activities)

Evaluation: how? How?  Evaluation plan  ToR  Survey, questionnaires, interviews  Participatory approach (direct involvement of programmes staff – decision makers)  Follow up and dissemination (need to show results and added value)

Evaluation – actors involved  JMA + JTS (including BO) with the support of external experts  Project beneficiaries and partners  Target Groups/Final beneficiaries  Use of external experts  + : Give a view from outside (“a pair of fresh eyes”) – Independence – A more objective analysis and judgements  - Costs (some programmes have limited TA budget)

INTERACT ENPI is a project funded by the European Union Procurement procedures and Large scale projects Worshop III

LSP not only ”big projects” – many other criteria Some programmes that do not have LSP – foresee now to open this possibility BUT the time constraints have to be considered! – LSPs are long projects, 2014 LSP Beneficiaries are usually not experienced with implementation of EU or other projects Specific actions needed Large scale projects

One do not exclude another Similarities: Both have investment character High subcontracting level (linked to procurement check) Same challenges in sustainability Supporting documents; Big preparatory costs in both Implementation of projects (works, supplies) Synergies: LSPs may lead to other infrastructure projects (roads to border crossings, etc) Large scale – infrastructural projects

Procurement TA – is a way of “ex-ante” follow up, whereas only ex-post (or ex- post, but before contract signature) check is foreseen Whereas Member states authorities using the national rules are by definition in line with EU rules, the situation is different with NGOs BUT Rules of nationality and origin to be respected by MS too Procurement procedures

In some countries the approach from the national authorities is different to EU funds and national co-financing funds Difficult to switch from national/ERDF procedures to PRAG, some Beneficiaries are dealing with both, or no experience Often no experience - some assistance to Beneficiaries on procurement procedures is needed Procurement procedures