Civil Society Facility and Media Programme 2018-2019 Call for proposals: EuropeAid/162473/DH/ACT/Multi Webinar no. 2: Role and structure of Concept Note (CN) in EU application procedure May 3, 2019 This publication was produced with the financial support of the European Union. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the GDSI Limited and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union

Webinar Programme Role and structure of Concept Note in EU application procedure Novelty in approach: theory of change, focus on results and outcomes Structure of the Concept Note Elements and technical requirements of the Concept Note Evaluation criteria: which are key criteria for CN evaluation Q & A

Role and structure of Concept Note in EU application procedure Novelty in approach: theory of change

Approaches and tools for project design Logical Framework (Approach) - LFA Objective oriented project planning (OOPP) Phase 1: Identification of problem, situation & stakeholder analysis Phase 2: Problem analysis (Problem tree), Objective analysis (Objective tree), Strategy analysis Phase 3: Logical framework (Logframe) Theory of change Planning triangle, logical model, outcomes (result) chain + narrative

Logical Framework (Approach) - LFA Diagram description of a project or programme; Gives description how the project/programme contributes to outputs, outcomes and goals/results; Key element/part of Project Cycle Management (PCM) & used for Objective Oriented Project Planning (OOPP); Usually shown as matrix or logframe, also flow chart (called logic model); Linear (not cyclic, no feedback loops); Incl. planning/anticipating of risks and assumptions; Tool for planning, monitoring.

Logical framework vs. Theory of change approach Tool for planning & monitoring projects Focused on project (logic) of intervention (zooming in on a specific pathway) Focus on logical steps, details of the intervention Linear Shown in a diagram (matrix, logframe) Tool for planning & monitoring projects Incl. big picture/context & different pathways Focus on change Circular/incl. feedback loops Shown in a diagram (triangle, boxes, logframe, etc.)

LogFrame approach, Theory of change & the EU In 1992, the Commission adopted “Project Cycle Management” (PCM), a set of project design and management tools based on the LFA, which was already widely used by the EU, MS, UN and other donors; The Commission has continued to improve and update these tools through the years, the latest being with the 2015 & 2016 PRAG, which introduced updated Logframe (incl. result chain, baselines, targets). The current LogFrame combination of classical LogFrame approach and Theory of change.

The updated EU LogFrame LFA approach moved towards focus on change  incl. Theory of change Reflected in the terminology and meaning of the LogFrame: Logic of intervention Result chain Overall objectives Impact Specific objectives Outcomes Outputs Results Activities Activities

The updated EU Logframe (cont.) Indicators are updated with 3 additional columns to elaborate indicators into a monitoring framework to be used during the project implementation: Baseline (concrete indicator value at the the starting of measuring, can also be current value); Current value (concrete indicator value at the start of project implementation); Target (concrete indicator value to be achieved at project end, also level of expected output, outcome, impact).

Results Chain (used in EU Logframe) A simple diagram to show how a project will trigger different levels of change from activities to impact. Results! Inputs Financial and Physical Resources committed to programme activities Activities Utilisation of resources to generate products and services through an "Action" Outputs The products, capital goods and services which result from an Action’s activities Outcomes The likely or achieved short-term and medium-term effects of an Action’s outputs Impact Long term effects produced by the Action

Example of result chain (used in EU LogFrame) Inputs financial input Activities Procurement of text books Training organised Contracting Identifying sites Procurement & distribution of condoms Marketing Outputs Text books provided Teachers trained Water points constructed Sanitation facilities improved Improved access to condoms Promoting the use of condom Outcomes Increased school completion Increased use of improved water & sanitation Increased use of condoms Impact Increased literacy Improved health and well being Reduced number of new HIV infections and unwanted pregnancies

Structure of the Concept Note

Elements of the Concept Note Description of the action Relevance of the action Partnership/Lead applicant, (co-applicants and affiliated entities) THE ACTION = PROJECT = Global term for beneficiary activities funded by the EU (via grants, procurement, prizes or financial instruments).

1. Description of the action (max 2 pages) The background of the action (key challenges, context analyses); The overall and specific objectives of the action (section 1.1.1. table); Key stakeholder groups, their attitudes towards the action and consultations held; Briefly outline intervention logic indicating expected outputs, outcome(s) and impact as well as underlying the main risks and assumptions towards their achievement; Briefly outline the type of activities proposed, including a description of linkages/relationships between activity clusters Explain how the Action will mainstream relevant cross-cutting issues (human rights, gender equality, democracy, good governance, support to youth, children’s rights and indigenous peoples, environmental sustainability and combating HIV/AIDS (if there is a strong prevalence in the target country/region).

2. Relevance of the action (max 3 pages) 1) Relevance to the objectives/sectors/themes/specific priorities of the call for proposals Includes information on relevance of the action: to the objective(s) and priority(ies) of the CfP; to specific subthemes/sectors/areas and other specific requirements as per GfA; which of the expected results (or lots) referred to in the guidelines for applicants will be addressed.

