2018 Annual Activity Report Annexes - European Commission · 2019-06-17 · DG NEAR sets the target...

near_aar_2018_annex_final Page 1 of 282

2018

Annual Activity Report

Annexes

Directorate General

Neighbourhood and

Enlargement

Negotiations –

DG NEAR

Ref. Ares(2019)2267237 - 29/03/2019


Table of Contents

ANNEXES 3

ANNEX 1: STATEMENT OF THE DIRECTOR IN CHARGE OF RISK MANAGEMENT AND INTERNAL CONTROL ............... 3 ANNEX 2: REPORTING – HUMAN RESOURCES, BETTER REGULATION, INFORMATION MANAGEMENT AND EXTERNAL

COMMUNICATION ................................................................................................................. 4 ANNEX 3: DRAFT ANNUAL ACCOUNTS AND FINANCIAL REPORTS .................................................................. 11 ANNEX 4: MATERIALITY CRITERIA .......................................................................................................... 30 ANNEX 5: RELEVANT CONTROL SYSTEM(S) FOR BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION (RCSS) ........................................ 31 ANNEX 6: IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH NATIONAL OR INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC-SECTOR BODIES AND BODIES GOVERNED BY

PRIVATE LAW WITH A PUBLIC SECTOR MISSION .......................................................................... 75 ANNEX 7: EAMR OF THE UNION DELEGATIONS ..................................................................................... 104 ANNEX 8: AOSD REPORT – TRUST FUND IN RESPONSE TO THE SYRIAN CRISIS (TO BE ADDED IN FINAL VERSION)105 ANNEX 9: EVALUATIONS AND OTHER STUDIES FINALISED OR CANCELLED DURING THE YEAR ............................ 132 ANNEX 10: EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS – PERFORMANCE AUDITS ........................................................ 151 ANNEX 11: ANALYSIS OF KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ......................................................................... 160 ANNEX 12: PERFORMANCE TABLES ........................................................................................................ 222


ANNEXES

ANNEX 1: Statement of the Director in charge of Risk Management and Internal Control

“I declare that in accordance with the Commission’s communication on the internal

control framework1, I have reported my advice and recommendations on the overall state

of internal control in the DG to the Director-General.

I hereby certify that the information provided in the present Annual Activity Report and in

its annexes is, to the best of my knowledge, accurate and complete.”

Date: 29 March 2019

“Signed”

Mark Johnston

1 C(2017)2373 of 19.04.2017.


ANNEX 2: Reporting – Human Resources, Better Regulation, Information Management and External

Communication

This annex is the annex of section 2.2 "Other organisational management dimensions".

1. Human Resources Management

Objective:

The DG deploys effectively its resources in support of the delivery of the

Commission's priorities and core business, has a competent and engaged

workforce, which is driven by an effective and gender-balanced management

and which can deploy its full potential within supportive and healthy working

conditions

Indicator 1 : Percentage of female representation in middle management: 40%

by 2019

Source of data: SEC(2017)505

Baseline 2016

(January)

Target

2019

Latest known results

for 2018

38% 40% 38.09%

Main outputs in 2018:

Description Indicator Target Latest known result

Increase number

of women

appointed to first

time middle

management

functions.

Number of first time

appointments

50% of HoU

opportunities by end

2019.

Appoint 1 woman to

first time

management

position by end

2018

At end 2018 the

representation rate of

female management

was 38.09%.

However, in order to

attain the target of

40% female

representation in

management by the

end of this mandate

the Commission

revised its approach

which will now focus

on first time female

nominations. DG

NEAR appointed 3

female first time

appointments in 2018.

To achieve the

Commission target DG

NEAR has a target of 1

female first time

appointments to make

before the end of

2019

Increase number

of women

appointed to first

time middle

management

functions.

Number of first time

appointments

Appoint 1 woman to

first time

management

position by end

2017

Completed in

September 2017


Indicator 2 : Percentage of staff who feel that the Commission cares about their

well-being

Source of data: Commission staff survey 2018

Baseline Target

Latest known result

For 2018

January 2014 :

32%

Target: Commission Average (35%) in 2016

Two percentage points above Commission

Average (37%) in 2018

In relation to the indicator 2 on staff well-

being, DG NEAR set the target for this

indicator in 2016 at the level of Commission

Average (35%) for 2016 and at 2 percentage

points above the Commission average in the

2018 staff survey2.

53% for DG NEAR

52% Commission

average



Promote an

appropriate

work life

balance for staff

Staff request

appropriate working

conditions (part-time,

flexitime and

teleworking) to match

their particular work

life balance

considerations

40% of colleagues

in HQ teleworking

by end 2018

(compared to 32%

in 2017)

100% of eligible

requests for part-

time working

validated

In 2018 46.7% of DG

NEAR staff in HQ

teleworked (of which

10.2% were structural

teleworkers)

Indicator 3 : Staff engagement index

Source of data: Commission staff survey 2018

Baseline 2014 Target

2016/2018

Latest known result

For 2018

2014 :

DG NEAR Staff

engagement

index =64

(NB Data for DG

ELARG - not

comparable with

NEAR as a

whole)

Commission Average (65%) in 2016

Two percentage points above Commission

Average (67%) in 2018

DG NEAR sets the target for this indicator in

2018 at 2 percentage points above the

Commission average in the 2018 staff

survey3.

69% DG NEAR

69% Commission

average

2 This is based on the recommendations of the DG NEAR Staff Engagement Working Group, which was

established following the results of the 2014 survey. The target was approved by senior management.

3 This is based on the recommendations of a DG NEAR Staff Engagement Working Group established following the results of the 2014 survey, and approved by senior management of the DG




Roll out the

2018 Staff

Engagement

Action Plan

tackling the staff

engagement

issues raised in

the 2016 Staff

survey namely: Shared DG

NEAR vision

and purpose

Effective

internal

communicati

on

Managing

Performance

Enhancing

'people'

managemen

t skills

Working

conditions &

work /life

balance

Career

advice,

career

paths,

opportunitie

s & mobility

Training &

training

budget.

Take

'temperature'

mid-year on the

7 areas

contributing to

overall staff

engagement

Adoption of the 2018

Action Plan by DG

NEAR Senior

Management

Adoption of Action

Plan foreseen for April

2018

The adoption of the

action plan was

replaced by a more

participatory method

of engaging with staff,

namely through the

continuation of the

work of the Our Near

group in 2018. The

Group set up in July

2016 promotes the

creation of a DG NEAR

common identity–

using the approach of

participatory

leadership. In 2018,

DG NEAR invested

extensively in

teambuilding activities

in all Directorates (3

at Directorate level

and 14 at Unit level)

with the active

participation of the

Group, culminating in

an all DG event in

September 2018

which focused on

achieving a more open

and collaborative DG

and how to improve

staff engagement and

internal

communication.

Efforts were also

made to improve staff

engagement in the

delegations where

individual action plans

for implementation at

local level are being

developed in addition

to corporate and inter-

institutional

endeavours.

Promote

awareness

of fit@ work

campaign

including mental

and physical

health &

wellbeing activit

ies

Staff attend and

participate in

activities which

increase staff

understanding of the

importance of

mental and physical

health to their

overall wellbeing

Organise minimum 6

fit@work workshops

on:

Ergonomics

Physical health

Nutrition

Social-

psychological

issues

Mental Health

In 2018, NEAR

organised 3 ad hoc

activities in NEAR with

a total of 143

participants including:

DG NEAR Health Week

- 22.01-26.01.2018 –

total number of

participants 118

Aromatherapy session

– 24.05.2018 –

number of participants


20

Presentation about

nutrition – 19.06.2018

– number of

participants from DG

NEAR 5, total number

of participants 21

NEAR organised 10-11

regular activities in

DG with an average

number of 6 – 6.5

participants per

activity (60 to 77 total

number of participants

weekly).

2. Better Regulation

DG NEAR does not manage regulatory acquis. Information about ongoing evaluations is

provided in Part 1.

3. Information management aspects

Objective: Information and knowledge in the DG is shared and reusable by

other DGs. Important documents are registered, filed and retrievable.

Indicator 1: Percentage of registered documents that are not filed

Source of data: Hermes-Ares-Nomcom (HAN) statistics

Baseline (2015) Target

(2018)

Latest known result

(2018)

4.73% 0% 2.09%


Description Indicator Target Latest known results

Electronic filing

of registered

documents in

Ares

Percentage of

registered and filed

documents in Ares

100% 98,67%

Indicator 2: Number of HAN files readable/accessible by all units in the DG



(2018)

Latest known result

(2018)

93.39% 93% 93%



Better us of

electronic

workflows in Ares

Percentage of purely

e-signatories in Ares

50%

i.e. all internal notes

(up to two pages)

51%

Indicator 3: Number of HAN files shared with other DGs



(2018)

Latest known result

(2018)

4.15% 20% 5.40%




Shared

ARES/NomCom

files between HQ

and EU-

Delegations for

all financial files

Percentage of shared

files

100% 99%

4. External communication activities

Objective: Citizens perceive that the EU is working to improve their lives and

engage with the EU. They feel that their concerns are taken into consideration

in European decision making and they know about their rights in the EU

Definition: Eurobarometer measures the state of public opinion in the EU Member States.

This global indicator is influenced by many factors, including the work of other EU

institutions and national governments, as well as political and economic factors, not just

the communication actions of the Commission. It is relevant as a proxy for the overall

perception of the EU citizens. Positive visibility for the EU is the desirable corporate

outcome of Commission communication, even if individual DGs’ actions may only make a

small contribution

Source of data: Standard Eurobarometer (DG COMM budget) [monitored by DG COMM

Baseline

November 2014

Target 2020


2018

Total "Positive":

39%

Neutral: 37 %

Total "Negative":

22%

Positive image

of the EU ≥ 50%

Total "Positive": 40%

Neutral: 37%

"Negative": 21%

Objective 1 - To increase knowledge and understanding of the European

Neighbourhood Policy, including the use and objectives of EU funds for the

neighbourhood


Description Indicator Target Latest known

results

Press trips for EU

journalists to

neighbourhood regions

Number of participants 60 66

Number of participants

who declare the event

met their expectations

>60% of

participants

85%

Useful contacts made >40% of

participants

>60%

Likelihood to share the

info

>50% of

participants

>90%

Better understanding

of the policy/related

funding

>50% of

participants

>70%

Training seminars

on EU visibility and

communication for

beneficiaries in the

neighbourhood region


Event met

expectations

>65% of

participants

>75% of

participants

Likelihood to share the

info

>50% of

participants

>85% of

participants


Neighbourhood

Regional

Communication

Programme

(OPEN):

campaigns, events

and polling to improve

perceptions of the EU

in Neighbourhood

countries

Number of visits to EU

Neighbours website

>480,000 494,000

Number of people

reached on Facebook

(average reach per post)

East: 15,000

South: 10,000

East: 15,500

South: 18,000

Number of impressions

– Twitter (monthly)

50,000 92,816

Fan engagement rate Facebook East:

3%

Facebook South: 3%

Twitter: 2%

Facebook East:

5.3%

Facebook South: 1.13%

Twitter: 1.1%

Number of subscribers

to news alerts

>10,000 10,150

Number of people

reached through events

>5,000 13,000

Number of young

people becoming part

of Young European Neighbours network

>2,500 4,400

Objective 2 - To increase knowledge and understanding of the enlargement

policy, including the use and objectives of EU pre-accession funds



results

Press trips for EU

journalists to the

enlargement regions


Number of participants

who declare the event

met their expectations

>60% of

participants

90%


of the policy/related funding

>50% of

participants

70%

Training seminars

on EU visibility and

communication for

beneficiaries in the enlargement region


Event met

expectations

>65% of

participants

99%

Policy events co-

organised with

stakeholders


Event met

expectations

>60% of

participants

95%


of the policy/related funding

>50% of

participants

90%


Objective 3 - Dissemination of information through DG NEAR website and social

media



results*

DG NEAR website* Number of visits 1,500,000 745,000

Number of unique

visitors

1,000,000 600,000

Number of page views 3,000,000 1,330,000

DG NEAR social media

(Facebook and

Twitter)

Number of people

reached

Facebook:

average reach by

post: 60,000

Overall:

18,600,000

Average reach by

post:72,000

Number of impressions Twitter:

2,500,000

(overall)

Instagram:

1,000,000

7,800,000

1,400,000

Fan engagement rate: Facebook: 4%

Twitter: 2%

(average number

of engagements

by post

Facebook: 1500

/ Twitter: 40

Instagram: 30

Facebook: 1600

Twitter: 50

Instagram: 40

* Results are based on a new web data analysis tool launched by the Commission, hence

discrepancy with the targets based on an old tool.

Annual communication spending (based on estimated commitments):

Baseline (Year

2016):

Target (Year 2018): Total amount

spent

Total of FTEs working on

external communication

EUR 22,950,000 EUR 7,500,000 EUR 7,330,0004 15

The estimated commitments for Delegations were EUR 14,37 million with approximately

52% dedicated to the IPA zone and 48% to the ENI zone.

4 External Communication activities managed by HQ and excluding funds for communication activities

implemented by EU Delegations/Offices in the enlargement and neighbourhood regions.


ANNEX 3: Draft annual accounts and financial report

Table 1 : Commitments

Table 2 : Payments

Table 3 : Commitments to be settled

Table 4 : Balance Sheet

Table 5 : Statement of Financial Performance

Table 5 Bis: Off Balance Sheet

Table 6 : Average Payment Times

Table 7 : Income

Table 8 : Recovery of undue Payments

Table 9 : Ageing Balance of Recovery Orders

Table 10 : Waivers of Recovery Orders

Table 11 : Negotiated Procedures (excluding Building Contracts)

Table 12 : Summary of Procedures (excluding Building Contracts)

Table 13 : Building Contracts

Table 14 : Contracts declared Secret

Table 15 : FPA duration exceeds 4 years


TABLE 1: OUTTURN ON COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS IN 2018 (in Mio €)

Commitment appropriations

authorised

Commitments made

%

1 2 3=2/1

Title 07 Environment

07 07 02 Environmental policy at Union and international level

0,45 0,45 100,00 %

Total Title 07 0,45 0,45 100,00%

Title 13 Regional and urban policy

13 13 08 Structural Reform Support Programme (SRSP) - Operational technical assistance

1,15 1,15 100,00 %

Total Title 13 1,15 1,15 100,00%

Title 19 Foreign policy instruments

19 19 05 Cooperation with third countries under the Partnership Instrument (PI)

0,09 0,00 0,00 %

Total Title 19 0,09 0,00 0,00%

Title 21 International cooperation and development

21 21 08 Development and cooperation worldwide 11,73 11,73 100,00 %

Total Title 21 11,73 11,73 100,00%

Title 22 Neighbourhood and enlargement negotiations

22 22 01 Administrative expenditure of the 'Neighbourhood and enlargement negotiations' policy area

70,80 51,98 73,41 %

22 02 Enlargement process and strategy 1 763,88 1 762,34 99,91 %

22 04 European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) 2 446,66 2 433,27 99,45 %

Total Title 22 4 281,34 4 247,59 99,21%

Total DG NEAR 4 294,76 4 260,92 99,21 %

* Commitment appropriations authorised include, in addition to the budget voted by the legislative authority, appropriations carried over from the previous exercise, budget amendments as well as miscellaneous commitment appropriations for the period (e.g. internal and external assigned revenue).


TABLE 2: OUTTURN ON PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS IN 2018 (in Mio €)

Chapter Payment

appropriations authorised *

Payments made %

1 2 3=2/1

Title 07 Environment

07 07 02 Environmental policy at Union and international level 0,04 0,04 100,00 %

Total Title 07 0,04 0,04 100,00%

Title 13 Regional and urban policy

13 13 08

Structural Reform Support Programme (SRSP) - Operational technical assistance

0,31 0,25 81,85 %

Total Title 13 0,31 0,25 81,85%

Title 19 Foreign policy instruments

19 19 05

Cooperation with third countries under the Partnership Instrument (PI)

1,20 1,03 85,53 %

Total Title 19 1,20 1,03 85,53%

Title 21 International cooperation and development

21 21 08 Development and cooperation worldwide 1,20 0,16 13,11 %

Total Title 21 1,20 0,16 13,11%

Title 22 Neighbourhood and enlargement negotiations

22 22 01

Administrative expenditure of the 'Neighbourhood and enlargement negotiations' policy area

73,67 7,95 10,79 %

22 02 Enlargement process and strategy 1 409,74 1 192,47 84,59 %

22 04 European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) 2 040,92 2 031,84 99,56 %

Total Title 22 3 524,32 3 232,26 91,71%

Total DG NEAR 3 527,07 3 233,74 91,68 %


* Payment appropriations authorised include, in addition to the budget voted by the legislative authority, appropriations carried over from the previous exercise, budget amendments as well as miscellaneous payment appropriations for the period (e.g. internal and external assigned revenue).


TABLE 3 : BREAKDOWN OF COMMITMENTS TO BE SETTLED AT 31/12/2018 (in Mio €)

2018 Commitments to be settled Commitments to be

settled from

Total of commitments to be settled at end

Total of commitments to be settled at end

Chapter Commitments 2018 Payments 2018 RAL 2018 % to be settled financial years previous

to 2018

of financial year 2018 of financial year 2017

1 2 3=1-2 4=1-2/1 5 6=3+5 7

Title 07 : Environment

07 07 02

Environmental policy at Union and international level

0,45 0,00 0,45 100,00 % 0,16 0,61 0,20

Total Title 07 0,45 0,00 0,45 100,00% 0,16 0,61 0,20

Title 13 : Regional and urban policy

13 13 08

Structural Reform Support Programme (SRSP) - Operational technical assistance

1,15 0,00 1,15 100,00 % 0,75 1,89 1,00

Total Title 13 1,15 0,00 1,15 100,00% 0,75 1,89 1,00

Title 19 : Foreign policy instruments

19 19 05

Cooperation with third countries under the Partnership Instrument (PI)

0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 % 2,37 2,37 1,90

Total Title 19 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00% 2,37 2,37 1,90

Title 21 : International cooperation and development

21 21 08

Development and cooperation worldwide

11,73 0,00 11,73 100,00 % 5,54 17,28 5,70

Total Title 21 11,73 0,00 11,73 100,00% 5,54 17,28 5,70


Title 22 : Neighbourhood and enlargement negotiations

22 22 01

Administrative expenditure of the 'Neighbourhood and enlargement negotiations' policy area

51,46 45,17 6,29 12,22 % 0,20 6,49 6,68

22 02 Enlargement process and strategy

1 762,34 159,85 1 602,49 90,93 % 4 756,86 6 359,35 5 879,88

22 04

European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI)

2 433,27 345,99 2 087,27 85,78 % 5 815,20 7 902,48 7 679,71

Total Title 22 4 247,07 551,02 3 696,05 87,03% 10 572,26 14 268,31 13 566,27

Total DG NEAR 4 260,40 551,02 3 709,39 87,07 % 10 581,08 14 290,47 13 575,07



TABLE 4 : BALANCE SHEET NEAR

BALANCE SHEET 2018 2017

A.I. NON CURRENT ASSETS 796 522 921,85 602 950 700,81

A.I.4. Non-Current Financial Assets 366 159 696,32 362 774 416,53

A.I.5. Non-Current Pre-Financing 428 759 025,53 239 055 411,28

A.I.6. Non-Cur Exch Receiv & Non-Ex Recoverab

1 604 200,00 1 120 873,00

A.II. CURRENT ASSETS 1 976 425 337,85 1 941 075 000,90

A.II.1. Current Financial Assets 37 900 357,60 48 968 398,60

A.II.2. Current Pre-Financing 1 598 596 165,26 1 580 985 822,64

A.II.3. Curr Exch Receiv &Non-Ex Recoverables

42 566 654,91 46 654 741,23

A.II.6. Cash and Cash Equivalents 297 362 160,08 264 466 038,43

ASSETS 2 772 948 259,70 2 544 025 701,71

P.I. NON CURRENT LIABILITIES -10 865 933,00 -9 819 833,00

P.I.2. Non-Current Provisions -9 210 356,00 -8 042 957,00

P.I.3. Non-Current Financial Liabilities -1 655 577,00 -1 776 876,00

P.III. NET ASSETS/LIABILITIES -57 210 365,83 -55 545 686,83

P.III.1. Reserves -57 210 365,83 -55 545 686,83

P.II. CURRENT LIABILITIES -1 138 502 883,21 -1 039 856 063,95

P.II.2. Current Provisions -33 635 894,11 -26 558 321,00

P.II.4. Current Payables -228 449 450,64 -140 660 699,13

P.II.5. Current Accrued Charges &Defrd Income

-876 417 538,46 -872 637 043,82

LIABILITIES -1 206 579 182,04 -1 105 221 583,78

NET ASSETS (ASSETS less LIABILITIES) 1 566 369 077,66 1 438 804 117,93

P.III.2. Accumulated Surplus/Deficit 10 024 336 507,55 6 956 111 046,86

Non-allocated central (surplus)/deficit* -11 590 705 585,21 -8 394 915 164,79

TOTAL 0,00 0,00


"It should be noted that the balance sheet and statement of financial performance presented in Annex 3 to this Annual Activity Report, represent only the assets, liabilities, expenses and revenues that are under the control of this Directorate General. Significant amounts such as own resource revenues and cash held in Commission bank accounts are not included in this Directorate General's accounts since they are managed centrally by DG Budget,

on whose balance sheet and statement of financial performance they appear. Furthermore, since the accumulated result of the Commission is not split amongst the various Directorates General, it can be seen that the balance sheet presented here is not in equilibrium. Additionally, the figures included in tables 4 and 5 are provisional since they are, at this date, still subject to audit by the Court of Auditors. It is thus possible that amounts included in these tables may have to be adjusted following this audit."

TABLE 5 : STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE NEAR

STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE 2018 2017

II.1 REVENUES -44 589 143,91 -41 444 029,97

II.1.1. NON-EXCHANGE REVENUES -21 970 632,59 -15 289 091,05

II.1.1.5. RECOVERY OF EXPENSES -19 087 238,70 -15 251 285,66

II.1.1.6. OTHER NON-EXCHANGE REVENUES -2 883 393,89 -37 805,39

II.1.2. EXCHANGE REVENUES -22 618 511,32 -26 154 938,92

II.1.2.1. FINANCIAL INCOME -10 883 439,02 -15 800 437,82

II.1.2.2. OTHER EXCHANGE REVENUE -11 735 072,30 -10 354 501,10

II.2. EXPENSES 3 096 747 830,40 3 109 669 490,66

II.2. EXPENSES 3 096 747 830,40 3 109 669 490,66

II.2.10.OTHER EXPENSES 30 609 296,55 45 051 586,98

II.2.1. EXP IMPLEM BY MEMBER STATES (SHARED) 12 843 366,04 167 868 105,44

II.2.2. EXP IMPLEM BY COMMISS&EX.AGENC. (DM) 1 757 175 808,09 1 606 444 647,40

II.2.3. EXP IMPL BY OTH EU AGENC&BODIES (IM) -96 208,06

II.2.4. EXP IMPL BY 3RD CNTR & INT ORG (IM) 925 309 284,37 1 005 395 982,10

II.2.5. EXP IMPLEM BY OTHER ENTITIES (IM) 361 102 763,31 267 009 004,74

II.2.8. FINANCE COSTS 9 707 312,04 17 996 372,06

STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE 3 052 158 686,49 3 068 225 460,69

It should be noted that the balance sheet and statement of financial performance presented in Annex 3 to this Annual Activity Report, represent only the assets, liabilities, expenses and revenues that are under the control of this Directorate General. Significant amounts such as own resource revenues and cash held in Commission bank accounts are not included in this Directorate General's accounts since they are managed centrally by DG Budget, on whose balance sheet and statement of financial performance they appear. Furthermore, since the accumulated result of the Commission is not split amongst the various Directorates General, it can be seen that the balance sheet presented here is not in equilibrium. Additionally, the figures included in tables 4 and 5 are provisional since they are, at this date, still subject to audit by the Court of Auditors. It is thus possible that amounts included in these tables may have to be adjusted following this audit.


TABLE 5bis : OFF BALANCE SHEET NEAR

OFF BALANCE 2018 2017

OB.1. Contingent Assets 185 298 892,70 193 586 177,35

GR for other 0,00 12 000,00

GR for performance 32 542 920,81 38 466 400,08

GR for pre-financing 139 959 289,47 136 590 386,97

OB.1.4. CA Other 12 796 682,42 18 517 390,30

OB.2. Contingent Liabilities -19 811 552,88 -32 327 543,75

OB.2.1. Guarantees given for EU FI -15 228 623,00 -28 192 679,00

OB.2.7. CL Legal cases OTHER -4 582 929,88 -4 134 864,75

OB.3. Other Significant Disclosures -13 281 941 815,23 -12 707 325 875,51

OB.3.2. Comm against app. not yet consumed -13 281 941 815,23 -12 707 325 875,51

OB.4. Balancing Accounts 13 116 454 475,41 12 546 067 241,91

OB.4. Balancing Accounts 13 116 454 475,41 12 546 067 241,91

OFF BALANCE 0,00 0,00

It should be noted that the balance sheet and statement of financial performance presented in Annex 3 to this Annual Activity Report, represent only the assets, liabilities, expenses and revenues that are under the control of this Directorate General. Significant amounts such as own resource revenues and cash held in Commission bank accounts are not included in this Directorate General's accounts since they are managed centrally by DG Budget, on whose balance sheet and statement of financial performance they appear. Furthermore, since the accumulated result of the Commission is not split amongst the various Directorates General, it can be seen that the balance sheet presented here is not in equilibrium. Additionally, the figures included in tables 4 and 5 are provisional since they are, at this date, still subject to audit by the Court of Auditors. It is thus possible that amounts included in these tables may have to be adjusted following this audit.


TABLE 6: AVERAGE PAYMENT TIMES FOR 2018 - DG NEAR

Legal Times

Maximum Payment

Time (Days)

Total Number of Payments

Nbr of Payments

within Time Limit

Percentage Average Payment

Times (Days) Nbr of Late Payments Percentage

Average Payment

Times (Days)

30 1524 1399 91,80 % 13,30 125 8,20 % 59,59

45 235 189 80,43 % 22,54 46 19,57 % 302,41

56 3 1 33,33 % 13,00 2 66,67 % 316,50

60 1631 1491 91,42 % 31,13 140 8,58 % 86,24

90 1143 1031 90,20 % 45,98 112 9,80 % 166,23

120 3 3 100,00 % 69,33

Total Number of Payments

4539 4114 90,64 % 425 9,36 %

Average Net Payment Time

37,3644366 28,42 123,96

Average Gross Payment Time

54,30760552 43,66 157,42

Suspensions

Average Report

Approval Suspension

Days

Average Payment

Suspension Days

Number of Suspended Payments

% of Total Number Total Number of

Payments Amount of Suspended

Payments % of Total Amount

Total Paid Amount

1 50 1525 33,60 % 4539 776 526 121,40 25,14 % 3 088 260

188,19


Late Interest paid in 2018

DG

GL Account

Description Amount (Eur)

NEAR 65010000 Interest expense on late payment of charges 55 888,74

NEAR 65010100 Interest on late payment of charges New FR 26 581,89

82 470,63

TABLE 7 : SITUATION ON REVENUE AND INCOME IN 2018

Revenue and income recognized Revenue and income cashed from Outstanding

Chapter Current year RO Carried over RO Total Current Year RO Carried over RO Total balance

1 2 3=1+2 4 5 6=4+5 7=3-6

52 REVENUE FROM INVESTMENTS OR LOANS GRANTED, BANK AND OTHER INTEREST

3 451 208,61 1 983,20 3 453 191,81 2 834 169,00 0,00 2 834 169,00 619 022,81

63 CONTRIBUTIONS UNDER SPECIFIC AGREEMENTS

10 371 775,60 1 501 137,11 11 872 912,71 10 371 775,60 1 501 137,11 11 872 912,71 0,00

64 CONTRIBUTIONS FROM FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

14 674 470,54 0,00 14 674 470,54 10 170 648,87 0,00 10 170 648,87 4 503 821,67

66 OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS AND REFUNDS 48 770 412,10 33 028 012,17 81 798 424,27 41 080 483,87 3 996 497,28 45 076 981,15 36 721 443,12

81 LOANS GRANTED BY THE COMMISSION 20 866 911,94 15 081 378,18 35 948 290,12 20 866 911,94 15 081 378,18 35 948 290,12 0,00

90 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 0,00 276 753,90 276 753,90 0,00 0,00 0,00 276 753,90

Total DG NEAR 98 134 778,79 49 889 264,56 148 024 043,35 85 323 989,28 20 579 012,57 105 903 001,85 42 121 041,50


TABLE 8 : RECOVERY OF PAYMENTS (Number of Recovery Contexts and corresponding Transaction Amount)

INCOME BUDGET RECOVERY ORDERS ISSUED IN 2018

Irregularity OLAF notified Total undue payments

recovered

Total transactions in recovery context

(incl. non-qualified) % Qualified/Total RC

Year of Origin (commitment) Nbr RO Amount Nbr RO Amount Nbr RO Amount Nbr RO Amount Nbr RO Amount

1999 1 49 554,63

2002 1 50 151,91

2003 1 774 250,33 1 774 250,33 1 774 250,33 100,00% 1,00

2004 1 4 823 049,81 1 4 823 049,81 2 14 823 049,81 50,00% 0,33

2005 1 973 060,58 1 973 060,58 1 973 060,58 100,00% 1,00

2006 2 292 495,28 2 292 495,28 4 764 315,25 50,00% 0,38

2007 1 546 060,00 1 546 060,00 1 546 060,00 100,00% 1,00

2008 5 137 208,38 5 137 208,38 10 1 996 700,98 50,00% 0,07

2009 1 12 281,75 1 12 281,75 6 14 604 568,90 16,67% 0,00

2010 10 185 738,49 10 185 738,49 12 4 740 924,68 83,33% 0,04

2011 3 39 564,90 3 39 564,90 5 864 133,94 60,00% 0,05

2012 7 74 865,91 7 74 865,91 9 572 422,20 77,78% 0,13

2013 11 19 797 987,99

2014 4 31 812,02 4 31 812,02 6 93 163,28 66,67% 0,34

2015 9 146 109,07

2017 2 115 174,63

2018 1 4 755,20

No Link 2 1 178 700,06 2 1 178 700,06 4 11 550 475,66 50,00% 0,10

Sub-Total 37 8 523 027,51 1 546 060,00 38 9 069 087,51 86 72 466 859,04 44,19% 0,13


EXPENSES BUDGET

Error Irregularity OLAF Notified Total undue payments

recovered

Total transactions in recovery context

(incl. non-qualified) % Qualified/Total RC

Nbr Amount Nbr Amount Nbr Amount Nbr Amount Nbr Amount Nbr Amount

INCOME LINES IN INVOICES

NON ELIGIBLE IN COST CLAIMS

14 21 402,96 14 21 402,96 20 2 389 342,90 70,00% 0,90%

CREDIT NOTES 1 151,00 57 1 834 952,07 58 1 835 103,07 77 13 266 723,93 75,32% 13,83%

Sub-Total 1 151,00 71 1 856 355,03 72 1 856 506,03 97 15 656 066,83 74,23% 11,86%

GRAND TOTAL 1 151,00 108 10 379 382,54 1 546 060,00 110 10 925 593,54 183 88 122 925,87 60,11% 12,40%


TABLE 9: AGEING BALANCE OF RECOVERY ORDERS AT 31/12/2018 FOR NEAR

Number at 1/12/2018

Number at 31/12/2018

Evolution Open Amount

(Eur) at 1/12/2018

Open Amount (Eur) at

31/12/2018 Evolution

2002 1 1 0,00 % 129 024,98 129 024,98 0,00 %

2005 2 2 0,00 % 267 184,00 267 184,00 0,00 %

2006 2 2 0,00 % 771 200,00 771 200,00 0,00 %

2007 6 6 0,00 % 681 183,07 681 183,07 0,00 %

2008 2 2 0,00 % 108 498,53 108 498,53 0,00 %

2009 2 2 0,00 % 96 466,00 96 466,00 0,00 %

2010 2 2 0,00 % 150 352,30 150 352,30 0,00 %

2011 8 8 0,00 % 1 900 609,29 1 900 609,29 0,00 %

2012 11 11 0,00 % 1 316 772,19 1 316 772,19 0,00 %

2013 12 12 0,00 % 3 014 836,19 3 014 836,19 0,00 %

2014 22 22 0,00 % 2 568 831,89 2 568 831,89 0,00 %

2015 20 19 -5,00 % 6 722 740,96 6 088 222,13 -9,44 %

2016 21 19 -9,52 % 4 281 934,85 4 179 222,85 -2,40 %

2017 38 36 -5,26 % 8 380 834,80 8 322 996,80 -0,69 %

2018 107 110 2,80 % 20 823 545,40 12 815 190,18 -38,46 %

256 254 -0,78 % 51 214 014,45 42 410 590,40 -17,19 %

TABLE 10 : RECOVERY ORDER WAIVERS IN 2018 >= EUR 60.000

Waiver Central

Key Linked RO

Central Key

RO Accepted Amount

(Eur)

LE Account Group

Commission Decision

Comments

1 3233180048 3241314252 -60 760,63 Private Companies

Total DG NEAR -60

760,63

Number of RO waivers 1

There are 11 waivers below 60 000 € for a total amount of -134.332,87

Commission Decision for waiver No PE/2018/1003; Waiver for insolvency of the debtor UCPMI SARL*CONCORD CONSULTING GROUP; Waiver of the total amount of EUR 60 760,63.


TABLE 11 : CENSUS OF NEGOTIATED PROCEDURES - DG NEAR - 2018

External Procedures > € 20,000

Negotiated Procedure Legal base Number of Procedures

Amount (€)

Annex 1 - 11.1 (b) - Artistic/technical reasons or exclusive rights (technical monopoly, captive market)

3 355 412,00

Annex 1 - 11.1 ( e ) - New services/works consisting in the repetition of similar services/works

4 2 540 105,00

Annex 1 - 39.1 (a) - Services entrusted to public-sector bodies or non-profit institutions or organisations

4 1 039 900,00

Annex 1 - 39.1 (b) - Tender procedure unsuccessful 1 367 150,00

Art. 134.1(b) (Without prior publication) Work of art, technical reasons or protection of exclusive rights

2 620 021,40

Art. 134.1(c) (Without prior publication) Reasons of extreme urgency 4 6 136 464,27

Art. 134.1(e) (Without prior publication) New services or works consisting in the repetition of similar services or works

3 4 751 180,00

Art. 266.1(a) (External Actions) - Service entrusted to public sector bodies or non-profit institutions or associations

3 369 210,00

Art. 266.1(a) (External Actions - Service) Reasons of extreme urgency 2 2 292 050,00

Art. 266.1(b) (External Actions - Service) Service entrusted to public sector bodies or non-profit institutions or associations

2 955 000,00

Art. 266.1(b) (External Actions) Tender procedure unsuccessful 2 2 299 990,00

Art. 266.1(c) (External Actions - Service) Extension of service already started

4 2 272 709,00

Art. 266.1(f) (External Actions - Service) Technical reasons connected with the protection of exclusive rights

6 2 743 105,00

Art. 268.1(a) (External Actions - supply) Reasons of extreme urgency 2 1 362 637,66

Art. 268.1(d) (External Actions - supply) Tender procedure unsuccessful 2 2 296 428,43

Art. 270.1(b) (External Actions - works) Additional works which, though unforeseen circumstances, have become necessary

1 180 000,00

Total 45 30 581 362,76

Internal Procedures > € 60,000

Negotiated Procedure Legal base Number of Procedures

Amount (€)

Annex 1 - 11.1 (a) - Follow-up of an open/restricted where no (or no suitable) tenders/requests to participate have been submitted

1 138 848,00

Art. 134.1(a) (Without prior publication) No tenders or no suitable tenders have been submitted

1 199 960,00

Total 2 338 808,00


TABLE 12 : SUMMARY OF PROCEDURES OF DG NEAR EXCLUDING BUILDING CONTRACTS

External Procedures > € 20,000

Procedure Legal base Number of Procedures

Amount (€)

Competitive procedure with negotiation (Annex 1 - 12.1) 2 337 800,00

Exceptional Negotiated Procedure without publication of a contract notice (Art. 134 RAP)

9 11 507 665,67

(Ext. act) Exceptional Negotiated Procedure with a single offer (Art. 266 RAP)

5 2 669 200,00

(Ext. act) Service - Competitive Negotiated Procedure with at least three candidates without pub. (Art. 265.1(b) & 3 RAP)

36 5 422 990,58

(Ext. act) Service - Exceptional Negotiated Procedure with a single offer (Art. 266 RAP)

14 8 262 864,00

(Ext. act) Service - International Open Procedure with prior publication (Art. 265(1)(a)(ii) RAP)

1 499 900,00

(Ext. act) Service - International Restricted Procedure with prior publication (Art. 265.1(a)(i) & 2 RAP)

89 220 166 145,08

(Ext. act) Supply - Competitive Negotiated Procedure with at least three candidates without pub. (Art. 267.1(b)(ii) & 2 RAP)

2 91 270,00

(Ext. act) Supply - Exceptional Negotiated Procedure with a single offer (Art. 268 RAP)

4 3 659 066,09

(Ext. act) Supply - International Open Procedure after publication of a contract notice (Art. 267.1(a) RAP)

36 10 870 851,50

(Ext. act) Supply - Local open procedure with prior publication (Art. 267.1(b)(i) RAP)

3 602 249,00

(Ext. act) Works - Competitive Negotiated Procedure with at least three candidates without pub. (Art. 269.1(c) & 2 RAP)

1 195 642,09

(Ext. act) Works - Exceptional Negotiated Procedure with a single offer (Art. 270 RAP)

1 180 000,00

(Ext. act) Works - International Open Procedure with prior publication (Art. 269(1) (a) (i) RAP)

1 4 287 433,55

(Ext. act) Works - International Restricted Procedure with prior publication (Art. 269.1(a)(i) RAP)

2 7 757 773,04

(Ext. act) Works - Local Open Procedure with prior publication (Art.269.1(b) RAP)

1 1 479 543,57

(Ext. act) Works - Local Open Procedure with prior publication (Art.269(1) (b) RAP)

6 12 819 908,93

Negotiated procedure without prior publication (Annex 1 - 11.1) 10 4 175 507,00

Negotiated procedure with single tender (Annex 1 - 39.1) 5 1 407 050,00

Restricted procedure - As provided for in FR 164(1)(b) - Services/Supplies as from EUR 300 000 - Works as from EUR 5 000 000 - publication (Annex 1 - 38.1 (a))

6 14 643 025,00

Simplified procedure - Services/Works < EUR 300 000 - Supplies < EUR 100 000. Legal services as in Annex 1 - 38.6. (Annex 1 - 38.1 (d))

7 1 241 945,00

Total 241 312 277 830,10


Internal Procedures > € 60,000

Procedure Legal base Number of Procedures

Amount (€)

Exceptional Negotiated Procedure without publication of a contract notice (Art. 134 RAP)

1 199 960,00

Negotiated procedure without prior publication (Annex 1 - 11.1) 1 138 848,00

Open Procedure (Art. 104(1) (a) FR) 2 1 238 154,91

Total 4 1 576 962,91

TABLE 13 : BUILDING CONTRACTS

Legal base Contract Number Contractor Name Description Amount (€)

Art. 134.1(g) (Without prior publication) for building contracts

SCR.LCM.395261.01 ELAN PROPERTIES B.C.-S DOOEL SKOPJE

SCR.LCM.395261.01 - INFO CENTER LEASE CONTRACT 2018-2020

88 400,54

1 88 400,54


TABLE 14 : CONTRACTS DECLARED SECRET

LC Responsible Organisation DG Code

LC Contract/Grant Type

LC Date Legal base Contract Number Contractor

Name Description Amount (€)

NEAR Direct 27.12.2018

Annex 1 - 11.1 (i) - Secret contract or contract requiring special security measures

SCR.LCM.404179.01 R.M TEAM FZE

SCR.LCM.404179.01 - THIRD PARTY MONITORING OF EU NON-HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE

900 000,00

1 900 000,00

TABLE 15 : FPA duration exceeds 4 years - NEAR

None of your FPA (if any) exceeds 4 years


ANNEX 4: Materiality criteria

The criteria used by DG NEAR to determine the materiality of potential weaknesses have

been established in line with the Standing Instructions for the 2018 AAR. These

instructions propose a standard quantitative materiality threshold of maximum 2% for the

authorized payments of the reporting year, but also allow a multi-annual approach.

Because of their multiannual nature, the effectiveness of DG NEAR's control strategy can

only be fully measured and assessed once all audits, checks and controls have been fully

implemented and systematic errors have been detected and corrected.

The question of being on track towards the control objective of legality and regularity is

reassessed annually, taking into account both the frequency and importance of the errors

found as well as a cost/benefit analysis of the effort needed to detect and correct them.

Notwithstanding the multiannual span of DG NEAR’s control strategy, its Director-General

is required to sign a statement of assurance for each financial reporting year. In order to

determine whether to qualify this statement of assurance with a reservation, the

effectiveness of the control systems in place needs to be assessed not only for the year of

reference but also with a multiannual perspective, to determine whether it is possible to

reasonably conclude that the control objectives will be met in the future as foreseen.

The identification and potential correction of internal control weaknesses (and - in

particular - errors with financial impact), the criteria for making a decision on whether

there is material error in the expenditure of the DG and the question of whether to make a

reservation in the AAR, will therefore be based on the full range of internal controls

described in this AAR and on the level of error identified in the RER Studies on a multi-

annual basis and in the Annual Reports by the ECA.

In quantitative terms:

DG NEAR ensures that the RER, i.e. the level of errors which remain undetected and

uncorrected, does not exceed 2% by the end of the management cycle. DG NEAR

considers that a weakness is quantitatively significant and deserves to be disclosed as a

reservation to the Declaration when the value of the transactions affected by this

weakness represents more than 2% of all the transactions of the same nature (instrument,

management mode) closed during the period under review (01/09/2017 – 31/08/2018).

In qualitative terms:

DG NEAR considers issuing a reservation if (i) significant errors, taking into account their

frequency of occurrence, or (ii) significant weaknesses in the Internal Control have been

identified.

The identification of significant weaknesses in the Internal Control system is derived from

various sources, such as the annual assessment of internal controls (ICAD), the

conclusions from reports issued by the various control bodies (ECA, IAS) and major issues

that have been outlined by the various controlling bodies or situations where a significant

reputational risk may occur (e.g. major fraud cases or decisions with a significantly

negative political impact).


ANNEX 5: Relevant Control System(s) for budget implementation(RCSs)

1. Direct Management

Under Direct Management, funds are channelled to the final recipients through contracts signed directly by the Commission as contracting

authority. Under Direct Management, the control environments are Grants in Direct Management (RCS 1); Procurement in Direct Management

(RCS 2); Budget Support (RCS 3); in addition the Pegase mechanism to channel Direct Financial Support to the Palestinian institutions includes a

specific set of controls which has been reviewed in recent years by the ECA.

Grants in Direct Management (RCS 1)

Grants are financial contributions awarded as donations to third parties in order to co-finance actions intended to help achieve a Union policy

objective (action grants), or the functioning of a body which has an objective forming part of, and supporting, a Union policy (operating grants).

Grants are based on the reimbursement of eligible costs actually incurred by the beneficiaries, or on financing not linked to the costs of the

relevant operations, on unit costs, on lump sums, on flat-rate financing, or on any combination of these forms. Whatever the form of the grant,

the latter aims at co-financing the cost of the activities carried out by the beneficiaries for implementing the concerned actions or work

programmes. The results of the action remain the property of the beneficiaries.

Stage 1: Prior to Contracting

Grants are subject to the publication of work programmes on the Commission websites5 and implemented principally through calls for proposals6.

Calls for proposals are based on a standard template and regularly updated in accordance inter alia with the changes in the Financial Regulation

and relevant case law. Applicants are expected to present proposals for actions that correspond to stated objectives and fulfil the required

conditions set in each call. All applications are examined and assessed on the basis of eligibility and evaluation criteria (selection and award) that

were clearly announced in the calls for proposals. This includes an assessment, by an Evaluation Committee composed in majority of DG NEAR

staff, of the technical and financial capacity of the applicant, as well as of the relevance, impact, sustainability and cost effectiveness of the

proposals. In order to prevent any potential conflict of interest, each member of the Evaluation Committee must sign a declaration of impartiality

and confidentiality. At the end of the evaluation process, DG NEAR notifies all applicants to inform them of the final decision concerning their

proposals. Grants may also be concluded following a direct award.

5 The Action Documents annexed to the Commission Implementing Decisions adopting Annual Action Programmes constitute the work programmes and the publication consists therefore on making available on Commission

website the Action Documents. Additionally, calls for proposals may be announced on the concerned Delegations websites for those that concern the corresponding countries.

6 Part of the grants portolio is made of grants concluded following direct award, in accordance with the relevant legal provisions (Article 190 of the Rules of Application of the Financial Regulation). The RCS1 described in this report also applies mutatis mutandis to those grants directly awarded.


A – Identification and formulation of action to be co-financed including choice of instrument and implementation modality

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the Commission selects the most appropriate instrument in its cooperation with partner countries in line

with the policy objectives (effectiveness); compliance (legality & regularity) and ensures the proper type of support and modalities specific to

each partner country

Main risks

It may happen (again) that… Mitigating controls

Coverage, frequency

and depth of controls Possible Cost effectiveness indicators (3Es)

The instrument and/or

implementation modality is not well

suited to work towards the

identified objectives and/or lead to

a substantial increase of

implementation risks.

Quality Review

100%

Economy: Estimation of cost of controls of grant

operations up to the identification and formulation,

including staff costs. External costs of control are

based on values of respective contracts and related

disbursements


B - Preparation, adoption and publication of the Annual Work Programmes and Calls for proposals

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the Commission selects the proposals that contribute the most towards the achievement of the policy or

programme objectives (effectiveness); Compliance (legality & regularity); Prevention of fraud (anti-fraud strategy)

Main risks


Coverage, frequency and

depth of controls Possible Cost effectiveness indicators (3Es)

The annual work programmes and

the subsequent calls for proposals

do not adequately reflect the

policy objectives, priorities, are

incoherent and/or the essential

eligibility, selection and award

criteria are not adequate to ensure

the evaluation of the proposals.

Hierarchical validation

within the authorising

department

Explicit allocation of

responsibility to individual

officials (reflected in task

assignment or function

descriptions)

Centralised checklist-

based verification

If risk materialises, all

grants awarded during the

year under this work

programme or call would be

irregular, inadequate and/or

ineffective. Possible impact

100% of budget involved

and significant reputational

consequences.

Coverage / Frequency:

100%

Depth: Checklist includes a

list of the requirements of

the regulatory provisions

identified.

Effectiveness: Number of calls published and

grants awarded.

Efficiency: Time to prepare and adopt calls and

time for publication. Number of clarifications

needed

Economy: Estimated cost of controls of grant

preparation adoption and publication.


C - Selecting and awarding: Evaluation, ranking and selection of proposals

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the most promising projects for meeting the policy objectives are among (a good balance of) the

proposals selected (effectiveness); Compliance (legality & regularity); Prevention of fraud (anti-fraud strategy)

Main risks




The evaluation, ranking and

selection of proposals is not

carried out in accordance with the

established procedures, the policy

objectives, priorities and/or the

essential eligibility, or with the

selection and award criteria

defined in the annual work

programme and subsequent calls

for proposals.

Assignment of staff (e.g.

programme officers)

and/or

Selection and

appointment of expert

assessors

Transparent publication of

calls

100% vetting for technical

expertise and independence

(e.g. conflicts of interests,

nationality bias, ex-

employer bias, collusion)

Effectiveness: Number of requests of

clarification or corrigendum regarding the call.

Errors identified during RER exercise and/or DAS

sampling.

Efficiency: Time to grant, time to inform, need

to relaunch.

Economy: Estimation of cost of controls of grant

selection.

Redress procedure

100% of contested decisions

are analysed by AOSD

services


Stage 2 - Contracting: Transformation of selected proposals into legally binding grant agreements

DG NEAR establishes and signs contracts with successful applicants. For this, proposals (description of the action and the budget) are reviewed in

order to remove possible arithmetical errors and ineligible costs, and in order to bring clarifications and minor corrections where relevant. A

standard grant contract model is used for all EU-financed grant contracts for external actions.

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the actions and funds allocation is optimal (best value for public money; effectiveness, economy,

efficiency); Compliance (legality & regularity); Prevention of fraud (anti-fraud strategy)

Main risks




The description of the action in the

grant agreement includes tasks

which do not contribute to the

achievement of the programme

objectives and/or that the budget

foreseen overestimates the costs

necessary to carry out the action.

The beneficiary lacks operational

and/or financial capacity to carry

out the actions.

Procedures do not comply with

regulatory framework.

Project Officers

implement evaluators’

recommendations,

including elimination of

ineligible costs and

arithmetical errors in

budgets in a dialogue with

the selected applicants

during the contract

preparation stage.

Hierarchical validation of

proposed adjustments.

Validation of beneficiaries

(operational and financial

viability).

Signature of the grant

agreement by the AO.

In-depth financial

verification and taking

appropriate measures for

high risk beneficiaries.

Reinforce financial and

contractual circuits.

100% of the selected

proposals and beneficiaries

are scrutinised.

Coverage: 100% of draft

grant agreements.

Depth may be determined

after considering the type or

nature of the applicant (e.g.

large internationally

recognized NGOs or local

organizations multiple co-

applicants, and/or of the

modalities (e.g. part of

human resources or

equipment compared to the

total cost of the action)

and/or the total value of the

grant.

Effectiveness: Final eligible costs accepted,

need for riders to facilitate implementation

Efficiency: budget savings, reallocation to next

ranked proposals

Economy: Estimation of cost of controls related

to contracting.


Stage 3 - Monitoring the execution. This stage covers the monitoring the operational, financial and reporting aspects related to the

project and grant agreement

All payment requests and related reports are verified and approved by DG NEAR staff (ex-ante controls). Before any transaction (payment,

rider,…) is authorised, the operational and financial aspects are initiated and verified by two different (operational/financial) entities. This is the

"four eyes" principle of the Financial Regulation, which DG NEAR, taking into consideration the specific high risk environment of external aid

actions, reinforces by requiring controls by two separate agents for each of these two stages. Checklists and types of controls are regularly

updated in accordance with the results of the risk analyses as well as changes in the regulatory environment or feedback from field users.

The first pre-financing payment, which covers either 80% of the amount of the contract or 100% of the EU's part of the first annual budget for

the first year of implementation, is paid after both parties have signed the contract. For multi-annual actions, an interim report (technical and

financial) and payment request are sent once a year. The balance is paid on approval of the final report. If it appears that actual eligible costs are

lower than anticipated or declared, the grant is reduced proportionately and any unused amount is recovered.

When required by the grant contract, payment requests or final reports are accompanied by an expenditure verification report of an independent

external auditor contracted by the grant beneficiary. DG NEAR has developed standard Terms of Reference including a reporting model for

expenditure verifications which are part of the standard annexes of the standard grant contracts. They reinforce the verification of compliance

with the contract terms including those relating to procurement by the beneficiary. These templates are reviewed on a regular basis to ensure the

highest efficiency as well as compliance with changes in the relevant legal framework (e.g. Financial Regulation).

Expenditure verifications are compulsory for:

• Any request for payment of the balance in the case of grants of more than EUR 100,000;

• Any request for further (annual) pre-financing payments in case of grants of EUR 5,000,000 or more.

Additional audits to be carried out by external auditors can be contracted by DG NEAR as part of DG NEAR's annual audit plans based on risk

analyses or as deemed appropriate by the AOSD.

Main control objectives: ensuring that the operational results (deliverables) from the projects are of good value and meet the objectives and

conditions (effectiveness & efficiency); ensuring that the related financial operations comply with regulatory and contractual provisions (legality &

regularity); prevention of fraud (anti-fraud strategy); ensuring appropriate accounting of the operations (reliability of reporting, safeguarding of

assets and information)


Main risks


Coverage, frequency and depth

of controls

Possible Cost effectiveness indicators

(3Es)

The actions foreseen are not,

totally or partially, carried out in

accordance with the technical

description and requirements

foreseen in the grant agreement

and/or the amounts paid exceed

that due in accordance with the

applicable contractual and

regulatory provisions.

Operational and financial

checks in accordance with

the financial circuits.

Transaction authorisation

by the AO

For riskier operations, ex-

ante in-depth and/or on-

site verification.

100% of the projects are

controlled, including only value-

adding checks.

Riskier operations subject to in-

depth and/or on-site controls.

The depth depends on risk criteria.

Effectiveness: Delivered output,

sustainability.

Efficiency: KPI on Ineligible amount

detected through ex-ante controls,

number of contracts suspended, amount

of penalties, monitoring missions and

projects’ visits.

Economy: Estimation of cost of controls

related to monitoring of implementation.

For high risk operations,

reinforced monitoring

Risk assessment to

identify potential ROM,

evaluations and on-the-

spot (OV and/or FV)

monitoring visit. Earmark

projects for risk-based

system audits (during the

first phase of

implementation of the

project) and financial

audits (after receiving at

least one interim payment

or at the end of the

project) : (see below

annual control plans)

High risk operations identified by

risk criteria.

Red flags: delayed interim

deliverables, suspicion of

plagiarism, unstable co-applicants

set-up requesting many

amendments, Early Detection and

Exclusion System (EDES), etc.

If needed: application of

Suspension/interruption

of payments, Penalties.

Referring grant to OLAF

Depth: depends from results of

controls.

Expenditure verification

accompanying

Any request for

Coverage: > 10% of ongoing or

very recently closed operations


Main risks



of controls


(3Es)

payment of the

balance in the case

of grants of more

than EUR 100,000;

Any request for

pre-financing

payments per

financial year in

case of grants of

EUR 5.000,000 or

more.

Annual Control Plans:

Audits and expenditure

verifications are planned

annually for ongoing and

closed operations of DG

NEAR overall portfolio.

The operations to be

verified or audited are

determined through risk

analyses. These controls

can take place before or

after disbursements

recognizing expenditure.

Efficiency: KPIs on implementation of

audit plans, and on ineligible expenditure

detected through ex post controls

Economy: Estimation of cost of controls

related to audits and verifications.


Stage 4 - Ex-Post controls and Follow-up

Payments for grants in direct management are included in the population of the RER study undertaken each year for DG NEAR on a

representative sample of closed contracts. Findings from the risk based audits and from the RER study are systematically followed up by DG

NEAR, taking the necessary actions for the recovery of non-eligible expenditures where appropriate.

A - Reviews, audits and monitoring

Main control objectives: Measuring the effectiveness of ex-ante controls by ex-post controls; detect and correct any error or fraud remaining

undetected after the implementation ex-ante controls (legality & regularity; anti-fraud strategy); addressing systemic weaknesses in the ex-ante

controls, based on the analysis of the findings (sound financial management); Ensuring appropriate accounting of the recoveries to be made

(reliability of reporting, safeguarding of assets and information)

Main risks


Coverage, frequency


The ex-ante controls (as such) fail

to prevent, detect and correct

erroneous payments or attempted

fraud.

The ex-post controls focus on the

detection of residual errors.

Through a residual error

rate (RER) study a

representative sample of

closed operations is

reviewed in order to

determine the effectiveness

of the pyramid of controls

put in place by the DG.

Findings are validated with

fund recipients, used for

possible ex-post

corrections (i.e.

recoveries), taken into

consideration for

improvements of ex-ante

controls, and referred to

OLAF where needed.

MUS sample sufficiently

representative to draw

valid management

conclusions.

Effectiveness: Residual error rate below

tolerable threshold.

Efficiency: time to deliver RER results, on time

for the assurance of the AAR

Economy: Estimation of cost of RER controls of

grant operations

Supervision missions to

Delegations by

Size and composition of

sample are determined in


Main risks


Coverage, frequency


independent staff not

involved in the operational

and financial circuits

accordance with the

cooperation portfolios

managed by the visited

Delegations.

