1. Case Study Border Midland West
Source: Mr. Gerry Finn
Director
Border, Midland and Western Regional Assembly
Ireland
March 2004

2. Project Selection – General Principles
Programme and Measure Objectives
Economic Impact – taking account of Deadweight and Displacement
Financial Viability – PPP and productive Sector Projects
Cost effectiveness
Environmental Impact
Impact on equality of opportunity
Impact on poverty
Impact on rural development
Programme Complement set out specific criteria to be used
Greater degree competition especially aid to private sector
Source: National Development Plan 2000 – 2006 P. 212
(3)

3. Principal Appraisal Techniques
Financial Analysis
Cost Benefit Analysis
Cost Effectiveness
Scoring ; Weighting ; Ranking
Multi Criteria Analysis (M.C.A)
Cost Benefit – Mandatory for projects €50m +
– Recommended for other large infrastructural projects
Source: Fitzpatrick Associates: Review of Project Selection
Procedures and Appraisal Techniques in the CSF. May 1999
(4)

4. Cost Benefit Analysis KEY FEATURES LIMITATIONS
APPLICATION
KEY FEATURES
LIMITATIONS
Essential to demonstrate the economic costs and benefits of projects from the perspective of the national economy or social welfare
Comprehensive
Comparison of costs and benefits, including non-market.
Treatment of risk.
Can include estimation of multipliers
Impacts require common monetary numeraire
Data demands can be considerable
Can have inadequate political or social acceptability
Source: Fitzpatrick Associates: Review of Project Selection
Procedures and Appraisal Techniques in the CSF May 1999
(5)

5. Project Appraisal – Scoring, Weighting, Ranking (SWR)
The criteria against which projects will be appraised are identified
A weighting is assigned to each criteria based on importance (no weighting = equal value)
Each project receives numerical score against different criteria
Different project applications ranked against each other
Source: IPA: Implementation and Administration of E.U.
Structural And Cohesion Funds in Ireland –
Procedures Manual: P. 65
(6)

6. Project Appraisal – Scoring, Weighting, Ranking (SWR)
Criteria
Score (0-5)
Weight
Revised Score
ECONOMIC IMPACT
Contribute to OP Objectives
Impact on Employment
Risk of Deadweight
Risk of Displacement
Cost Effectiveness
NON-ECONOMIC IMPACT
Contribution to OP Objectives
Environmental Impact
Impact on Equal Opportunities
Spatial Impact
Source: Fitzpatrick Associates: Review of Project Selection
Procedures and Appraisal Techniques in the CSF May 1999
(7)

7. Project Appraisal – Scoring, Weighting, Ranking (SWR)
Criteria
Score (0-5)
Weight
Revised Score
Commercial/Financial Appraisal
Market Need
Projected Sales Demand
Financial Projections
Risk of not Achieving Forecasts
Access to Matching Funding
Ability of Promoter to Achieve Forecasts
Long-term Exchequer Implications
Scheme-Specific Criteria
Total Score
(8)

8. Project Selection – Transparency Issues
Public Promotion
Eligibility Criteria Published
Criteria for selection available
Weightings for criteria available
Decisions made by Committee
Conflicts of interest avoided (Declarations)
Information given to unsuccessful applicants
Competitive or queuing basis
Appeals system in place
(9)

9. Project Selection – Selection Criteria
Included in Operational Programme Objectives
Measure specific objectives
Economic Impact
Financial Viability
Cost-Effectiveness
Horizontal Principles: Environment: rural development
Poverty: Equality
Scoring: Weighting: Ranking
(10)

10. Project Appraisal – County Enetreprise Board Procedure
CEB County based structure
Legal Entity – Company limited by guarantee
Directors – State Sector; Social Partners;
Elected Members
Independent Evaluation Committee
Business Expertise
Banking Expertise
Private Sector Expertise
Other – Technical
Source: Roscommon CEB Procedures Manual
(11)

11. Project Appraisal – CEB Procedure
Idea
Initial contact with County Enterprise Officer
Business Plan / Formal Application
Site visit to project
Appraisal by CEB staff
Assessment by Evaluation Committee
CEB Board decision
Roscommon CEB Procedures Manual
(12)

