2. Charlotta Heimersson, LAG manager, Leader Norra Mälarstranden, Sweden
”Decentralisation of project selection at LAG level: example Sweden”

3. Leader in Sweden 63 LAG:s, 12 were previous in Leader +
LAG:s are NGO associations
Variations in size and budgets
Variations in size of staff
Training for LAG:s from MA and NRN

4. Differences from Leader +
MA on national and regional level
Distance between LAG:s and national MA+PA
Different opportunities
The LAG:s would prefer one national Leader authorothy

5. Financial issues LAG:s has to provide 50% of the national co-funding
or the projects will have to find it!
Most LAG:s in Sweden have already obtained the 50% in advance
All national co-funding gets paid to the beneficiary simultaneously with the RDP grant

6. Decisionmaking process
Project development LAG
Project management LAG
Publication of calls LAG
Reception of applications LAG
Project assessment LAG
Project ranking LAG
Final selection to MA LAG

7. Decisionmaking process
Formal project approval, including fixing the amount of support: regional MA
Payment of claims, including advance payment: PA through regional MA, LAG
Control tasks: regional MA, national MA, PA
Project execution monitoring: regional MA, national MA, PA and LAG

8. Bottlenecks
Leader bottom-up approach vs the control system within the RDP
Large variations in LAG budgets and also great variations in capacity and resources at the regional MA:s in Sweden

9. Good practice The co-funding usually obtained by LAG
The LAG:s decision making rules and the transparency of the
Open and constructive dialogue between the LAG:s and MA:s
Support to LAG:s from the NRN
Support and training from MA:s