Effectiveness: number of supervision mission,

number of SMART recommendations accepted

and described in an action plan

Efficiency: Time to prepare supervision

missions

Economy: Estimated cost of supervision

missions

B - Implementing results from ex-post audits/controls

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the (audit) results from the ex-post controls lead to effective recoveries (legality & regularity; anti-fraud

strategy); Ensuring appropriate accounting of the recoveries made (reliability of reporting)

Main risks


Coverage, frequency


The errors, irregularities and cases

of fraud detected are not

addressed or not addressed timely

Systematic registration of

audit / control results to be

implemented.

Financial operational

validation of recovery in

accordance with financial

circuits.

Authorisation by AO.

Coverage: 100% of final

audit results with a

financial impact.

Effectiveness: All RER detected are recorded in

the audit module, followed up and closed

Efficiency: time to close audit module RER

entries, amount recovered and time to implement

action plans following supervision missions.

Economy: Estimation of cost of follow up of

financial recommendations on grant operations.


Procurement in Direct Management (RCS 2)

Procurement contracts are commercial contracts concluded in writing between economic operators and one or more contracting authorities in

order to obtain the execution of works, the supply of goods or the provision of services. In direct management, procurement contracts with third

parties are awarded and managed directly by DG NEAR in accordance with the applicable rules and procedures.

There are three types of procurement contracts: service contracts (fee based or global price), supply contracts and works contracts.

Stage 1: Prior to Contracting

The basic means of awarding contracts is competitive tendering. All contract awards must obey the principles of transparency, proportionality,

equal treatment, non-discrimination and sound financial management. Standard tender procedures are used according to predefined thresholds

per type of contract. The selection of the contractor is made by an evaluation committee composed of DG NEAR staff (and possibly one voting

member from the beneficiary country) on the basis of pre-defined eligibility, capability (selection) and award criteria. In order to prevent any

potential conflict of interest, each member of the Evaluation Committee must sign a declaration of impartiality and confidentiality. At the end of

the evaluation process, DG NEAR notifies all tenderers of the final decision concerning their offers.

A – Identification and formulation of action to be financed including choice of instrument and implementation modality





Main risks


Coverage, frequency







implementation risks. Quality Review

100%

Economy: Estimation of cost of controls of

procurement operations up to the identification

and formulation, including staff costs. External

costs of control are based on values of respective

contracts and related disbursements


B - Planning the procurement

Main control objectives: Effectiveness, efficiency and economy. Compliance (legality and regularity).

Overall cost efficiency indicator: total cost of controls of process / total expenditure executed during the year

Main risks


Coverage, frequency


The needs are not well defined

(operationally and economically)

and that the decision to procure

was inappropriate to meet the

operational objectives

Discontinuation of the services or

of works provided, or of the

delivery of supplies due to a late

contracting (poor planning and

organisation of the procurement

process)

Validation by AO(S)D of

justification (economic

operation) for launching a

procurement process.

Publication of intended

procurements

100% of the forecast

procurements

Effectiveness: Number of planned tenders that

were cancelled.

Efficiency: Time to prepare and adopt calls and

time for publication. Number of clarifications and

corrigendum needed

Economy: Estimated cost of controls of the

planning and publication of procurement

operations


C - Needs assessment, selection of the offer & evaluation

Main control objectives: Effectiveness, efficiency and economy. Compliance (legality and regularity). Prevention of Fraud (Anti-fraud strategy)

Main risks


Coverage, frequency


The best offer/s are not

submitted due to the poor

definition of the tender

specifications

AOSD supervision and

approval of specifications

100% of the calls for

tenders including the

technical specifications

are verified ex-ante by

Commission staff

Effectiveness: Number of requests of clarification

regarding the tender. Number of complaints.

Number of litigation cases filed. Errors identified

during RER exercise and/or DAS sampling.

Efficiency: Time to identify the best offer, time to

inform, need to relaunch.

Economy: Estimation of cost of controls of the

supervision of specifications and procurement

selection.

Call for tenders which are

technically complex are

elaborated by external

experts contracted through

service contracts and then

verified by Commission

staff.

The most economically

advantageous offer not being

selected, due to a biased,

inaccurate or ‘unfair’ evaluation

process

Formal evaluation process:

Opening committee and

Evaluation committee

100% of the offers

analysed. and all

documents transmitted

Opening and Evaluation

Committees' declaration of

absence of conflict of

interests

100% of the members of

the opening committee

and the evaluation

committee

Exclusion decisions

documented

100% checked and

required documents

provided are consistent


Stage 2 - Contracting: Transformation of selected offers into legally binding contracts

DG NEAR establishes and signs contracts with successful tenderers using standard contract models.

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the actions and funds allocation is optimal (best value for public money; effectiveness, economy,


Main risks


Coverage, frequency


The contractor lacks operational

and/or financial capacity to carry

out the actions.

Procedures do not comply with

regulatory framework.

Validation of substantiating

documents and experience

provided and declared by

contractors

Signature of contracts by

the AO.

Financial and contractual

circuits.

100% of tenders are

scrutinized.

Effectiveness: Final eligible costs accepted, need

for riders to facilitate implementation

Economy: Estimation of cost of controls related to

contracting.


Stage 3 – Monitoring Implementation / Financial transactions

All invoices and related documents (reports, certificates, guarantees etc.) are verified and approved by DG NEAR staff (ex-ante controls). Before

any transaction is authorised, the operational and financial aspects are initiated and verified by two different (operational/financial) entities. This

is the "four eyes" principle of the Financial Regulation, which DG NEAR, taking into consideration the specific high risk environment of external aid

actions, reinforces by requiring controls by two separate agents for each of these two stages. Checklists and types of controls are regularly

updated in accordance with the result of risk analyses as well as changes in the regulatory environment or feedback from field users.

Disbursement of pre-financing is subject to contractual conditions (e.g. if an advance exceeds a specified threshold, the contractor must provide a

financial guarantee for the full amount of the pre-financing payment; performance and retention guarantees may also be required above certain

thresholds for supply and works contracts). The release of intermediary and final payments is subject to verification/validation of expenditure7:

• Service contracts: All invoices must be accompanied by an interim or final report. All invoices for a fee-based contract must also be

accompanied by an up-to-date financial report. Before payments are made for a fee-based contract, an external auditor, contracted by the

contractor must examine and verify the invoices and the financial reports sent by the contractor to the Commission. DG NEAR has

developed standard Terms of Reference including a reporting model for expenditure verifications which are part of the standard annexes of

the standard service contracts.

• Supply contracts: The supplies are not accepted until the prescribed verifications and tests have been carried out. The supplies are taken

over by the beneficiary when they have been delivered in accordance with the contract, have satisfactorily passed the required tests, or

have been commissioned, and after a certificate of acceptance has been issued and has been endorsed by the contracting authority project

manager, i.e. the legal or natural person responsible for monitoring the execution. Origin of the supplies is also verified prior to payment

where relevant.

• Works contracts: The works are not accepted until the prescribed verifications and tests have been carried out. The works are taken

over by the partner country beneficiary authorities when they have satisfactorily passed the tests on completion and a certificate of

acceptance has been issued or is deemed to have been issued by the Supervisor i.e. the legal or natural person responsible for monitoring

the execution of the contract on behalf of the Contracting Authority.

Additional audits to be carried out by external auditors can be contracted by DG NEAR as part of DG NEAR's annual audit plans based on risk

analyses or as deemed appropriate by the AOSD.

7 These invoices may be subject to additional ex-ante audits contracted as part of NEAR's annual control plans by the Commission as deemed appropriate by the Authorising Officer by Sub-delegation.


Main control objectives: Ensuring that the implementation of the contract is in compliance with the signed contract

Main risks

It may happen (again)

that…

Mitigating controls

Coverage,

frequency and

depth of controls

Possible Cost effectiveness indicators (3Es)

The services/supplies/ works

foreseen are not, totally or

partially, provided in



foreseen in the contract

and/or the amounts paid

exceed that due in

accordance with the

applicable contractual and

regulatory provisions.

Business discontinues

because contractor fails to

deliver

Operational and financial checks in

accordance with the financial

circuits.

Transaction authorisation by the

AOSD

For riskier operations, ex-ante in-

depth and/or on-site verification.

100% of the projects

are controlled,

including only value-

adding checks.

Riskier operations

subject to in-depth

and/or on-site

controls.

The depth depends

on risk criteria.

Effectiveness: Delivered output, Number of

riders, amount of liquidated damages,

sustainability.

Efficiency: KPI on Ineligible amount detected

through ex-ante controls, number of contracts

suspended, amount of penalties.


monitoring of implementation

For high risk operations, reinforced

monitoring

Risk assessment to identify potential

ROM, evaluations and on-the-spot

(OV and/or FV) monitoring visit.

Earmark projects for risk-based

system audits (during the first phase

of implementation of the project)

and financial audits (after receiving

at least one interim payment or at

the end of the project) : (see below

annual control plans)

High risk operations

identified by risk

criteria.

Red flags: delayed

interim deliverables,

suspicion of

plagiarism, unstable

consortium,

requesting many

amendments, Early

Detection and

Exclusion System

(EDES), etc.


Main risks


that…

Mitigating controls

Coverage,

frequency and

depth of controls


If needed: application of

Suspension/interruption of

payments, Penalties or liquidated

damages.

Referring procurement contract to

OLAF

Depth: depends from

results of controls.

Expenditure verification

accompanying most service interim

and final invoices (following

contractual conditions); acceptance

certificates for supplies; role of

supervisor on works monitoring;

Annual Control Plans: Audits and

expenditure verifications are planned

annually for ongoing and closed

operations of DG NEAR overall

portfolio. The operations to be

verified or audited are determined

through risk analyses. These

controls can take place before or

after disbursements recognizing

expenditure.

Coverage: > 10% of

ongoing or "recently"

closed operations

Efficiency: KPIs on implementation of audit plans,

and on ineligible expenditure detected through ex

post controls


audits and verifications.


Stage 4 – Ex-Post controls

Tender procedures an payments for procurement contracts in direct management are included in the population of the RER study undertaken

each year for DG NEAR on a representative sample of closed contracts. Findings from the risk based audits and from the RER study are

systematically followed up by DG NEAR taking the necessary actions for the recovery of non-eligible expenditures where appropriate.



undetected after the implementation of ex-ante controls (legality & regularity; anti-fraud strategy); addressing systemic weaknesses in the ex-

ante controls, based on the analysis of the findings (sound financial management); ensuring appropriate accounting of the recoveries to be made


Main risks

It may happen

(again) that…

Mitigating controls Coverage, frequency

and depth of controls

Possible Cost effectiveness

indicators (3Es)

The ex-ante controls

(as such) fail to

prevent, detect and

correct erroneous

tender procedures,

payments or

attempted fraud.

The ex-post controls

focus on the detection

of residual errors.

Through a residual error rate (RER) study a

representative sample of closed operations is

reviewed in order to determine the

effectiveness of the pyramid of controls put in

place by the DG.

Findings are validated with fund recipients, used

for possible ex-post corrections (i.e.

recoveries), taken into consideration for

improvements of ex-ante controls, and referred

to OLAF where needed.



valid management

conclusions.



Efficiency: time to deliver RER results,

on time for the assurance of the AAR

Economy: Estimation of cost of RER

controls of grant operations

Supervision missions to Delegations by

independent staff not involved in the

operational and financial circuits


sample are determined

in accordance with the



Delegations.

Effectiveness: number of supervision

mission, number of SMART

recommendations accepted and

described in an action plan


missions


missions




strategy); ensuring appropriate accounting of the recoveries made (reliability of reporting)

Main risks


Coverage, frequency







implemented.




circuits.


Coverage: 100% of final

audit results with a

financial impact.

Findings of systemic

errors are considered for

corrections of non-

audited projects by the

same contractor, taken

into account for future

projects.

Effectiveness: All RER detected are recorded in

the audit module, followed up and closed


entries, amount recovered and time to implement

action plans following supervision missions.


financial recommendations.


Budget Support in Direct Management (RCS 3)

Budget support is the transfer of financial resources from the Commission to the National Treasury of a partner country, following the fulfilment of

jointly agreed conditions for disbursement. The financial resources received become part of the global resources of the partner country, and are

consequently used in accordance with the public financial management system of the partner country.

As it contributes to financing the totality of a country’s budget and not a specific subset of budgeted expenditures, Budget Support is

accompanied by a dialogue on the overall approach of budget policy and the functioning of public financial management in a context of

harmonisation and alignment. This dialogue frequently leads to agreement on capacity development measures.

The Commission implements budget support directly and performs most control functions. However the assessment of the achievement of

disbursement conditions is generally performed by external experts contracted by the Commission.

Stage 1: Identification and formulation

In line with the legal framework, Commission communication COM(2011) 638/2 ('The Future Approach To EU budget support To Third Countries')

sets the four main budget support eligibility criteria as follows:

• a stability oriented macro-economic policy;

• a credible programme to improve public financial management;

• a well-defined national development policy (supported by the EU);

• and transparency and oversight of the budget.

When designing budget support programmes, DG NEAR relies on a framework based on clear policy objectives of the partner country, priorities

and results to be achieved, their consistency with budgetary allocations, and the capacity of the partner to implement them. This framework is

the basis for the policy dialogue with the partner country and the assessment of performance which ultimately trigger disbursements.




Overall control efficiency indicator: Estimated cost of controls of budget support operations divided by total amount of expenditure under

budget support operations in the year.


Main risks


Coverage, frequency


- The Commission supports

partner countries which do not

meet the criteria on fundamental

values and/or the 4 eligibility

criteria

- The programme is wrongly

formulated to meet the general

objectives for budget support

programmes.

- The programme's specific

objectives and indicators are not

aligned with partner countries

own development policies, are

not coordinated with other

aligned donors, are not consistent

with EU development policy or

will have no impact on the on-

going reforms.

Quality Review in HQ to

analyse the identification

fiche of the project (FIP).

100% of BS FIP


identification and formulation.

Quality Review in HQ to

analyse the action document

of the project and the draft

Financing agreement (FA).

100 % of BS FAs

DG NEAR step by step

financial circuit for level one

commitments in budget

support operations.

100 % of BS FAs

RISK assessment framework

for budget support

operations: Implemented by

the Delegation and reviewed

in the FAST8 for substantial

or high risk BS

programmes.

Political dialogue with

partner countries authorities

donor coordination by EU

Delegation, internal

coordination inside the

Commission (Delegation,

DG NEAR, Line DGs) and

involvement of EEAS.

Substantial or high risk

BS FAs

8 Financial Assistance Steering Committee.


Stage 2 – Contracting

DG NEAR concludes standard Financing Agreements (FA) with partner countries benefitting from budget support. These FA include objectives,

expected results, main activities, financing plan/budget, implementation modalities, monitoring of performance and criteria for disbursement.

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the main parameters of the budget support transaction are correctly encoded in the contract database.

Main risks


Coverage, frequency


Important parameters relevant for

disbursements under budget

support operations are wrongly

encoded.


financial circuit for level two

commitments in budget

support operations.

100% of parameters

Economy: Estimation of cost of controls of staff

verifying the main parameters.


Stage 3 – Monitoring of the implementation – operational, financial and reporting aspects.

Disbursements only take place once agreed measurable results (e.g. policy reforms or service delivery targets) have been achieved and the

above mentioned budget support eligibility criteria and indicators are met. Thus the ex-ante transactional checks performed by Commission staff

at the point of payment claims on continuing eligibility and fulfilment of disbursement performance criteria are fundamental to the budget support

control structure. In case of partial or weak fulfilment of disbursement conditions, the Commission may withhold or reduce disbursements, often

in a co-ordinated manner with other donors, until corrective measures are undertaken by the partner government and agreed conditions are

finally fulfilled.

Senior management level governance over budget support is ensured by the FAST (Financial Assistance Steering committee), which is an

internal DG NEAR committee chaired by the Director-General. A key tool for the FAST to maintain strategic oversight over budget support are

country specific strategic discussions, which are conducted in low/medium risks beneficiaries. In 2018, such strategic discussions were held for 7

out of the 14 budget support beneficiaries (Morocco, Tunisia, Armenia, Albania, Kosovo*, Serbia and Montenegro). These discussions cover the

ongoing portfolio with disbursements, as well as the outlook for the new operation together with the context, challenges, opportunities and key

benefits of budget support in the country. In addition, the FAST reviewed two payments for Ukraine, discussed the conditions for possible

disbursements in Moldova, Azerbaijan and Egypt, and approved a disbursement for Egypt. Risk Management Frameworks (RMFs) for the 14

budget support beneficiaries (Albania, Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Egypt, Georgia, Jordan, Kosovo*, Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco, Serbia,

Tunisia, Ukraine) were validated in the FAST, and 2018 Budget Support Report and the internal 2018 FAST Committee report were adopted.

A risk management framework is also part of DG NEAR's decision making process regarding budget support operations. Building on an

identification of major risks and ways to mitigate them, the risk management framework systematically informs the policy dialogue with partner

countries on the strategic level, as well as focussing on key issues.

Eligibility criteria have to be met both prior to and throughout the subsequent life of a budget support programme. The continuous assessment of

the eligibility criteria enables the Commission to ensure the legality and efficiency of the programmes, from commitments through to

disbursements.

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the operational results meet the conditions, objectives and expected results (effectiveness & efficiency);

ensuring that the related financial operations comply with regulatory and contractual provisions (legality & regularity); ensuring appropriate

accounting of the operations (reliability of reporting, safeguarding of assets and information).


Main risks


that…

Mitigating controls Coverage, frequency


1. The Commissions fails to

identify a significant

deterioration of fundamental

values and/or wrong

assessment on the 4 eligibility

criteria before BS payments are

released.

2. The Commission makes a

wrong calculation of the

amount to be disbursed for the

variable tranches

3.- Risk that transfer of funds

into the Treasury account has

not respected the terms of the

financing Agreement on

exchange rate and treasury

credit delay

Policy structured dialogue

On eligibility, risk assessment

framework and policy

performance framework;


financial circuit for payments

in BS operations;

Clear and unambiguous

calculation methods for

variable tranches are

introduced in the financing

agreements (e.g. amounts

paid in proportion of the

fulfilment of criteria and

objectives set in a policy

matrix).

RISK assessment framework

Implemented by the

Delegation and reviewed in

the FAST for substantial or

high risk BS programmes

Beneficiary’s obligation to

confirm date of credit and

exchange rate used

100% of BS payments

100% of BS payments

Substantial or high risks

BS payments


monitoring.


Stage 4 – Ex post controls

Payments for budget support are included in the population of the RER study undertaken each year by DG NEAR on a representative sample of

closed contracts. Findings from the RER study are systematically followed up by DG NEAR, taking necessary actions for the recovery of non-

eligible amounts where appropriate.

A – Ex-post controls and follow-up

Main control objectives: Measuring the effectiveness of ex-ante controls; detect and correct any error or fraud remaining undetected after the

implementation of ex-ante controls (legality & regularity; anti-fraud strategy); addressing systemic weaknesses in the ex-ante controls, based on

the analysis of the findings; ensuring appropriate accounting of the recoveries to be made (reliability of reporting, safeguarding of assets and

information)

Main risks


Coverage, frequency


The ex- ante controls fail to

prevent, detect and correct

erroneous disbursements or fraud.



Residual error rate study.

BS payments are

included in the scope of

the RER study (MUS

sample).

Effectiveness: Residual error rate below tolerable

threshold.

Efficiency: time to deliver RER results, on time for

the assurance of the AAR


grant operations

Review of sample

transactions during

supervison missions to

Delegations.


sample are determined

in accordance with the



Delegations.


number of SMART recommendations accepted and

described in an action plan

Efficiency: Time to prepare supervision missions

Economy: Estimated cost of supervision missions



Main control objectives: Ensuring that the results from ex-post controls lead to appropriate corrective measures (legality & regularity; anti-

fraud strategy).

Main risks


Coverage, frequency


The deficiencies, errors, and

irregularities detected through ex-

post controls are not addressed

(timely).


ex-post control outcomes

to be implemented.

Authorisation by AOSD.

Coverage: 100% of ex-

post control outcomes

with a financial impact.

Findings of systemic

errors might be

extended to non-

audited BS schemes

with the same partner

country.

Effectiveness: All RER detected are recorded in the

audit module, followed up and closed

Efficiency: time to close audit module RER entries,

amount recovered and time to implement action

plans following supervision missions.




2. Indirect Management

Indirect management is a management mode under which the final recipient receives EU funds through an agreement concluded with an

intermediary entity to which the tasks of selecting the final recipients and managing the resulting contracts have been entrusted by the

Commission. The recipient is either an Indirect Management Entrusted Entity (IMEE) such as an International Organisation or a Member State

Agency; or an Indirect Management with Beneficiary/partner Country (IMBC). It is important to mention that under the ENI instrument, the

entrustment to a beneficiary country is only partial as payments are still made directly by the Commission (except for limited imprest accounts

schemes), while under the IPA instrument the entrustment is full, including payments. The significant control environments identified and

described below are those of IMBC in the IPA zone (RCS 4) and IMEE (RCS 5).

Indirect management with IPA beneficiary countries (RCS 4)

Under IPA II IMBC, the entities designated by IPA II beneficiary countries are entrusted by the Commission with the implementation of the IPA II

assistance. The Commission remains ultimately responsible for the EU budget, in line with Article 317 TFEU and informs the European Parliament

and the Council of the operations carried out by the entities and persons in charge. This management mode relies on the (pre-assessed) systems

of third countries (complemented since 2016 by the RER) and the efficiency of these systems depends on the state of development of

administrative capacity in the country concerned.

All IPA beneficiary countries implementing the budget under indirect management with beneficiary countries are required to respect some ground

rules such as ensuring the absence of conflict of interest, the respect of the principle of transparency and the setting up of an effective internal

control system when implementing the EU budget. In addition, they provide to the Commission an annual management declaration,

implementation reports and annual accounts accompanied by an audit opinion.

Stage 1 – Programming, evaluation and selection of proposals

In order to safeguard the financial interests of the Union, the IPA II beneficiary countries shall:

a) set up and ensure the functioning of an effective and efficient internal control system;

b) use an accounting system that provides accurate, complete and reliable information in a timely and regular manner clearly distinguishing

costs accepted and payments made;

c) provide for the structures and authorities referred to in Article 10(1) and (2) of the IPA II Framework Agreement being subject to an

independent external audit, performed in accordance with internationally accepted auditing standards by an audit authority functionally

independent of the structures and authorities concerned;

d) apply appropriate rules and procedures for providing financing from IPA II assistance through grants, procurement and financial

instruments.


Before the Commission entrusts the implementation of IPA II assistance, it reviews the request by the National Authorising Officer and the

established structures and authorities referred to in Article 10 of the IPA II Framework Agreement and, for the purposes of the ex-ante

assessment pursuant to Article 61(1) of the Financial Regulation, obtains evidence that the requirements set out in points (a) to (d) of Article

12(3) and those of Annex B to the IPA II Framework Agreement are fulfilled. This review may include on-the-spot verifications by the

Commission. Moreover and as a rule, all contracts must be awarded and implemented in accordance with the procedures and standard documents

laid down by the Commission for its external operations, in force at the time of the launch of the procedure in question (with ex-ante control by

the Commission).

Ex-ante control means that the EU delegations must carry-out controls at regular steps during the procedure (on the tendering of contracts,

launch of calls for proposals and the award of contracts and grants) and give their approval at all important stages in a contract award procedure,

as detailed in the Practical guide to contractual procedures for EU external actions (PRAG). This represents an important mitigating element in the

overall assessment of the functioning of IPA management, control and supervision systems in the IPA beneficiary countries. In case where the

approval cannot be granted, the corresponding activities are not eligible for IPA II funding.


A - Preparation, adoption and publication of the Programming decision(s) (including choice of management mode), publication

evaluation and selection of proposals/offers

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the Commission selects the implementation mode and subsequently the /proposals/offers that

contribute the most towards the achievement of the policy or programme objectives (effectiveness); compliance (legality & regularity);

prevention of fraud (anti-fraud strategy)

Main risks


Coverage, frequency


Possible Cost

effectiveness indicators

(3Es)

The Decision(s) do not

adequately reflect the policy

objectives, priorities;

For IPA, the establishment (or

prolongation) of the mandate of

the beneficiary country is affected

by issues, which would

undermine the basis for the

management of the related EU

funds (via that particular entity);

Hierarchical validation within the authorising

department;

Inter-service consultation, including all relevant

DGs;

Adoption by the Commission

Systems audits and/or verification missions (for

indirect management under IPA): systematic and

standard desk-review and risk-based field visit

verification

If risk materialises risk

that some or all costs

would be irregular.

Possible impact on

budget involved and

significant reputational

consequences.

Coverage / Frequency:

100%

Depth: systematic

control of the necessary

requirements

Effectiveness:

- findings following

verification by the

Commission

- Consumption rate of

commitment credits

Economy: Cost of control

for the programming phase.


B - Selecting and awarding: Evaluation and selection of proposals/offers

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the most promising proposals / best value for money offers for meeting the policy objectives are among

(a good balance of) the proposals / are the offers selected (effectiveness) by IPA II beneficiary countries; Compliance (legality & regularity) and

prevention of fraud (anti-fraud strategy) by IPA II beneficiary countries

Main risks


Coverage,

frequency and

depth of controls


The evaluation, ranking and selection of

proposals/offers is not carried out in

accordance with the policy objectives,

priorities and/or the essential eligibility,

or with the selection and award criteria

defined in the Decisions and subsequent

calls for proposals/tenders.

Eligibility, selection and award criteria

are not adequate to ensure the

evaluation of the proposals/offers;


Task Managers).

100%

Effectiveness: Appropriate planning of selection

and award of contracts within the deadlines

Efficiency: Rejection rates9

Economy: Cost of control for the evaluation phase.

Stage 2 - Contracting: Transformation of selected proposals / offers into legally binding grant agreements / contracts

The national Contracting Authority establishes and signs agreements with the organisations assessed and identified under stage 1. Standard

agreement models are used for all EU-financed operations under IMBC. The endorsement of a contract by the Commission prior to its conclusion

by the Contracting authority signals the Commission's agreement to the financing of the contract. In the event of a failure to comply with the

procedures, the Commission may refuse its approval for a given transaction and thereby refuse EU funding for the transaction in question.

9 Ratio between the number of rejections of tender, evaluation, and contracts documents submitted by National Implementing Agencies (IAs) for the Commission’s ex ante

control and the absolute number of submissions of documents for approval in the reporting year.


Main control objectives: Ensuring that the actions and fund allocation is optimal (best value for public money; effectiveness, economy,


Main risks


Coverage, frequency


The description of the action in the

grant agreement /contracts

includes tasks which do not

contribute to the achievement of

the operational objectives and/or

that the budget foreseen

overestimates the costs necessary

to carry out the action.

The recipient /contractor does not

meet eligibility criteria or lack

financial capacity to carry out the

actions


Task Managers).

Standard and systematic

verification missions.

100% of the selected

proposals / offers and

recipients / candidates

are scrutinised.

Coverage: 100% of

draft grant agreements

/ contracts.

Effectiveness: Contracting rates within the D+3

deadline.

Efficiency:

- Rejection Rates

- Derogations, prior approvals and other

exceptions authorised

Economy: Cost of control for the contracting phase.

Stage 3 - Monitoring the execution. This stage covers the monitoring the operational, financial and reporting aspects related to the projects

following the principles and using the controls foreseen in the framework agreements.

At IPA II beneficiary countries level, the summary of the daily control framework is the following:

The Contracting Authority performs management verifications before declaring expenditure to the National Fund, ex ante documentary

checks on all payment claims and on the spot checks on sampled transactions;

The National Authorising Officer, supported by the Management Structure, analyses the documentation and reports from the previous

level of verification before certifying the legality and regularity of expenditure declared to the Commission. He/she takes steps to satisfy

him/herself that adequate controls have been made by the Contracting Authority, including carrying out his/her own checks (such as

monitoring missions and risk based on the spot checks) when deemed necessary;

The Audit Authority has the responsibility to design an audit strategy in order to perform audits of the management, control and

supervision systems and ex post audits of representative samples of operations, as well as complementary audits on high risk operations

where necessary. The Audit Authority provides the Commission an Annual Activity Report. This report includes an annual audit opinion on

the functioning of the management, control and supervision systems and in particular of the quality and effectiveness of the verification by

contracting authorities and the management structure and the error rate resulting from its audit of sampled transactions and the

assurance provided by the NAO.


Main control objectives: ensuring that the operational results (deliverables) from the projects are of good value and meet the objectives and

conditions (effectiveness & efficiency); ensuring that the related financial operations comply with regulatory and contractual provisions (legality &

regularity); prevention of fraud (anti-fraud strategy); ensuring appropriate accounting of the operations (reliability of reporting)

Main risks



depth of controls


indicators (3Es)

The actions foreseen are not,

totally or partially, carried out in



foreseen in the grant agreement

/contract and/or the amounts

paid exceed that due in

accordance with the applicable

contractual and regulatory

provisions (ineligible/irregular).

Operational monitoring in

accordance with the responsibilities

of the Commission

For high/very high projects this may

include on the spot missions

100% of the projects are

monitored;

Verification mission by

Commission staff

Effectiveness: Delivered output,

sustainability.

Efficiency: Irregularities reported by

the National authorities;

Verification recommendations by the

Commission and audit findings by the

NAO and Audit Authority.

Economy: Cost of control for the

monitoring phase

If needed: application of interruption

of payments or penalties. Referring

contractors to OLAF and

management of reported cases of

irregularities.

Depth: depends on results of

ex ante controls / risk

assessment.

Stage 4 - Ex-Post controls

Closed contracts of operations in IPA IMBC are included in the population of the RER study of the DG.


Main control objectives: Measuring the effectiveness of ex-ante controls; detect and correct any error or fraud remaining undetected after the

implementation ex-ante controls (legality & regularity; anti-fraud strategy); Ensuring appropriate accounting of the recoveries to be made



Main risks


Coverage, frequency


The ex-ante controls fail to

prevent, detect and correct


fraud.

Specific statistically

representative RER study for

IMBC

Methodology developed

by an external auditor.






grant operations

The audit strategy focus on the

detection of external errors (e.g.

made by recipients) and do not

consider any internal errors made

by staff or embedded

systematically in the own

organisation

Audit Authority to establish an

audit strategy, performed by

independent staff not involved

in the operational and

financial circuits

The representative

sample enables drawing

valid conclusions about

the entire population.

Effectiveness: substantiated audit opinion by

the audit authority.

Economy: Estimation of cost of controls to

review AA structure design and operating

effectiveness.





Main risks


Coverage, frequency



of fraud detected are not addressed

or not addressed timely



implemented.




circuits and Authorisation by

the relevant AOSD

Coverage: Final audit

results with a financial

impact.

Effectiveness: All RER detected are followed up

and closed


entries, amount recovered




Indirect management with entrusted entities (RCS 5)

Under indirect management with entrusted entities, the implementation of the budget is entrusted by the Commission to this type of entity in the

form of programmes or actions. Entrustment to EIB and EIF are also included in this RCS. Candidate entities to be entrusted with budget-

implementation tasks (the candidate delegatee) must demonstrate a level of financial management and protection of the EU financial interests

equivalent to that required when the Commission manages European Union funds. This is verified by carrying out an ex-ante assessment ("pillar

assessment") for which the entities concerned must have been assessed positively.

Stage 1 – Prior to Contracting

A – Ex-ante (re)assessment of the entrusted entity’s financial and control framework (towards “budget autonomy”; “financial

rules”).

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the entrusted entity is fully prepared to start/continue implementing the delegated funds autonomously

with respect of all 5 Internal Control Objectives.

Main risks



of controls


indicators (3Es)

The financial and control

framework deployed by the

entrusted entity is not fully mature

to guarantee achieving all 5 ICOs

(legality and regularity, sound

financial management, true and

fair view reporting, safeguarding

assets and information, anti-fraud

strategy).

Ex-ante pillar assessment,

conditional to granting budget

autonomy

Hierarchical validation within the

authorising department

Requiring justification and prior

consent for any deviating financial

rules

Postponing the budget autonomy

Obligation to notify any subsequent

changes embedded in Board

proceedings

Coverage/frequency: 100% of

entrusted entities/once

Depth may be determined after

considering the type or nature of

the entrusted entity and/or the

value of the budget concerned.

Effectiveness: All pillar

assessments finalized when

opportunity and legal checks are

validated.

Efficiency: Time to assess the

pillars of an entity

Economy: Estimation of cost of

controls implemented by DG

NEAR staff.


B - Identification and formulation




Main risks


Coverage, frequency







implementation risks.

Quality Review

100%

Economy: Estimation of cost of controls in the

identification and formulation phases.

Stage 2 – Contracting (i.e. Establishment (or prolongation) of the mandate to the entrusted entity (“delegation act”/ “contribution

agreement” / etc)).

DG NEAR establishes and signs agreements with the organisations assessed and identified under stage 1. A standard agreement model is used for

all EU-financed operations under indirect management with entrusted entities. Where relevant, specificities of eligible entities are addressed in

framework agreements and in some specific cases through the use of separate templates (e.g. World Bank Group).


Main control objectives: Ensuring that the legal framework for the management of the relevant funds is fully compliant and regular (legality &

regularity), delegated to an appropriate entity (best value for public money, economy, efficiency), without any conflicts of interests (anti-fraud

strategy).

Main risks


Coverage, frequency


The establishment (or

prolongation) of the mandate of

the entrusted entity is affected by

legal issues, which would

undermine the legal basis for the

management of the related EU

funds (via that particular entity).

The establishment of the

agreements concerned

(PAGoDAs, Delegation

Agreements, Contribution

Agreements etc.) is

submitted to hierarchical

validation within the

authorising department and

to Inter-service consultation,

including all relevant DGs.

Coverage: 100%

Frequency: once

If risk materialises, all

funds delegated during

the year(s) to the

entrusted entity would be

irregular. Possible impact

100% of budget involved

and significant

reputational

consequences. Economy: Estimation of cost of controls cost of

controls of the mandate.

The Commission has not sufficient

information from independent

sources on the entity’s

management achievements, which

prevents drawing conclusions on

the assurance for the budget

entrusted to the entity – which

may reflect negatively on the

Commission’s governance

reputation and quality of

reporting.

Agreements specify the

control, accounting, audit,

publication, etc. related

requirements in strict

observance of the EU

Financial Regulation

-ad hoc clauses in

framework agreements

- potential escalation of any

major governance-related

issues with entrusted

entities

- referral to OLAF

Coverage: 100%


Stage 3 – Monitoring the implementation

All payment requests and related reports are verified and approved by DG NEAR staff (ex-ante controls). Before any transaction is authorised, the

operational and financial aspects are initiated and verified by two different (operational/financial) services.10 This is the "four eyes" principle of the

Financial Regulation, which DG NEAR, taking into account the specific high risk environment of external aid actions, reinforces by requiring

controls by two separate agents for each of these two stages. Checklists and types of controls are regularly reviewed and updated to respond to

feedback from risk analyses and from field users as well as changes to the regulatory environment.

Additional verification missions to be carried out by external auditors can be contracted by DG NEAR on the basis of a risk analysis.

A - Operations: monitoring, supervision, reporting (“representation” / “control with or around the entity”).

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the Commission is fully and timely informed of any relevant management issues encountered by the

entrusted entity, in order to possibly mitigate any potential financial and/or reputational impacts (legality & regularity, sound financial

management, true and fair view reporting, anti-fraud strategy).

10 These payment requests may be subject to additional ex-ante verifications contracted as part of NEAR's annual audit plans by the Commission as deemed appropriate by the

Authorising Officer by Sub-delegation.


Main risks


Coverage, frequency and depth of

controls

Possible Cost

effectiveness

indicators (3Es)

Due to weak "modalities of

cooperation, supervision &

reporting", the Commission is not

(timely) informed of relevant

management issues encountered

by the entrusted entity, and/or

does not (timely) react upon

notified issues by mitigating them

or by making a reservation for

them – which may reflect

negatively on the Commission’s

governance reputation and quality

of accountability reporting.

Agreement specifying the control,

accounting, audit, publication, etc related

requirements – incl. the modalities on

reporting back relevant and reliable

control results

Monitoring or supervision of the

entrusted entity (e.g. ‘regular’ monitoring

meetings at operational level; review of

reported control results and any

underlying mngt/audit reports;

representation and intervention at the

board, scrutiny of annual report, etc).

Management review of the supervision

results.

If appropriate/needed:

- reinforced monitoring of operational

and/or financial aspects of the entity

- intervention, e.g. via own audits on-

the-spot, by IAS

- potential escalation of any major

governance-related issues with entrusted

entities

- referral to OLAF

Coverage: 100% of the entities are

monitored / supervised.

Frequency: meetings take place

regularly depending on the delegated

activities and delegated entities,

reports submitted at least annually

(depending of contractual provisions).

In case of operational and/or financial

issues, measures are being reinforced.

The depth depends on the mandate of

the (type of) entity, inter alia whether

the Commission has full access to the

entity’s internal control information.

Economy: Estimation

of cost of controls

related to monitoring

of implementation of

operations.


B – Commission contribution: payment or suspension/interruption.

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the Commission fully assesses the management situation at the entrusted entity, before either paying

out the (next) contribution for the operational and/or operating budget of the entity, or deciding to suspend/interrupt the (next) contribution

(legality & regularity, sound financial management, anti-fraud strategy).

Main risks



depth of controls


indicators (3Es)

The Commission pays out the

(next) contribution to the

entrusted entity, while not being

aware of the management issues

that may lead to financial and/or

reputational damage.

Agreement specifying the control,

accounting, audit, publication, etc.

Related requirements – incl.

reporting back

Management review of the

supervision results.

Ex-ante OV and FV, ‘in-depth’ if

need be

Hierarchical validation of

contribution payment and

recovery of non-used operating

budget subsidy

If appropriate/needed:

suspension or interruption of

payments

Coverage: 100% of the

contribution payments.