12. Project Appraisal – CEB Criteria for Assistance
You must show:
that the project is commercially viable
That there is a market for the product or service
That adequate finance will be available to fund the project
That the promoter has the management and technical capacity to handle the project
That the promoters tax affairs are in order and proper company structure
(13)

13. Project Selection - Tourism Procedure
Initial call for applications – 2 stage process
Assessement of Proposals
Initial review by Regional Tourism Organisation
Assessment and scoring of proposals by Fáilte Ireland
Assessed by Fáilte Ireland Assessment Committee
Considered and approved by Product Management Board
Shortlisted applications complete detailed proposal form
Evaluation by Fáilte Ireland evaluation team
Assessment Committee review recommendations
Product Management Board consider – approve, defer or reject
(14)

14. Tourism Procedure – Monitoring & Evaluation
Monitoring of Programme at three levels
Implementing Agency
Monitoring Committee level
National (NDP/CSF)
Grantee must retain all records and have available for inspection
Retain records of account for 6 years (Irish Law)
Retain records 3 years following closure of programme
Grantee must file annual financial statements
Grantee may have to provide evidence of satisfactory management and financial control procedures
Work must comply to all planning conditions
Regular progress reports on work
Security – Deed of Covenant or Mortgage
Grant paid in two instalments – Interim and Final
Paid eligible expenditure
Evidence matching funds
Check no grant aid from other sources
(15)

15. Project Financing Public Sector
Project provision included in annual budget estimates of Central Government Department
EU receipts also included
Recouped in arrears by Exchequer following verification of expenditure
Private Sector
Project Approved in advance of commencement
Project payments made in arrears on basis of verified expenditure (stage payments allowed)
Balance of funding provided by promoters own resources, borrowings or other equity investment
Equity and loan finance also included
Note: All public aid must respect State Aid rules
(16)

16. Tendering Quotations and Tenders Up to €800 – Two oral quotations
€800 to €8,000 – Two written quotations
€8,000 to €16,000 – Three written quotations
€16,000 to €32,000 – Four written tenders
€32,000 to €160,000 – Full tender in at least two regional newspapers and/or national newspapers
€160,000 and over – Advertisement in Official Journal of EU and national newspapers
Source: “A guide to Financial Management” – Special EU Programmes Body
(17)

17. Project Management – Role of Implementing Body
Design of overall scheme
Seek applications by public advertisement
Review and approval of project applications received from project promoters
Ongoing monitoring of projects
Reviewing progress expenditure, final project costs and irregularity reports if applicable
Review, approval and payment of project manager payment claims
Prepare claims for Managing Authority on to Paying Authority
Source: IPA: Implementation and Administration of E.U.
Structural And Cohesion Funds in Ireland –
Procedures Manual: P (18)

18. Project Management – IT Based System
Financial Control Systems
Financial Tables
Physical Indicators
Annual Implementation Reports
Other Reports by period county, field of intervention
Actual expenditure reports
Claims for draw down
Payment details
Report on receipts and outstanding claims
Funds allocation, dispersal instructions
Source: IPA: Implementation and Administration of E.U.
Structural And Cohesion Funds in Ireland –
Procedures Manual: P (19)

19. Project Reporting to Monitoring Committee
Introduction – description measure, commentary on progress
Expenditure to date
Performance Indicators – progress to targets
North/South Co-operation
Information and Publicity Requirements
Horizontal Issues – Environment; Gender Equality; Poverty; Rural Development
Future Prospects
Adjustments required
Annexes
(20)

20. Value for Money - Definitions
Additionality: Measure of economic output i.e. amount of project output compared to what would have occurred without intervention
Deadweight: Opposite to additionality i.e. could project have proceeded without State Aid
Displacement: Activities that would or could have been financed by the private sector are displaced by publicly subsidised activity
Cost-effectiveness: Projects selected contribute the largest amount possible to policy objectives at the minimum possible cost.
Source: Fitzpatrick Associates:
Review of Project Selection Procedures and Appraisal Techniques in the CSF. May 1999
(21)

21. Contact Details BMW Regional Assembly The Square Ballaghaderreen
Co. Roscommon
Tel. (353) Fax. (353)
Website:
National Development Plan:
Website:
EU Structural Funds:
Website: