Joint technical Secretariat in Riga I “Project Description” II “Partnership” 18 January 2010, Klaipėda 19 January 2010, Panevėžys & Saldus.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden Transnationality and locally implemented pilot actions in the BSR.
Advertisements

1 EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region Anders Lindholm European Commission DG Regional Policy, Territorial Cooperation.
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in the Seventh Framework Programme Support actions.
New opportunities for regional development through cross-border cooperation Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development November 16,
Writing a Project Proposal Fundraising Workshop ILGA-Europe, Krakow By Maxim Anmeghichean.
Identification of critical success factors for implementing NLLS, through collaboration and exchange of expertise IDENTIFY LLP-2008-RO-KA1-KA1NLLS.
CENTRAL EUROPE PROGRAMME SUCCESS FACTORS FOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT: focus on activities and partnership JTS CENTRAL EUROPE PROGRAMME.
The URBACT II Programme General Presentation Vilnius, 20 January 2011.
Financing possibilities for implementation of the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region: different solutions INTERACT Point Turku 14 October.
Urban-Nexus – Integrated Urban Management David Ludlow and Michael Buser UWE Sofia November 2011.
The implementation of the rural development policy and its impacts on innovation and modernisation of rural economy Christian Vincentini, European Commission.
Application Form – Part C Kirsti Mijnhijmer, Secretariat How to Apply Seminar 4th February 2015, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Latvia–Lithuania Cross Border Cooperation Programme 2007–2013 WORKSHOP “How to prepare good application?” Joint Technical Secretariat 3rd.
Regional Policy Priorities of Latvia until 2020
Part-financed by the European Union The new Baltic Sea Region Programme Susanne Scherrer, Director of the Joint Secretariat Rostock/Riga.
EU funds for South East Europe: IPA II Cross-border Cooperation Programme BULGARIA-SERBIA Sofia, 2015.
Introducing the 3 rd SEE Call: a strategic approach SEE Programme: the new Calls Ljubljana, 20 April 2011 Ivan Curzolo – SEE Joint Technical Secretariat.
Cooperation in the mainstream programmes / article 37-6b example of Limousin (France) ‏ inhabitants inhabitants 43 inhab / km² 43 inhab.
Application Form Part 1, Sections 4-9 How to Apply Seminar 16 th September 2010 – Copenhagen Kirsti Mijnhijmer.
Project Closure Guidelines Riga, Legal framework 2 EC Regulation 1828/2006 § 8, 9: Explanatory plaque, billboard, emblem of the EU, reference to.
Part-financed by the European Union The Baltic Sea Region Programme by the Joint Technical Secretariat BSR INTERREG III B Neighbourhood Programme.
Contribution of the Territorial Cooperation Programmes to the EU Strategy for the Danube Region Kiril Geratliev, Director General “Territorial Cooperation.
APPLICATION FORM OF ROBINWOOD SUBPROJECT SECOND STEP 1. The short listed Local Beneficiaries work together to create international partnerships and prepare.
1 European Union Regional Policy – Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion The new architecture for cohesion policy post-2013 High-Level Meeting on the.
CENTRAL EUROPE PROGRAMME Barbara Di Piazza JTS CENTRAL EUROPE PROGRAMME CENTRAL EUROPE INFODAY Venice, 4 March 2008.
South East Europe Transnational Cooperation Programme Bologna, 15° June 2009 Kick-off meeting of project SARMa SEE Joint Technical Secretariat.
European Commission Introduction to the Community Programme for Employment and Social Solidarity PROGRESS
Strategic Priorities of the NWE INTERREG IVB Programme Harry Knottley, UK representative in the International Working Party Lille, 5th March 2007.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden A Community Initiative concerning Transnational co-operation on spatial.
Regional Policy Common Strategic Framework The Commission's revised proposal for the CPR - COM (2012) 496 of 11 Sept.
Preparatory projects and funding opportunities 21 st April 2010 – Portrush, Northern Ireland Teresa Lennon and Michael O’Brien European Union European.
│ 1│ 1 What are we talking about?… Culture: Visual Arts, Performing Arts, Heritage Literature Cultural Industries: Film and Video, Television and radio,
July ‘2011 Smolyan, Bulgaria. The Programme is co-funded by the European Union (ERDF) and National Funds of Greece and Bulgaria Project : “through pREvention.
Regional Policy EU Cohesion Policy 2014 – 2020 Proposals from the European Commission.
1 LIFE+ COUNCIL WORKING GROUP 4 OCTOBER Discussion Points 1. LIFE+ in Context: Environment funding under the Financial Perspectives.
ACP S&T Programme - Stakeholder conference October Implemented by the ACP Secretariat Funded by the European Union EDULINK - ACP Science and.
ETCF-II is implemented by EUROCHAMBRES& TOBB TOBB ETCF-II is co-funded by the European Union and Turkey 1 CIVIL SOCIETY DIALOGUE- EU-TURKEY CHAMBERS FORUM.
Activity Reporting Lead Partner Seminar 20 th January 2011, Friars Carse Hotel, Dumfries, Scotland Rachel Burn.
Activity Reporting Lead Partner Seminar 22 February 2012 Copenhagen Rachel Burn.
FROM GAPS TO CAPS Risk Management Capability Based on Gaps Identification in the BSR Project Lead Partner: Fire and Rescue Department under the Ministry.
Application procedure From theory to practice Dieter H. Henzler, Steinbeis-Transfercenter Cultural Resources Management, Berlin.
 Ensure the title is in line with the requirements of the proposed funding agency if they have any specification for the titled page (some do have.
Grant Application Form (Annex A) Grant Application Form (Annex A) 2nd Call for Proposals.
Creating Innovation through International collaboration Melanie Relton & Helen Kidd, British Council 7 April 2013, Qatar.
Interreg IIIB Trans-national cooperation: Budget comparison : 440 million EURO 420 m EURO (Interreg IIC prog.) + 20 m EURO (Pilot Actions)
04/2007 THE EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENT POLICY & ITS INSTRUMENTS OF IMPLEMENTATION Preparation & Draft of environmental projects THE EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENT POLICY.
1 Second call for proposals – National Information Day EUROPEAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND Benoît Dalbert, Project Officer, Joint Technical Secretariat.
Part-financed by the European Union From application to implementation – the procedures Joint Technical Secretariat Lead Applicant Seminar for 1st application.
Project Manager – MCESD Project Partner - MEUSAC “ Closer to Europe ” Operational Programme 2 Cohesion Policy Empowering People for More Jobs.
URBACT IMPLEMENTATION NETWORKS. URBACT in a nutshell  European Territorial Cooperation programme (ETC) co- financed by ERDF  All 28 Member States as.
Project design – Activities and partnership CENTRAL EUROPE PROGRAMME Project development seminar Prague, 1-2 February 2010 Monika Schönerklee-Grasser.
EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD AND PARTNERSHIP INSTRUMENT - ENPI CROSS-BORDER COOPERATION PROGRAMMES.
Transnational Working & Reporting Procedures. LP Seminar January 2013 Transnational Cooperation & Reporting Procedures I) Transnational cooperation: Definition.
CENTRAL EUROPE PROGRAMME WORKSHOP A: Preparing an application – focus on activities and partnership Project development seminar Prague, 1-2 February.
Preparatory projects and funding opportunities 17 th June 2010 – Copenhagen, Denmark Christopher Parker and Rachel Burn European Union European Regional.
Sharing solutions for better regional policies European Union | European Regional Development Fund Erika Fulgenzi Policy Officer | Interreg Europe JS
GREECE-ALBANIA IPA CROSS BORDER COOPERATION PROGRAMME
Baltic Sea cooperation for reducing ship and port emissions through knowledge- & innovation-based competitiveness BSR InnoShip Baltic Sea cooperation for.
PROJECT MANUAL Galina Georgieva Project Officer
Cross-Border-Cooperation in
Baltic Sea Region Programme : New Funding Opportunities
Application Form Sections 4-9 Christopher Parker & Kirsti Mijnhijmer 28 January 2009 – Copenhagen, Denmark European Union European Regional Development.
EEA/Norway Grants – perspectives of new period
Helene Skikos DG Education and Culture
ENI CBC Joint Operational Programme Black Sea Basin
Policy-to-project-to-policy Conference
Project intervention logic
INFORMATION SEMINAR Interreg V-A Latvia-Lithuania programme
Project intervention logic
Presentation transcript:

Joint technical Secretariat in Riga I “Project Description” II “Partnership” 18 January 2010, Klaipėda 19 January 2010, Panevėžys & Saldus 21 January 2010, Līvāni Latvia–Lithuania Cross Border Cooperation Programme 2007–2013 WORKSHOP “How to prepare good application?”

WORKSHEET I Project Description 2

1. Good Project Title. HOW? 3  Project title – project business card  Choose words clearly reflecting the focus of your project. The most important words first, then less important words  Remove unnecessary for understanding words Good title – a quick picture for the reader of the key ideas of your project!

1. Is it a Good Project Title? 4  Establishment of Cooperation systems between sport facilities in Latvia–Lithuania Cross border region  Harmonious Cross Border Co-operation in traffic safety of LV-LT border regions  Development of infrastructure and services for entrepreneurship “Innovative Border”  Improvement of water quality in small settlements Vriclava (LV) and Sauginiai (LT)  Continuance of Latvia-Lithuania Cross Border Cooperation in Protection of Population and Environment Extra words: Illogical Two titles in one project Country abbreviations Spelling mistakes Not easy understandable

2. Short Title of the Project 5  LVLTMARINE Improvement of the labor force competitiveness in Latvia– Lithuania Maritime Sector  Mid-Baltics Craft Cross-border network of craft as promoter of attractiveness of Latvia–Lithuania borderlands  Museum Access Development of Accessible and Attractive Museums in Zemgale and Northen Lithuania  THESPIRITOFCURONIA Sport games THESPIRITOFCURONIA of Curonian region in Skuodas and Liepaja  RCBR Reconstruction of the Latvia–Lithuania cross border road Blankenfelde – Vaineikiai

3. Priority and Direction 6 3rd Call For Proposals: I Priority Direction of Support 1 Facilitating Business, Labour Market and R&T Development Direction of Support 2 Improvement of Internal and External Accessibility of the Border Region II Priority Direction of Support 1 Enhancing Joint Management of Public Services and Natural Resources Direction of Support 3 Development of Active and Sustainable Communities (Small Project Facility) Quality Criteria Project is relevant to Programme Objectives Check supported activities!!! Only one Direction of Support!

4. Project Duration 7 Project start date:  First costs incurred or paid  Eearliest – the day after the decision of the Joint Monitoring and Steering Commitee  Latest – within 1 month after LP signs the Subsidy Contract Project end date:  First date + duration = end date One date for all project! Start and end date is fixed in the Subsidy Contract

5. Brief Summary of Project 8 Answer to the questions:  Who (project partners)  Where (place of implementation)  Why (justification of project)  What (aims of the project)  How (main activities)  What (outputs and benefit for the target groups) and Gives a first impression about the project! Published on the Programme website, presented to media PERSUADE DON’T GO TOO MUCH INTO DETAILS BE SPECIFIC, CONCISE

6. Total Project Budget 9  Filled in autmatically from Worksheet V ‘Project Budget’

7. Problem and Justification 10  Problem you want to solve, situation to improve?  Background of project/partnership – has it origin in any previous project?  Why partnership is needed? It is your chance to persuade assessors about project significance!!! Problem Joint / Common?

7. Problem and Justification: Recommendations 11  Justify, not only describe problem/situation  Avoid general stereotypic statements, use statistics, researches and other relevant concrete data  Choose problem that you can solve (instead of big problem that you can’t or even don’t have competence to solve  Justify the need of the target group, not the project partners’ organisations unless they are project target group  Answer if the project idea has cross border nature? Can’t it be solved separately on a national, local scale?

8. Objectives and Sub-objectives 12  1 overall and at least 2 sub-objectives Overall – strategic long term vision, non-achievable within project time, but project contributes to its achievement Sub-objective – operational aim, achievable within project If you don’t know where to go how would you know that you have came there? PROBLEMOBJECTIVES RESULTS Possibility to get funding is not target itself!

13 9. Project Target Groups  Describe and indicate and describe direct target groups of the project and quantify the  Indicate and explain what will be the effect or benefits for the project target groups from your project activities Interested parts:  Target groups  Project implementers  Decision makers  Financial source

Approach and Methodology 1.Describe coherence between: 2.Justify chosen Work Packages and thematic link between them 3.Coherence between investments and project objectives/activities Quality Criteria The proposed methodology and approach is coherent with project rationale PROBLEMOBJECTIVEACTIVITIESRESULTS

Contribution to Programme Objectives and Development Plans  Describe coherence between project and Programme objectives  Indicate compliance to regional and/or local planning/strategic documents Quality Criteria Project objectives are included into the local and/or regional planning documents

Contribution to EU Horizontal Policies Does the project contribute to:  Sustainable development  Equal opportunities  Competition  Partnership  Additionality Quality Criteria Project is in line and contributes to the relevant EU and national legislation and policies as well as facilitate implementation of the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region. NEWS: European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region

Cross Border Impact and Innovative Approach  Cross border v.s. national/local implementation  Benefits for the border area  Difference from existing solutions

WORKSHEET II Partnership 18

Partnership 19 Indicate:  Involvement of each Partner in preparation of the application  Commitment of the involved partners  Justification of partner who is not from the Programme territory  Involved personnel, duration of their work, monthly remuneration rate  Justification of not balanced budget or partnership

Partnership 20 Shortcomings of partnership:  Little knowledge about the partners  No clear common understanding of the project targets  Planned outputs and results not relevant for all the project partners  Weak commitment of some partners to the project