2. Relevance of the action 2) Relevance to the particular needs/constraints of the target country/region(s) and/or relevant sectors (including synergy with other development initiatives and avoidance of duplication): The specific pre-project situation (incl. quantified data analysis where possible); Detailed analysis of the problems to be addressed by the action and how they are interrelated at all levels; Any significant and relevant plans undertaken at national, regional and/or local level relevant to the action and how the action will relate to such plans; If the action is the continuation of a previous action, how will build on the activities/results of this previous action; refer to the main conclusions and recommendations of any evaluations carried out. If the action is part of a larger programme, clearly explain how it fits or is coordinated with that programme or any other planned project. Specify the potential synergies with other initiatives, in particular by the European Commission. Explain the complementarity with other initiatives supported by the EU and by other donors (Member States & others).

2. Relevance of the action 3) Describe and define the target groups and final beneficiaries, their needs and constraints, and state how the action will address these needs Target groups are groups/entities who will directly benefit from the action at the action purpose level. Final beneficiaries are those who will benefit from the action in the long term at the level of the society or sector at large. Description of the target groups and final beneficiaries (quantified where possible); Their needs and constraints; Demonstrate the relevance of the proposal to the needs and constraints; Explain their participation.

Added-value elements Indicate any specific added-value elements of the action, e.g. the promotion or consolidation of public-private partnerships, innovation and best practice. Often modestly written in the CN applications – can bring up to 5 scores in the Evaluation of the CN (out of max 50 in total)! 1.4. Does the proposal contain particular added-value elements (e.g. innovation, best practices, constructive partnerships with public central and local authorities, relevant bodies and economic stakeholders; and the other additional elements indicated under 1.2. of the guidelines for applicants? 5

3. Partnership (Lead applicant, co-applicants and affiliated entities etc.) – contact details THE ACTION APPLICANT AFIILIATED ENTITIES CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATES CO-APPLICANT

Technical requirements !!! Closely follow the template; Must be in English; Do not exceed 5 full pages (A4 size) of Arial 10 characters with 2 cm margins, single line spacing; Sign the Declaration by the applicant for the Concept Note (part of the CN template); Specify location (country, region, area, town) and duration (in months); Estimate co-financing amount and %, may not later vary by more than 20 %; Own contribution may be replaced by other donors’ contribution, while partners and duration only under limited circumstances.

Administrative check Administration compliance check: Whether CN is submitted within deadline; If the CN satisfies all the criteria specified in the checklist (Annex A.1.) If any of the requested information is missing or is incorrect, the application may be rejected on that sole basis and the application will not be evaluated further.

KEY IS TO HAVE A GOOD, SOUND and RELEVANT IDEA!!! Evaluation of the CNs The CN will receive an overall score out of 50 in line with the evaluation grid, while score bellow 30 will be rejected; Elements related to overall design of the action, results and intervention logic have double weight in the score. KEY IS TO HAVE A GOOD, SOUND and RELEVANT IDEA!!!

Evaluation of the CN CNs that reach the above threshold will be ranked by score. The highest scoring applications will be pre-selected until the limit of 200% of the available budget for the CfP is reached; Lead applicants receive a letter indicating the reference number of their application and the respective results. This letter will automatically appear online in the PROSPECT profile or is sent by email or by post; The pre-selected lead applicants will subsequently be invited to submit full applications.

Section Maximum Score 1. Relevance of the action 20 1.1. How innovative and relevant is the proposal to the objectives and priorities of the call for proposals and to the specific themes/sectors/areas or any other specific requirements and guidance stated in the guidelines for applicants? Are the expected results of the action aligned with the priorities defined in the guidelines for applicants (section 1.2), including the results framework indicated in the Guidelines for EU support to civil society in the enlargement countries 2014-2020? 5 1.2. How relevant is the proposal to the particular needs and constraints of the target enlargement region and/or relevant sectors (including value-added and synergy with other EU- funded initiatives in the region such as other CSF-funded actions, the Western Balkans Investements Framework, Creative Europe and the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights –EIDHR and avoidance of duplication)? 1.3. How clearly defined and strategically chosen are those involved (final beneficiaries, target groups)? Have their needs (as rights holders and/or duty bearers) and constraints been clearly defined and does the proposal address them appropriately? Is there evidence of a gender analysis having been carried out and informing the proposal? 1.4. Does the proposal contain particular added-value elements (e.g. innovation, best practices, constructive partnerships with public central and local authorities, relevant bodies and economic stakeholders; and the other additional elements indicated under 1.2. of the guidelines for applicants?

2. Design of the action 30 2.1. How coherent is the overall design of the action? Does the proposal indicate the expected results to be achieved by the action? Does the intervention logic explain in a convincing way how the expected results will be achieved? 5x2** 2.2. Does the design reflect a robust analysis of the problems involved, and the capacities of the relevant stakeholders? 5 2.3. Does the design take into account external factors (risks and assumptions) and include plans to adapt to such risks materialising, or assumptions not being fullfilled? 2.4. Are the activities feasible and consistent in relation to the expected results (including timeframe)? Are results (output, outcome and impact) realistic? 2.5. To which extent does the proposal integrate relevant cross-cutting elements such as environmental/climate change issues, promotion of gender equality and equal opportunities, needs of disabled people, rights of minorities and rights of children, democratic standards and good governance , support to youth, outreach to grassroots and citizens? Maximum total score 50 **: this scores is multiplied by 2 because of its importance

This publication was produced with the financial support of the European Union. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the GDSI Limited and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union