This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH RCBI ‘handover’ meeting Hungary-Slovakia-Romania-Ukraine ENPI CBC Programme Budapest, 21 March 2012

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Meeting outline Expectations Review of the involvement of PC and what the programme plans to do to facilitate involvement Identify what RCBI tools/materials may be needed to help with this including a presentation on some of these, e.g. e- modules + support needed to the end of the project Situation at the start of the project (2007) and situation at end. How has it changed Review of support from RCBI - what was useful and what could be improved and what might be needed in the future programming phase Evaluation and wrap up

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Basis Quantitative analysis based on statistics on calls, provided by the programme Analysis based on questionnaires: –Programme: JMA, JTS, BO –Ua: NCP, CSE Input from - RCBI Key Experts

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH No. of Ua applicants – 1st & 2nd calls

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH No. of Ua partners -1st & 2nd calls

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH No. of Ua applicants and partners -1st & 2nd call

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Awarded projects - Ist call

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Awarded Projects - 2 nd call awarded

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Success rate -1st and & 2nd calls 59%26% 29%15%

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Budget share Ua – 1st and 2nd calls

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Involvement of PC organisations in applications - 1 As Applicants: Very well represented (3); not very well represented (2) Reasons: Number of UA applicants in the 1st CfP was under the average, but due to the experiences and successful promotional events, this number doubled Attraction to Programme’s priorities as well as to the system of financing Good innovative and development ideas Depends on a programme – we are satisfied with the level of involvement of our applicants/partners in “Hungary-Slovakia-Romania-Ukraine” Complicated national requirements and unstable national legislation Lack of partners Lack of experience

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Involvement of PC organisations in applications - 2 As Partners: Very well represented (3); well represented (1); not very well represented (1) Reasons: Due to the rule, that at least one participant should be from the PC Building of project partnership between PC organisation and MS organisation is a fundamental obligation for submitting a project proposal and further implementation of the project in case it has been selected Desire to get acquainted with the Programmes rules and requirements better Chance for experience exchange Being a partner is more convenient and involves less responsibility compared to being an Applicant Depends on a programme – we are satisfied with the level of involvement of our applicants/partners in “Hungary-Slovakia-Romania-Ukraine” (2) Interest of Ukrainian organisations to participate in the ENPI CBC

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Involvement of PC organisations in awarded projects - 1 As Applicants: Very well represented (2); well represented (1); not very well represented (2) Reasons: The rules were not so strict Attractive system of financing Good experience in working with EU Programmes Depends on a programme – we are satisfied with the level of involvement of our applicants/partners in “Hungary-Slovakia-Romania-Ukraine” (2)

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Involvement of PC organisations in awarded projects - 2 As Partners: Very well represented (3); not very well represented (2) Reasons: In awarded projects not just one UA partner participates Building of project partnership between PC organisation and MS organisation is a fundamental obligation for submitting a project proposal and further implementation of the project in case it has been selected (2) Depends on a programme – we are satisfied with the level of involvement of our applicants/partners in “Hungary-Slovakia-Romania-Ukraine” (2)

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Main challenges - 1 As Applicants: Legislative obstacles (2) Banking difficulties (money transfer, proof of spending, etc) Complicated national requirements Assessment procedure Application package Language barrier Visa, national permissions Lack of experience (incl. in the preparation of project proposals according to EU rules) (2) Afraid to take responsibility for project management Lack of partners Co-financing

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Main challenges - 2 As Partners: Legislative obstacles (2) Visa, national permissions Complicated national requirements Finding a partner (2) Assessment procedure Language barrier Application package Lack of experience Co-financing

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Disadvantage issue Disadvantage – 2 No disadvantage – 3 Reasons: In PC, legislation does not reflect the needs of project implementation In MS the system is more flexible MS have more experience in Programme participation and in preparing application forms

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Balanced participation Equal treatment of all applicants is more important than balanced participation – 2 A balanced distribution of funds among participating countries is very important – 2 Balanced participation is extremely important for programme success – 4 Explanations: Balanced distribution of funds proves that the Action is being implemented mutually and actively by the partners The quantity of PC organisations participating in projects is essential for their further development and increasing of their skills and know-how A balanced distribution of funds among participating countries seems to be very important, but it much depends on the quality of the applications It would be good to balance the rules for participation of Adjacent/Adjoining regions and main regions

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Responsibility for facilitating balanced participation JMA/JTS – 2 Branch offices – 2 JMC – National authorities – 3 Other: –JMA/JTS was to use the best and independent assessors in order to find the best applications. The points/scores were doing their own job to rank the projects, and distribute the fund among the participants/countries. National authorities, umbrella organizations should motivate the potential applications too –Regional Councils or self-governing regions

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH What are you doing to facilitate participation ? Programme Info days (2) Partner search forums (3) Spreading information through media, project website, internet (2) Ua Our Authorities hold information events and provide our applicants with explanations Stimulates balanced participation at its level (JTFs, JMCs)

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH What can/should you do in the future? Programme To keep spreading information (e.g. Info days) (2) To guarantee independent and satisfactory assessors Continue providing information on the Programme and informing organizations about the rules and requirements of the Programme List of successful PC organisations and of all implemented projects should be published on Programme’s website as well as on the websites of Regional Authorities Ua Balanced participation of MC and PC should be the provision in programme documents Be more active in communicating with the regional authorities from MS to encourage more active participation of the organisations from MS in ENPI CBC projects

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH RCBI support to HSRU Support for programming - contributions from experts from Ukraine and other programming experts Training on programme management - JTS/JMC (2) Events to support calls for proposals - info seminars (2), project preparation workshop (9), partner search forums (3) Support for PC to participate in programme events (5)

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH RCBI materials/tools - 1 Database of partners and contacts in MPC E support for project identification and development and project implementation Identifying, developing and implementing ENPI CBC projects: Tips from RCBI practice of supporting potential applicants and partners RCBI Project Implementation Manual (PIM) Guides to national requirements for implementing ENPI CBC projects

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH RCBI materials/tools - 2 The clock is ticking: Steps for preparing ENPI CBC project proposals ‘Who does What When’ Wheel - Responsibilities and tasks for each programme management structure Power point presentations from events – Project Preparation workshops, Partner search Forums, Project Management and Implementation training Reports on PC involvement Other support?