Frequency: usually annually

but can be more frequent

depending on the contractual

provisions.

The depth depends on the

mandate of the (type of) entity,

inter alia whether the

Commission has full access to

the entity’s internal control

information.

Efficiency: KPIs on implementation

of audit plans, and on ineligible

expenditure detected through ex

post controls


controls related to audits and

verifications.

Annual Control Plans: Verification

of expenditure are planned

annually for ongoing and closed

operations of DG NEAR overall

portfolio. The operations to be

verified are determined through

risk analyses. These controls can

take place before or after

disbursements recognizing

expenditure.

Coverage: > 10% of ongoing or

"recently" closed operations


Stage 4 - Ex-Post controls and Follow-up

Payments for operations in Indirect Management with entrusted entities are included in the population of the RER study undertaken each year for

DG NEAR on representative sampling of closed contracts. Findings from the risk based audits and from the RER study are systematically followed

up by DG NEAR, which takes necessary actions for the recovery of non-eligible expenditures where appropriate.

A - Reviews, audits, verifications and monitoring


undetected after the implementation ex-ante controls (legality & regularity; anti-fraud strategy); addressing systemic weaknesses in the ex-ante

controls, based on the analysis of the findings (sound financial management); Ensuring appropriate accounting of the recoveries to be made


Main risks


Coverage, frequency



(3Es)

The ex-ante controls (as such) fail

to prevent, detect and correct


fraud.



Through a residual error rate

(RER) study a representative

sample of closed operations

is reviewed in order to

determine the effectiveness

of ex-ante controls.

Findings are validated with

fund recipients, used for

possible ex-post corrections

(i.e. recoveries), taken into

consideration for

improvements of ex-ante

controls, and referred to

OLAF where needed.



valid management

conclusions.






grant operations

Supervision missions to

Delegations by independent

staff not involved in the

operational and financial

circuits


sample are determined in

accordance with the



Delegations.


number of SMART recommendations accepted

and described in an action plan


missions


missions


B - Implementing results from ex-post controls

Main control objectives: Ensuring that the results from the ex-post controls lead to effective recoveries (legality & regularity; anti-fraud


Main risks



of controls


indicators (3Es)




Systematic registration of control

results to be implemented.

Financial operational validation of

recovery in accordance with

financial circuits.


Coverage: 100% of final audit

results with a financial impact.

Findings of systemic errors are

considered for corrections of other

projects by the same organisation,

taken into account for future

projects

Effectiveness: All RER detected

are recorded in the audit module,

followed up and closed

Efficiency: time to close audit

module RER entries, amount

recovered and time to implement

action plans following supervision

missions.


follow up of financial

recommendations.


ANNEX 6: Implementation through national or international public-sector bodies and bodies governed by private law with a public sector mission

Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu

r) Justification of the

recourse to indirect centralised management

Justification of the selection of the bodies

Summary description of the implementing tasks entrusted to these bodies


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.37

30

15.0

1

373015 Appui au

renforcement du secteur culturel tunisien

BG

UE

EN

I_C

BC

NE

AR

B 0

3 Tunisia Tunisi

a

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM

PM

Private law

bodies with a public

service mission

6000069973

THE BRITISH COUNCIL ROYAL

CHARTER 18-0

5-2

016

06-0

6-2

016

18-0

7-2

018

05-1

2-2

019

690.0

00,0

0 A part of this action

is implemented in indirect management with an Agency of an EU Member State (British Council) in accordance with Article 58(1)(c) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012. It will focus on activities related to specific objectives 2 ("to promote cultural diversity and access to culture, at local, national, and international, levels") and 3 ("to support freedom of expression and creation, notably of younger generations") of the programme. This implementation modality is used since the EUNIC network (EU National Institutes for Culture), chaired by the British Council in Tunisia, pools together the national institutes of EU Member States in charge of cultural action. Their involvement will allow for a greater visibility of, and synergies among, EU cooperation and bilateral actions of all Member States represented in the EUNIC Tunisia cluster.

The British Council has substantial experience in managing EU programmes and is the only pillar-assessed member of the EUNIC cluster in Tunisia.

Procurement and grant award procedures (Calls for Proposal); commitment of expenditure and execution of payments; and support of administrative and logistical costs. It will also entail technical assistance, training, and transfer of expertise.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.37

60

96.0

1

376096 U-LEAD

with Europe: Ukraine Local Empowerment, Accountability and Development Programme – Component 1

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

SG

UA

Ukraine Ukraine

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM

PM

Private law

bodies with a public

service mission

6000057485

DEUTSCHE GESELLSCHAFT FUR INTERNATIONALE ZUSAMMENARBEIT (GIZ) GMBH

20-0

7-2

016

11-0

8-2

016

30-1

0-2

018

01-0

1-2

016

31-1

2-2

019

2.4

14.3

30,3

1 The recourse to an

indirect centralised management with GIZ was justified in order to be able to work with the Ukrainian Government on policy development and build capacity at the local level

a) Specific sector/thematic expertise. GIZ works for over 20 years on the regional and local level all over Ukraine, and has an established network. GIZ has a good record, working on aspects of decentralised public finance management and public administration reform in Ukraine. b) Management capacities. GIZ showed strong programme management capacities at national level in collaboration with Ukrainian Government, at local level in collaboration with 24 Local Government Development Centers, and a smooth cooperation and information exchange with relevant EU services and participating Member States.

The entrusted entity will carry out the following budget-implementation tasks: public procurement and grant award procedures, concluding and managing the resulting contracts, including making of the related payments.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.37

60

97.0

1

376097 U-LEAD

with Europe: Ukraine Local Empowerment, Accountability and Development Programme Component 2: Administrative service centres and awareness raising of citizens on local self-governance

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

SG

UA

Ukraine Ukraine

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000074277

SWEDISH INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTCOOPERATION AGENCY SIDA

08-0

8-2

016

18-0

8-2

016

13-1

2-2

018

18-0

8-2

016

17-0

4-2

020

2.4

14.3

39,5

0 The recourse to an

indirect centralised management with SIDA was justified in order to be able to improve the delivery of administrative services and develop a relevant software.

Sida has provided support to decentralization and local self-governance on both central and local level for twenty years. This includes innovative solutions of service delivery on local level, creating the legal basis, strengthening capacity for policy dialogue as well as for public financial management. Sida’s current portfolio in Ukraine covers comprehensive work on the local level, in particular gender- responsive budgeting ; introduction of rule of law principles in local service provision; and piloting e-governance solutions to promote transparency, accountability and good governance on local and national levels.



Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.39

79

17.0

1

397

91

7 Nexus

North: support towards strengthening water utilities in the North of the West Bank

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

B 0

1 Occupi

ed Palesti

nian Territor

y

Occupie

d Palestinian Territory

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM

PL Publi

c law bodie

s

600

00

95

503

AGENCE FRANCAI

SE DE DEVELOPPEMEN

T

06

-08

-2018

06

-08

-2018

06

-08

-2018

06

-08

-2018

05

-08

-2021

7.7

50.0

00,0

0 A part of this

action is implemented in indirect management with Agence Française de Developpement (AFD) in accordance with Article 58(1)(c)(v) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012. This implementation entails the support towards strengthened water and energy services in the north of the West Bank. This implementation modality is justified in the light of the close co-operation between the EU and the AFD in the water and energy sector in general and in particular in Tubas in the latest years. AFD has substantial experience in implementing water projects in Palestine and specifically in the north of the West Bank together with experience in the energy efficiency sector.

AFD is one of the most important and active donors and implementing agency in the water and energy sectors in Palestine. AFD (France) is the EU lead donor for energy within the context of the European Joint Strategy 2017-2020.

In the West Bank, technical approach and modalities of the planned intervention have been discussed at length with the Palestinian Energy and Natural Resources Authority (PENRA), the Palestinian Water Authority (PWA), AFD, the Palestinian Energy & Environment Research Centre (PEC), the Joint Water and Sanitation Service Council (JWSSC), the West Bank Water Department (WBWD) and the Tubas District Electricity Company (TDECO). The entrusted entity would carry out, amongst others, the following budget-implementation tasks: monitoring of the project activities and co-ordination with the PA, procurement i.e. ex-ante control, paying, reporting, monitoring and evaluation, visibility.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.39

82

98.0

1

398298 EU4Busi

ness – The EU

Local Currency

Partnership

Initiative: The

European Fund for

Southeast Europe (EFSE)

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

C 0

1 Headquar

ters Easte

rn Europ

e Regio

n

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT

FUR WIEDERA

UFBAU 19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-0

6-2

039

28.3

20.0

00,0

0 Indirect centralised

management is the standard modality for projects adopted in the framework of the Neighbourhood Investment Platform (NIP)

KfW is an eligible EFI under NIP, with long term experience in energy and energy efficiency and well established cooperation with the beneficiary.

The EU contribution under this Agreement will be used to subscribe the newly issued European Eastern Neighbourhood L shares that will act as dedicated share class to support local currency lending and to subscribe C Shares that jointly with other investors will enable the financing of EFSE projects in the Eastern Partnership countries.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.39

82

98.0

1

398298 EU4Busi

ness – The EU Local

Currency Partnersh

ip Initiative:

The European Fund for Southeast Europe (EFSE)

BG

UE

EN

I_C

BC

NE

AR

C 0

1 Headquar

ters Easte

rn Europ

e Regio

n

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT FUR

WIEDERAUFBAU 1

9-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-0

6-2

039

22.0

00.0

00,0



KfW is an eligible EFI under NIP, with long term experience in energy and energy efficiencyand well established cooperation with the beneficiary.

The EU contribution ofunder this Agreement will be used to subscribe the newly issued European Eastern Neighbourhood L shares that will act as dedicated share class to support local currency lending and to subscribe C Shares that jointly with other investors will enable the financing of EFSE projects in the Eastern Partnership countries.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

06

20.0

1

400620 Conventi

on de Délégation pour la mise en oeuvre

du program

me PASA-

EF

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

B 0

3 Algeria Algeri

a

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000509044

AGENCE FRANCAIS

E D'EXPERTI

SE TECHNIQU

E INTERNATI

ONALE

13-0

9-2

018

28-0

9-2

018

13-0

9-2

018

01-1

0-2

018

30-0

9-2

022

5.8

00.0

00,0

0 Indirect

management in accordance with Article 58 (1) c) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) N° 966/2012 is used as it allows a deeper impact at local level, favour networking and sharing of experiences. In addition, this modality contributes to the enhancement of the EU / EU Member States partnership with the Algerian partner.

This implementation modality is justified because EF has organizational and technical capacities, as well as a logistical capacity in terms of mobilizing the necessary expertise in an efficient and fast manner, in full adequacy with the implementation needs of the project. In particular, EF has already participated in the implementation of several projects or programmes related to one or more project components.

Procurement and grant award procedures; commitment of expenditure and execution of payments; and support of administrative and logistical costs.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

06

76.0

1

400676 Conventi

on de Délégation pour la mise en oeuvre

du program

me PASA-

GIZ

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

B 0

3 Algeria Algeri

a DAG

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PM Private

law bodies with a public

service mission

6000057485

DEUTSCHE

GESELLSCHAFT FUR INTERNATI

ONALE ZUSAMMENARBEIT

(GIZ) GMBH

01-1

0-2

018

01-1

0-2

018

01-1

0-2

018

01-1

0-2

018

30-0

9-2

022

8.4

00.0

00,0

0 Indirect

management in accordance with Article 58 (1) c) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) N° 966/2012 is used as it allows a deeper impact at local level, favour networking and sharing of experiences. In addition, this modality contributes to the enhancement of the EU / EU Member States partnership with the Algerian partner.

This implementation modality is justified because GIZ has organizational and technical capacities, as well as a logistical capacity in terms of mobilizing the necessary expertise in an efficient and fast manner, in full adequacy with the implementation needs of the project. In particular, GIZ has already participated in the implementation of several projects or programmes related to one or more project components.

Procurement and grant award procedures; commitment of expenditure and execution of payments; and support of administrative and logistical costs .


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

09

07.0

1

400907 To

Improve the

Innovative

Ecosystem and boost

start-ups creation

BG

UE

IPA

2

NE

AR

D 0

4 Albania Alban

ia

CO

N

Contr

ibutio

n A

gre

em

ent

IM PM Private


service mission

6000057485

DEUTSCHE



(GIZ) GMBH

24-0

9-2

018

01-1

0-2

018

24-0

9-2

018

01-1

0-2

018

30-0

9-2

021

6.6

00.0

00,0

0 This

implementation modality has been selected to increase donors’ coordination and aid effectiveness and benefit from donors’ comparative advantage and expertise in the sector.

The reasons for choosing GIZ are: a) experience in support to innovative eco-systems, b) in-house capacity and easy access to specialized expertise partnerships, including for FabLabs, financial instruments and pre-incubation support c) sub-granting experiences with innovation grants matching and voucher schemes

GIZ shall be responsible for carrying out the tasks relating to the implementation. In particular, the entrusted entity/ies shall be responsible for the contracting, implementation, information and visibility, monitoring and reporting of IPA II activities, and the evaluation thereof whenever relevant, in accordance with the principle of sound financial management, and for ensuring the legality and regularity of the expenditure incurred in the implementation of the programme.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

13

48.0

1

401348 Green

Economy:

Sustainable

Mountain Tourism

and Organic

Agriculture

(GRETA)

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

C 0

1 Georgia Geor

gia

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PM Private


service mission

6000298306

AUSTRIAN DEVELOP

MENT AGENCY

GMBH 11-1

2-2

018

11-1

2-2

018

11-1

2-2

018

11-1

2-2

018

10-0

4-2

023

3.0

00.0

00,0

0 Indirect

management with Member State agencies in accordance with Article58(1)(c )of Regulation(EU, Euratom) No966/2012. This implementation modality is foreseen under component 3 'Greater business sophistication' of the Action Dcoument for Economic and Business Development in Georgia (AAP 2017).

The entrusted entity was selected after negotiations resulting from a call for expresion of interest addressed to all EU Member states eligible agencies (pillar assessed) . ADA has experience in agriculture and regional development. It has well-established relationships with key national and regional stakeholders. Austrian expertise has also supported the preparation of the Strategy for the development of High Mountain Areas of Georgia.

The EU and Sweden delegate ADA with the management of the EU's/SIDA financial contribution. ADA will carry out the following budget-implementation tasks: grants, procurement and hiring of external experts.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

13

49.0

1

401349 Clusters

4 Development -

Better

Business Sophistication in Georgia

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

C 0

1 Georgia Geor

gia

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PM Private


service mission

6000057485

DEUTSCHE



(GIZ) GMBH

11-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

11-1

2-2

018

01-0

7-2

019

31-0

1-2

023

5.3

00.0

00,0

0 Indirect

management with Member State agencies inaccordance with Article58(1)(c ) of Regulation(EU, Euratom) No966/2012 . This implementation modality is foreseen under component 3 'Greater business sophistication' of the Action Document Economic and Business Development in Georgia (AAP 2017).

The entrusted entity was selected after negotiations resulting from a call for expresion of interest addressed to all EU Member states eligible agencies (pillar assessed) . GIZ has the necessary organisational, human capacity and a long standing experience in the implementation of projects for the sustainable economic development in Georgia and in the Eastern Patnership region, primarily focused on private and sector development. GIZ is very familiar with the country context; closely cooperates with the authorities and efficiently interacts with the Delegation of the EU to Georgia.

The task of overall project implementation is delegated by the European Commission in a Multi-Donor Action with a BMZ contribution, to GIZ, who will carry out the following budget-implementation tasks: grants, procurement and hiring of external experts.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

14

95.0

1

401495 MSME

Promotion

Program

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

B 0

3 Egypt Egypt D

AG

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT FUR

WIEDERAUFBAU 1

9-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

01-0

1-2

019

31-1

2-2

023

15.4

02.0

00,0


management is the standard modality for projects adopted in the framework of the Neighbourhood Investment Platform (NIP). The project was given a positive opinion by the NIP Board on 22/06/2018 and was approved by Financing Decisions C(2017)4638 as amended by C(2017)8590 and C(2018)8631.

KfW is an eligible EFI under NIP, with a recognised experience in MSMEs financing, financial inclusion and innovative finance in Egypt and the region. KfW has a deep knowledge of the country's financial institutions and functioning (including the Project Executing Agency MSMEDA) and a permanent presence in Egypt. KfW has a good track record of socio-economic projects; through this action start-ups and microfinance NGOs will be the main beneficiaries.

KfW is co-financing the action. KfW will act as Lead Finance Institution and will be responsible for the monitoring, implementation and evaluation of the action. The action is composed by a credit line, an investment grant and technical assistance to facilitate the investments in a holistic manner (consulting services for supporting an on-line platform and promoting an innovation environment, establishment and seed funding of an insurance fund for loans, advisory services to start-ups and MFIs-NGO, communication and visibility plan).


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

17

28.0

1

401728 Green for

Growth - Extension

to Neighbou

rhood East II

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

C 0

1 Headquar

ters Easte

rn Europ

e Regio

n

DAG

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT FUR

WIEDERAUFBAU 1

9-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-0

6-2

039

6.1

57.1

51,0



KfW is an eligible EFI under NIP, with long term experience in energy and energy efficiencyand well established cooperation with the beneficiary.

The EU contribution is used for subscription for C shares in the Fund with the objective of supporitng investments in energy efficiency and renewables in EaP countries. KfW also implement technical assistance activities for the Fund.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

24

75.0

1

402475 Better

Commercial Law

and Legal Practice

in Georgia

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

C 0

1 Georgia Geor

gia

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PM Private


service mission

6000057485

DEUTSCHE



(GIZ) GMBH

11-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

11-1

2-2

018

01-0

1-2

019

31-1

0-2

020

1.3

00.0

00,0

0 Indirect

management with Member State agencies inaccordance with Article58(1)(c )ofRegulation(EU, Euratom) No966/2012. This implementation modality is foreseen under component 1 'Fairer and faster ligitations in commercial matters' under the Action Document Economic and Business Development in Georgia (AAP 2017).

The entrusted entity was selected after negotiations resulting from a call for expresion of interest addressed to all EU Member states eligible agencies (pillar assessed) . GIZ possesses high and specialised technical and managerial capacity, extensive experience in developing civil, administrative and commercial legal frameworks in Georgia and high reputation and engagement with the beneficiary institutions, gained significantly through its long term programme entitled "Legal approximation towards European standards in the South Caucasus", a part of which has been supported by the EU under a project entitled "Support to the Development of Private and Adminsitrative Law Systme in Georgia".

GIZ will carry out the following budget-implementation tasks: grants, procurement and/or hiring international experts.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

25

31.0

1

402531 Strengthe

ning of the

Statistical System

of Kosovo, 2019-2022

BG

UE

IPA

2

NE

AR

D 0

3 Kosovo

(under UNSCR 1244/99)

Kosovo

(under

UNSCR

1244/99)

CON

Contr

ibutio

n A

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000074277

SWEDISH INTERNATI

ONAL DEVELOPMENTCOOPERATION AGENCY

SIDA

19-1

1-2

018

07-1

2-2

018

19-1

1-2

018

01-0

5-2

019

30-0

4-2

023

2.0

00.0

00,0

0 This

implementation modality has been selected to increase donors’ coordination and aid effectiveness.

SIDA has significant experience and is a longstanding partner of the Kosovo Agency for Statistics (KAS) in the statistical sector

(i) procurement of ancillary technical assistance, (ii) procurement of assistance related to software development and supply of hardware and (iii) procurement of statistical surveys.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

26

74.0

1

402

67

4 Citizen

s' Empowerment

in the Republi

c of Moldov

a

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

C 0

1 Moldov

a Moldova D

AG

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM P

M Priva

te law

bodies

with a

public

service

mission

600

00

57

485

DEUTSCHE

GESELLSCHAFT

FUR INTERNATIONALE ZUSAMMENARBEI

T (GIZ) GMBH

19

-12

-2018

28

-12

-2018

19

-12

-2018

01

-01

-2019

31

-12

-2021

4.9

00.0

00,0

0 Indirect

management with Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) in accordance with Article 58(1)(c) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012. Given the situation in the country, that implementation modality appears to be the most relevant one to achieve impact and leverage in this specific sector and for that type of actions. This implementation entails entrusting GIZ with the implementation of the action on Citizens' Empowerment in Moldova.

• GIZ MLPS has gained substantial experience in the engagement of citizens in participatory planning, accompanying procurement and improvement of public service in Moldova since 2010. Given GIZ extensive experience of working with local authorities in Moldova (acquired in particular through MLPS), GIZ is well-placed to create a space for citizens and civil society in the local and regional decision-making process. Through this action, CSOs will have a mandate to directly participate in existing decision making processes such as supervising procurement with RDCs and Local Public Administrations. • GIZ has extensive experience in providing capacity development to CSOs worldwide and will be able to use this experience to carry out the grant component of this action. In this context capacity development activities are planned such as organising and carrying out backstopping, quality assurance, trainings, workshops,

The entrusted entity would carry out the following budget-implementation tasks: • Managing all necessary technical assistance to Civil Society Organisations; • Capacity development activities such as organising and carrying out backstopping, quality assurance, trainings, workshops, guidelines, studies, etc.; • Prepare and manage grants to CSOs; • Conclude and manage the contracts with CSOs, including making relevant payments.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

29

11.0

1

402911 Aligning

Education with

Labour Market

Needs - II

BG

UE

IPA

2

NE

AR

D 0

3 Kosovo

(under UNSCR

1244/99)

Kosovo

(under

UNSCR

1244/99)

DAG

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PM Private


service mission

6000298306

AUSTRIAN DEVELOP

MENT AGENCY

GMBH 26-1

1-2

018

11-1

2-2

018

22-1

1-2

018

01-0

3-2

019

28-0

2-2

023

3.8

00.0

00,0

0 This

implementation modality has been selected to increase donors’ coordination and aid effectiveness.

ADA has significant experience in the sector. ADA is a longstanding partner of Kosovo in the education sector.

(i) Procurement and installation of relevant equipment and training materials where this is needed (Vocational Schools, Vocational Training Centres). (ii) Procurement of assistance for training in the use of supplied equipment. (iii) Procurement of assistance in the integration of the Employment Management Information System with the Education Management Information System and (iii) Procurement of labour market surveys.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

36

69.0

1

403669 'Promotin

g Transparency and Combatti

ng Corruptio

n at National

Level

BG

UE

EN

I_C

BC

NE

AR

B 0

1 Lebanon Leba

non

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000509044

AGENCE FRANCAIS

E D'EXPERTI

SE TECHNIQU

E INTERNATI

ONALE

20-1

2-2

018

07-0

1-2

019

20-1

2-2

018

01-0

3-2

019

28-0

2-2

022

2.4

71.2

80,5

9 Indirect

Management with pillar assessed institutions in accordance with Article 58(1)(c) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No. 966/2012 since the implementation entails budget implementation tasks in supporting the ministries, control bodies and public institutions in fighting corruption, promoting good governance . In addition to providing financial support to CSOs in the field of access to information .

The Selection of Agence Francaise D'Expertise Technique Internationale is justified by the following: 1-Extensive experience in each of the corresponding areas of intervention ( Anti-corruption, Transparency and Accountability). 2- The agency has permanent presence in Lebanon and count on qualified staff. 3-It is a member of EUNIDA Network, therefore it is able to deploy a wide range of European expertise. 4-The agency has the capacity to launch Calls for Proposals and tenders for procurement contracts.

The entrusted entity would carry out the following budget-implementation tasks: supervise and manage undertaking of the action and enter into contracts and/or Grant Agreements in accordance with its policies and procedures.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

36

70.0

1

403670 Program

me d’Appui à

la Politique

de la Ville (PROVIL

LE 2)

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

B 0

3 Tunisia Medit

erranean

Region

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n

agre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000095503

AGENCE FRANCAIS

E DE DEVELOPPEMENT 1

7-1

2-2

018

20-1

2-2

018

17-1

2-2

018

20-1

2-2

018

19-0

4-2

024

30.6

90.0

00,0

0 Blending/Neighbour

hood Investment Platform (NIP) procedures

Blending/Neighbourhood Investment Platform (NIP) procedures (proposal from AFD presented and approved at NIP Board meeting of 14 December 2017)

Supervision of implementation of activities, procurement, budgetary implementation tasks

SC

R.C

TR

.40

41

30.0

1

404130 ''SANAD

MENA Fund for

Micro-, Small

and Medium

Enterprises

(Phase III)''

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

B 0

2 Headquar

ters Mediterran

ean Regio

n

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT

FUR WIEDERA

UFBAU 19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-0

6-2

039

23.4

90.0

00,0

0 Blending/Neighbou

rhood Investment Platform (NIP) procedures

Blending/Neighbourhood Investment Platform (NIP) procedures, KfW being one of the eligible Finance Institutions under the NIP.



Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

41

65.0

1

404165 Public

Finance Manage

ment Support

Programme for

Ukraine (EU4PFM

), Components 3 and

4.

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

SG

UA

Ukraine Ukraine

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000456443

VIESOJI ISTAIGA

CENTRINE PROJEKT

U VALDYMO AGENTUR

A

18-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-1

2-2

022

29.0

00.0

00,0

0 This method of

implementation was chosen in view of the important size and complexity of the EU4PFM programme and the specificities of the targetted sector which required the channelling of the EU funds through entities with relevant expertise and organizational capacity.

CPMA Lithuania can provide relevant experience to the Ukrainian government officials as it shares a similar historical background of transition towards a democratic and rules-based system of financial governance. Since Lithuania’s membership in the EU, the CPMA has relevant experience in implementation and administrative – financial management of nearly 50 EU Twinning, grant and technical assistance projects. It is currently also implementing some EU-financed projects in Ukraine in the customs and border management areas. Furthermore, Ukraine is a priority country for Lithuania in terms of development cooperation agenda.



Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

42

04.0

1

404204 Georgian

Energy Sector

Refprm (GESR)

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

C 0

1 Georgia Geor

gia

CO

N

Contr

ibutio

n A

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT

FUR WIEDERA

UFBAU 19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-1

2-2

024

300.0

00,0



KfW is an eligible EFI under NIP, with long term experience in energy and energy efficiency in Georgia and well established cooperation with the beneficiary.

The EU grant, with co-financing by KfW and AFD, will be used for Technical assistance to support the Georgian authorities in the fulfilment of the policy reform measures and its implementation. It will also cover communicatoin and visibility activities regarding energy efficiency in the context of the Energy Sector Reform in Georgia.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

42

04.0

1

404204 Georgian

Energy Sector

Refprm (GESR)

BG

UE

EN

I_C

BC

NE

AR

C 0

1 Georgia Geor

gia

CO

N

Contr

ibutio

n A

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT

FUR WIEDERA

UFBAU 19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-1

2-2

024

8.5

00.0

00,0



KfW is an eligible EFI under NIP, with long term experience in energy and energy efficiency in Georgia and well established cooperation with the beneficiary.

The EU grant, with co-financing by KfW and AFD, will be used for Technical assistance to support the Georgian authorities in the fulfilment of the policy reform measures and its implementation. It will also cover communicatoin and visibility activities regarding energy efficiency in the context of the Energy Sector Reform in Georgia.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

42

27.0

1

404227 Water

Supply and

Sanitation in Rural and Semi

Urban Communi

ties of Adjara

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

C 0

1 Georgia Geor

gia CON

Contr

ibutio

n A

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT

FUR WIEDERA

UFBAU 19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-1

2-2

024

7.3

60.0

00,0



KfW is an eligible EFI under NIP, with long term experience in the water sector in Georgia and well established cooperation with the beneficiary. KfW was involved in the comprehensive rehabilitation and modernisation programme implemented in the City of Batumi and surrounding urban areas which included the rehabilitation and extension of the water supply and waste water collection and treatemen system.

The EU contribution for the investment Grant is especially ear-marked for water supply and wastewater treatment components in rural areas of the regions of the Action. The contribution for the Technical Assistance will co-finance ther services of a Consultatnt.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

42

97.0

1

404297 Appui à

la gestion durable

des ressource

s halieutiqu

es et aquacole

s

BG

UE

EN

I_C

BC

NE

AR

B 0

3 Tunisia Tunisi

a DAG

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000095503

AGENCE FRANCAIS


1-1

2-2

018

27-1

2-2

018

21-1

2-2

018

01-0

1-2

019

31-1

0-2

023

6.0

00.0

00,0


is implemented in indirect management with Agence Française de Developpement (AFD) in accordance with Article 58(1)(c) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012. This implementation entails technical assistance, studies, training and supply of equipment necessary to reach the objectives of the support programme for the sustainable management of fishing resources. It will directly contribute to the PACE's specific objective 3: to modernise the agriculture and fishing sectors and ensure that this modernisation is based on the principle of sustainable management of natural resources.

The AFD is a key stakeholder of the support to the programme for the sustainable management of fishing resources.

All tasks relevant to the implementation of the support programme for the sustainable management of fishing resources, including procurement and grant award procedures, commitment of expenditure and execution of payments, and support of administrative and logistical costs.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

43

70.0

1

404370 EU

Support to the

East of Ukraine

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

SG

UA

Ukraine Ukraine

DAG

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT

FUR WIEDERA

UFBAU 19-1

2-2

018

20-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

20-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

022

9.5

00.0

00,0

0 This projects

requires working through a network of local partner banks and thereby decrease their investment risks and increase trusts of these banks with MSMEs. Only organisations the EU works with through indirect centralised management are able to comply with this requirement.

KfW is amongst the sole IFIs that has been mandated since 2003 to implement projects in support to MSMEs in Ukraine. Furthermore, KfW already has proven experience in the East of Ukraine, has worked with partner banks there and has presented the double advantage of working with leasing products and institutions.



Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

44

17.0

1

404417 Augment

ation de la

contribution

apportée par l'UE à

l'action du

PRIMEA suivant

les dispositio

ns de la conventio

n de financem

ent ENI/2017/040-704

du Program

me d'Appui à

la Compétiti

vité et aux

Exportation.

BG

UE

EN

I_C

BC

NE

AR

B 0

3 Tunisia Tunisi

a DAG

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000095503

AGENCE FRANCAIS


1-1

2-2

018

27-1

2-2

018

21-1

2-2

018

26-1

2-2

018

25-1

2-2

022

4.0

00.0

00,0


is implemented in indirect management with Agence Française de Developpement (AFD) in accordance with Article 58(1)(c) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012. This implementation entails the support to the management process of the Agency for the promotion of agricultural investments (APIA) as part of the programme to relaunch investments and modernise agricultural businesses (PRIMEA) funded under the Neighbourhood Investment Platform (NIP). It will extend its reach to the entire Tunisian territory. The contract will directly contribute to the PACE's specific objective 3: to modernise the agriculture and fishing sectors and ensure that this modernisation is based on the principle of sustainable management of natural resources.

The PRIMEA programme was initiated by the AFD.

All tasks relevant to the extension of PRIMEA to the entire Tunisian territory, including procurement and grant award procedures, commitment of expenditure and execution of payments, and support of administrative and logistical costs.


Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

44

48.0

1

404448 Centrale

solaire NOOR Midelt I

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

B 0

3 Morocco Moro

cco

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT

FUR WIEDERA

UFBAU 19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-1

2-2

024

30.5

50.0

00,0

0 Blending/Neighbou


Blending/Neighbourhood Investment Platform (NIP) procedures (proposal from KfW presented and approved at NIP Board meeting of 22 June 2018)


SC

R.C

TR

.40

44

49.0

1

404449 Centrale

solaire NOOR

Midelt II

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

B 0

3 Morocco Moro

cco

DA

G

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT

FUR WIEDERA

UFBAU 19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-1

2-2

024

30.5

50.0

00,0

0 Blending/Neighbou


Blending/Neighbourhood Investment Platform (NIP) procedures (proposal from KfW presented and approved at NIP Board meeting of 22 June 2018)



Co

m L

2

Lo

cal

Ke

y

Co

ntr

ac

t N

um

ber

Contract Title F

ina

ncia

l M

an

ag

em

en

t

Are

a

Pro

gra

mm

es

co

nc

ern

ed

(In

str

um

en

t)

En

tity

in

C

harg

e

Delegation in

Charge

Benefitting zone

LC

Ty

pe

LC

Ty

pe

de

scri

pti

on

BM

T Imp

lemented by

Code

Implemented by

LE

F

Complete Name O

rig

inal

co

ntr

act

EC

Sig

natu

re

Date

O

rig

inal

Co

ntr

ac

t

Co

ntr

ac

tor

Sig

natu

re

Date

A

uth

ori

zin

g

Off

icer

Sig

natu

re

Date

(L

ate

st

in t

he y

ear)

S

tart

da

te

En

d d

ate

Co

m L

2

Acce

pte

d

Am

ou

nt

(Eu





SC

R.C

TR

.40

44

78.0

1

404478 2018 NIP

decision share -

Green for Growth -

Extension to

Neighbourhood

East II

BG

UE

EN

I

NE

AR

C 0

1 Headquar

ters Easte

rn Europ

e Regio

n

DAG

Dele

gatio

n a

gre

em

ent

IM PL Public

law bodies

6000075251

KREDITANSTALT

FUR WIEDERA

UFBAU 19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

19-1

2-2

018

18-0

6-2

039

5.1

62.8

49,0



KfW is an eligible EFI under NIP, with long term experience in energy and energy efficiency and well established cooperation with the beneficiary.

The EU contribution is used for subscription for C shares in the Fund with the objective of supporitng investments in energy efficiency and renewables in EaP countries. KfW also implement technical assistance activities for the Fund.


ANNEX 7: EAMR of the Union Delegations

22 DG NEAR Delegations have submitted an EAMR report for the year 2018:

NEAR A TR Turkey IPA

NEAR B DZ Algeria ENI

NEAR B EG Egypt ENI

NEAR B PS West Bank and Gaza Strip ENI

NEAR B IL Israel ENI

NEAR B JO Jordan ENI

NEAR B LB Lebanon ENI

NEAR B MA Morocco ENI

NEAR B SY Syria ENI

NEAR B TN Tunisia ENI

NEAR C AM Armenia ENI

NEAR C AZ Azerbaijan ENI

NEAR C BY Belarus ENI

NEAR C GE Georgia ENI

NEAR C MD Moldova ENI

SGUA UA Ukraine ENI

NEAR D AL Albania IPA

NEAR D BA Bosnia and Herzegovina IPA

NEAR D XK Kosovo IPA

NEAR D ME Montenegro IPA

NEAR D MK The Republic of North Macedonia IPA

NEAR D RS Serbia IPA


ANNEX 8: AOSD Report – Regional Trust Fund in

Response to the Syrian Crisis

2018

Annual AOSD Report for EU Trust Funds

The European Union

Regional Trust Fund in

response to the Syrian

crisis


Table of Contents

1. Policy and/or operational highlights of the year .............................................. 108

1.1 Context of the Syrian refugee crisis in 2018 ...................................... 108

1.2 The Trust Fund .............................................................................. 109

1.3 Policy highlights of the year ............................................................ 110

1.4 Operational highlights of the year .................................................... 111

2. Programming, implementation and results (including evaluations) ................... 112

2.1 Trust Fund sectors ......................................................................... 113

2.2 Communication and visibility ........................................................... 116

2.3 EUTF Mid-Term Strategic Evaluation ................................................. 117

2.4 EUTF Results monitoring ................................................................. 118

3. Financial report .......................................................................................... 124

3.1 Amounts pledged and received ........................................................ 124

3.2 Amounts paid ................................................................................ 126

3.3 Beneficiaries and amounts contracted .............................................. 127

3.4 KPI analysis .................................................................................. 129

4. Internal control .......................................................................................... 129

4.1 Control results ............................................................................... 129

4.1.1 Control effectiveness as regards legality and regularity .................... 129

4.1.2 Fraud prevention, detection and correction ..................................... 130

4.2 Observations and recommendations made by IAS/ECA ....................... 130

4.3 Assessment of the effectiveness of the internal control systems .......... 131

4.4 Conclusions as regards assurance .................................................... 131

5. Declaration of assurance (and reservations) .................................................. 132


POLICY AND/OR OPERATIONAL HIGHLIGHTS

OF THE YEAR

o Context of the Syrian refugee crisis in 2018

The conflict in Syria continues to drive the largest refugee crisis in the world. Over

5.7 million Syrians are registered as refugees in neighbouring countries as of 31

December 2018 (UNHRC, 2019). Despite the exceptional generosity demonstrated by

host countries, host communities, and donors, many Syrian refugee families across

the region continue to lack the necessary resources to meet their basic needs.

Violence and human suffering have increased in Syria, with military escalation by

parties to the conflict further increasing to an alarming extent in 2018. The civilian

population has continued to endure the bulk of the suffering caused by the conflict,

including severe, constant and blatant violations of International Humanitarian Law

(IHL) and human rights law, in particular: deliberate and indiscriminate attacks on

civilians and civilian infrastructure, reported use of chemical weapons, forced

displacement, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, and torture, including

sexual exploitation and abuse and gender-based violence.

More than 12 million people have now been displaced, including more than 5.7 million

refugees hosted in neighboring countries and 6.6 million displaced inside Syria. There

was no large-scale arrival of refugees into neighbouring countries over the past year.

3.7 million Syrian refugees are registered in Turkey (recent increase mainly related to

new-borns), about 1 million in Lebanon and 0.7 million in Jordan. Across the region,

borders and admission practices remained closely managed, affecting the ability of

many individuals to seek the protection they need. At the same time, overall

conditions for safe, voluntary and dignified return are still not in place due to ongoing

and renewed armed conflict in Syria and uncertain conditions for returnees (available

services, property rights, personal security). Nearly 13.1 million people, almost half of

whom are children, urgently need humanitarian assistance and protection inside the

country.

The living conditions for Syrian refugees across the region continued to be extremely

challenging in 2018. Many of the refugees have been in the host country for four or

more years and struggle to make ends meet. While the vast majority of Syrian

refugees continue to be geographically integrated with host communities in urban,

peri-urban and rural areas, they are increasingly vulnerable and face extremely high

rates of poverty.

In Turkey, over 64 per cent of refugee households living outside of camps live below

the poverty line; 80 per cent of Syrian refugees living outside of camps in Jordan are

living below the poverty line; more than 76 per cent of Syrian refugees are below the

poverty line in Lebanon; and 82 per cent of registered Syrian refugees in Egypt are

either highly or severely vulnerable, meaning they are unable to afford the minimum

requirements for a dignified life. While the overall situation for refugees in Iraq is

somewhat better, the situation is deteriorating - particularly for those who do not

have the ability to obtain an income - and 37 per cent of refugees are now below the

poverty line.

Refugees continue to face a number of specific challenges across the region, including

limited livelihoods opportunities, barriers to accessing services, exhaustion of savings,

and the adoption of negative coping mechanisms, which further exacerbates the


residual protection risks they face. Broader political and social pressures can also

affect stability between displaced populations and host communities in countries

across the region.

The difficult situation for Syrian refugees across the region has been compounded by

the broader challenges facing many host countries. During 2018, the real gross

domestic product (GDP) growth in the region demonstrated slow growth at 2 per cent

in Jordan (down from 2.3 per cent last year), 2 per cent in Lebanon, -0.8 per cent

(down from 1.5 per cent previous year) in Iraq, 4.2 per cent in Egypt, and 7.2 per

cent in Turkey (World Bank, 2018). This relatively slow growth is at least in part

attributable to the Syrian conflict and refugee presence. While there are also signs of

economic recovery in the region, the unemployment rate remains high in these

countries: 12.1 per cent in Egypt, 11.32 per cent in Turkey, 14.9 per cent in Jordan,

8.2 per cent in Iraq and 6.6 per cent in Lebanon.

These countries have been very generous in hosting the refugees since the crisis

began, however there are signs of growing host community fatigue as vulnerable host

community members see the refugees as competitors for lower-skilled jobs and

depleting limited resources (natural and financial) provided by the governments and

international community, making it challenging for governments and municipalities to

provide basic services to both populations.

o The Trust Fund

The EU Regional Trust Fund in Response to the Syrian Crisis was established

with the signature of its Constitutive Agreement on 15 December 2014 by the

European Union (represented by the Commission) and one Member State (Italy).11 Its

aim is to address longer-term resilience needs of Syrian refugees and internally

displaced persons (IDPs) in neighbouring countries, as well as supporting host

communities and their administrations, principally in Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan, Iraq

and the Western Balkans through the provision of basic education and child

protection, better access to healthcare, improved water and waste-water

infrastructure, as well as support to resilience, economic opportunities and social

inclusion. Today the Fund is also one of the key mechanisms through which the EU

“Compacts” with Jordan and Lebanon are implemented. The Fund has been

established for an initial duration of 60 months, and it is proposed to be extended for

another 12 months, in order to meet continuing needs.

The EUTF aims to bring a more coherent and integrated EU response to the crisis by

merging various EU financial instruments and contributions from Member States into

one single flexible mechanism allowing for quick disbursement.

In line with the priorities set out at the London conference on Syria in 2016, the

Brussels conferences on the Future of Syria and the Region in April 2017 and April

2018, and the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework adopted in 2016 as part

of the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, the main objectives of the EU

Trust Fund are to foster more self-reliance of refugees, helping them thrive, not just

survive, while at the same time assisting the countries and communities hosting them.

In doing so, the EU Trust Fund bridges the nexus between humanitarian relief and

11 Establishment decision C (2014) 9615 of 10.12.2014 as amended by decision C(2015) 9691 of 21.12.2015.

The Constitutive Agreement was revised in March 2016.

http://www.globalcrrf.org/

https://www.unhcr.org/57e39d987

https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/neighbourhood/pdf/key-documents/syria_2014_9615_f1_comission_decision793137.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/neighbourhood/pdf/key-documents/syria/2015-mod-eu-trust-fund-syrian-crisis-establishment-commission-decision.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/neighbourhood/countries/syria/madad/20160526-revised-madad-fund-constitutive-agreement.pdf


development aid:

It addresses early recovery, as well as resilience and self-reliance needs of

refugees and IDPs, in a manner that also benefits local communities, and preserves the stability of neighbouring countries.

It supports countries hosting refugees by investing in health and education,

economic development, job creation and integration into labour markets, for

both local communities and refugees, especially vulnerable groups such as

women and youth.

With contributions and pledges from 22 Member States and Turkey, amounting to

over EUR 179.16 million, and contributions from various EU instruments, the Fund

has reached a total volume of more than EUR 1.65 billion to date. Projects

focusing on education, livelihoods and health covering a total of EUR 1.55 billion have

already been approved, out of which EUR 1.23 billion have been contracted to the

Trust Fund’s implementing partners on the ground. Although the Fund’s coverage

continues to include the Western Balkans and Turkey, new programme operations are

not foreseen at this stage in these locations as further EU support will be pursued

through the IPA instrument in the Western Balkans and the Facility for Refugees in

Turkey ensuring coherence and programme sustainability.

o Policy highlights of the year

The EU remains the leading donor in the international response to the crisis, with

over EUR 16.9 billion from the EU and Member States collectively allocated in

humanitarian and development assistance since the start of the conflict in 2011.

Of this, the European Commission’s support in response to the Syrian crisis has by

now exceeded EUR 5 billion, including immediate humanitarian assistance delivered

by ECHO, and non-humanitarian aid, provided through EU cooperation instruments

(ENI, IPA, IcSP), and, increasingly through the EU Regional Trust Fund in

response to the Syrian crisis to respond to immediate and medium-term needs.

At the 2016 London conference Supporting Syria and the Region the EU and the

Member States pledged over EUR 3 billion for the year 2016 to assist people inside

Syria as well as Syrian refugees and the communities hosting them in neighbouring

countries. The European Commission pledges for 2016 to 2018 amounted to EUR

1.473 billion.

This commitment was confirmed at the Brussels I (4-5 April 2017) and the Brussels II

Conferences on "Supporting the Future of Syria and the Region". The Brussels II

conference was held on 24-25 April 2018, during which the international community

pledged EUR 3.5 billion in funding to support humanitarian, resilience and

development activities in 2018 for the Syria crisis response, and EUR 2.7 billion for

the period 2018-2020. In addition, some international financial institutions and

donors announced around USD 21.2 billion (EUR 17.2 billion) in loans, of which

elements are on concessional terms.

For Lebanon, the European Commission has allocated more than EUR 1

billion in assistance to refugees and vulnerable communities since the beginning of

the crisis. This now includes EUR 522 million through the EU Regional Trust

Fund in response to the Syrian crisis, of which EUR 165 million in 2018, to

address longer-term resilience needs of Syrian refugees and support Lebanese host

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/neighbourhood/countries/syria/madad/index_en.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/neighbourhood/countries/syria/madad/index_en.htm

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/04/05-syria-conference-co-chairs-declaration/

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/04/05-syria-conference-co-chairs-declaration/


communities and the national administration with a focus on increasing access for

refugees to education and training, as well as livelihoods and health.

The EU programmes are aligned with priorities in the Lebanese Government's

response plan to the consequences of the influx of refugees from Syria, and

integrated in the various documents such as 1) the Regional Refugee and Resilience

Plan (3RP), 2) the Lebanon Crisis Response Plan (LCRP) and 3) the Reaching All

Children with Education in Lebanon (RACE) launched by the Minister of Education to

ensure vulnerable school-aged children affected by the Syria crisis access quality

formal and non-formal learning opportunities.

For Jordan, the European Commission’s total funding in response to the

Syrian crisis amounts to EUR 1.2 billion addressing both refugees and host

communities’ needs. This support package includes notably EUR 306 million of

humanitarian aid and EUR 229 million of development assistance from the ENI, as

well as now also EUR 301 million from the EU Regional Trust Fund in response

to the Syrian crisis.

This aid wass provided under the umbrella of the EU-Jordan Compact during its

period of validity which advocated a holistic approach for dealing with the Syrian

refugee crisis. These principles continue to apply and the approach builds on the

Jordan Response Plan (JRP) and the Jordan 2025 – National Vision and Strategy

amongst others. It focuses on strengthening the economic resilience of Jordan while

enhancing economic opportunities for Syrian refugees, through increased protection

and access to employment and quality education. In 2018, the EU and Jordan

established priorities and also decided to introduce a number of far-reaching

amendments to the rules of origin scheme set up in December 2017 to boost

Jordan's exports to the EU, and at the same time improve access by Syrian refugees

to legal employment. These amendments further relax the criteria required by the

scheme, and will thus increase the number of companies operating in Jordan that

may be able to benefit from the scheme. They also extend the scheme by an

additional four years, until the end of December 2030.

o Operational highlights of the year

In 2018, 14 Action Documents for a total funding of EUR 290.8 million were

adopted by the Trust Fund’s Operational Board.

With EUR 250 million mobilised by the Trust Fund for Lebanon and Jordan in 2018

alone, the European Union continues to demonstrate its resolve to respond to the

needs arising from the Syria conflict, and stand side by side with the refugees and the

countries hosting them under difficult conditions.

In the reporting period the following actions were adopted by the Operational Board

between June and December 2018:

EUR 122.6 million on 14 December 2018:

EUR 83.1 million for access to education and basic health care, to support

livelihoods through cultural heritage development, and to provide higher

education opportunities to Syrian refugees and vulnerable communities in Jordan;

EUR 27 million to provide livelihood opportunities in the fields of agricultural

development and through micro-loans, as well as social protection and higher

education to Syrian refugees and vulnerable communities in Turkey;

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/jordan/


EUR 9.5 million to strengthen mother and child critical health care services, as

well as support to livelihoods through cultural heritage development in Iraq;

EUR 3 million to strengthen communication and advocacy on EU support to

Syrian refugees through the Trust Fund instrument.

EUR 167 million on 20 June 2018:

EUR 100 million to improve access to education for Syrian refugee children in

Lebanon

EUR 52 million to support to social assistance to vulnerable refugees and host

communities affected by the Syrian crisis in Lebanon

EUR 13 million to strengthen the resilience of Palestine Refugees from Syria, in

Lebanon


Jordan

One Action Document for communication for an amount of EUR 1.2 million was

approved by the Operational Board through written procedure.

EU Regional Trust Fund in Response to the Syrian Crisis

Funding allocations adopted by the Board per country and year, adjusted to actual project amounts*

* excluding commitments for administrative expenditure

PROGRAMMING, IMPLEMENTATION AND RESULTS

(INCLUDING EVALUATIONS)

In partnership with the main refugee host governments, all Trust Fund-financed

actions are aligned and implemented in accordance with the refugee crisis response

plans of the affected countries or regions, in particular the Jordan Response Plan, the

Lebanon Crisis Response Plan, and the national plans in Turkey and Iraq, as part of

the regional UN refugee and resilience response framework in this regard. The Trust

Fund also supports relevant areas of the EU-Turkey Joint Action Plan and has been

also a delivery channel for the Facility for Refugees in Turkey (EUR 293 million) filling

critical gaps, in particular on fostering bottom-up initiatives across the humanitarian-

development nexus and civil society engagement.

The graph below presents an overview of funding by country.


o Trust Fund sectors

The EU Trust Fund bridges the nexus between humanitarian relief and development

aid:

It addresses early recovery, as well as resilience and self-reliance needs of

refugees and IDPs, in a manner that also benefits local communities, and

preserves the stability of neighbouring countries.

It supports countries hosting refugees by investing in health and education,

economic development, job creation and integration into labour markets, for

both local communities and refugees, especially vulnerable groups such as

women and youth.

With the actions adopted since 2015, the overall focus of the Trust Fund has evolved

as follows:


EUR 494 million are being invested in education to provide a massive scale-up

of support to the Ministries of Education in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan enabling

them to enrol more than 180,000 additional refugee children in school, while also

providing for accelerated learning programmes, non-formal and early childhood

education and child protection activities. It comprises 4 levels of action, in particular

in 2018: (i) a multi-country programme with UNICEF focusing on Jordan, Lebanon

and Turkey, (ii) several multi-country actions by European NGO groupings focusing

on retention support, non-formal and early childhood education, (iii) additional direct

support of EUR 32 million to the Jordanian Ministry of Education (total now EUR 56

million), (iv) funding for additional school infrastructure in Turkey and Jordan for

more than EUR 100 million and (v) technical assistance to provide coordination and

oversight support to the Ministry of Education in Lebanon. Together, these actions

target school-age children and adolescents that are currently out-of-school. As a

result the EU Trust Fund financing contributes substantially to closing the remaining

gap to achieve the goal of bringing all refugee children into education in line with SDG

4.

EUR 478 million have been allocated for resilience & local development

projects responding to the urgent need of improving economic opportunities for

refugees and vulnerable host communities beyond dependency on humanitarian

relief. These are being implemented through a mix of single-country and multi-

country activities by European NGOs, EU Member States development agencies (GiZ,

Expertise France, AECID, Italian Cooperation, AfD), and the Red Cross/Red Crescent

movement, plus international organisations. The projects target more than 200

communities across the region and notably also in Iraq and Turkey, addressing basic

financial needs of vulnerable families, engaging unemployed and disillusioned youth

through work, skills development and community engagement in preparation of a

future return to Syria, while also mitigating tensions between host and refugee


communities. Strategic partnerships have been fostered with FAO, WFP and IFAD in

Turkey and Lebanon. In 2018 the EUTF diversified its partnerships by working on (i)

social protection with WFP in Lebanon for EUR 52 million targeting poor Lebanese and

Syrians, (ii) a public private partnership action in Turkey by increasing access to

finance for Syrian refugees with Spark and ING, (iii) livelihoods through cultural

heritage development in Jordan and Iraq with UNESCO and (iv) social cohesion in

Turkey as a follow up to the ECHO programme bridging the humanitarian –

development nexus.

A total of EUR 187 million, in the health sector aims to widen and enhance

access of refugees across the region to primary, secondary and tertiary health care,

psycho-social support, and protection from sexual and gender-based violence. This

reaches and benefits already 857,000 refugees with a focus on Jordan, Turkey and

Lebanon. In addition, specific healthcare support is provided in Kurdistan region of

Iraq to the Dohuk hospital and in Jordan to several health clinics frequented by

refugees.

EUR 202 million are used for water, sanitation and hygiene programmes and

to extend water and wastewater facilities in Jordan and Lebanon. These

actions are helping Syrian refugees and host communities, where the needs for

supporting municipal water and wastewater services and infrastructure are biggest,

with a target of benefitting 816,055 people.

EUR 81 million are providing support for young Syrians to pursue higher

education as well as technical and vocational training in the region around

Syria. While before the war, 25% of 18-25 year old Syrians were enrolled in higher

and further education, this has dropped to less than 5% of the same age group today

among the refugees. With partners such as DAAD, British Council, Campus France,

EP-Nuffic, Stichting Spark, UNHCR and the German-Jordanian University, 6,500

course placements and scholarships are made available in the region, focusing on

Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon and Kurdistan region of Iraq.

Overall, 49 action documents with projects in the above mentioned main sectors have

already been approved in 9 meetings of the Trust Fund’s Operational Board, covering

a total amount of EUR 1.55 billion.

All action documents are published on the TF webpage:

https://ec.europa.eu/trustfund-syria-region/content/action-documents_en.

https://ec.europa.eu/trustfund-syria-region/content/action-documents_en


o Communication and visibility

In 2018, the EUTF increased its

communication efforts via strategic

outreach events within and outside the

institutions. A side-event of the Brussels II

Conference on Syria and the Region was

organised in April 2018, featuring EU

Commissioner Hahn with students and

young entrepreneurs, all beneficiaries of

EUTF supported projects.

A larger conference and public outreach

evening event was organised in June 2018.

The interactive event brought together

experts, practitioners from the region and

Europe, ranging from EUTF Donors to academics, NGOs, civil society activists,

implementing partners, and representatives of EU institutions, as well as direct

beneficiaries of EUTF projects, and opened up to a wider public in the evening.

The June event displayed a successful

photo exhibition portraying 65

photographs. The photo exhibition was

shown again for one month at the EEAS

premises in September 2018

In addition, a substantive number of

communication instruments and products

have been produced. Key products

include 4 editions of a testimonial

brochure "Voices from the Ground”, 26

web-clips, 26 teasers, 28 testimonial

posters, 4 mini documentaries, 1 animated video, hundreds of high quality photos

taken at EUTF projects in Iraq, Jordan and

Lebanon, which are effectively used in all

communication products and campaigns

(including social media, newsletters,

Brussels Syria conferences, etc). All videos

are hosted on the EU Neighbours South

YouTube platform and on the new EUTF

website launched in December 2018,

featuring factual and up-to date information,

videos, testimonies and a photo gallery.

The EUTF organised a press trip for

European and local journalists to visit Trust Fund supported projects in Jordan and

Lebanon from 25 to 29 November, resulting in extensive press coverage of the EUTF

activities in those two countries.

14 members of the Trust

Fund Board, visited Jordan

and Lebanon during a field

visit 4-8 June 2018. The

programme included visits

to 12 projects and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZUcG44W1Zg&index=50&list=PLaGaqba06xpi4YwDTwt0ljl_RPptPcjxx&t=285s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZUcG44W1Zg&index=50&list=PLaGaqba06xpi4YwDTwt0ljl_RPptPcjxx&t=285s

https://ec.europa.eu/trustfund-syria-region/content/home_en

https://ec.europa.eu/trustfund-syria-region/content/home_en


meetings with beneficiaries, some 25 implementing consortia and partners, as well as

representatives of the national authorities. The purpose of the field visit was to offer

an opportunity to the members of the Trust Fund Board to further enhance their

knowledge of the work of the Trust Fund at country level and their understanding of

achievements to date, and thus pave the way for the strategic future direction of the

EUTF.

o EUTF Mid-Term Strategic Evaluation

In 2018 the EUTF initiated a Mid-Term Strategic Evaluation in order to test its

assumptions and relevance and to identify opportunities for possible further

improvements. The evaluation i.a. found that:

“Most aspects of the rationale for setting up the EUTF have been justified. The

EUTF is large and cost-effective, reaching a large number of beneficiaries at a

comparatively low cost.”

“The multi-sectoral and multi-partner approach has been successful in recipient

countries, and the focus of interventions has largely been relevant to the

identified needs of beneficiaries.”

“The EUTF has allowed the EU to operate flexibly despite operational challenges.

The EUTF has also successfully matured and evolved over time to be more

inclusive of the host country contexts and adaptive to the overall dynamics of the

region. The EUTF increasingly shows signs of closer coordination with host country

priorities and processes, with regional frameworks such as the Regional Refugee

Response Plan (3RP), and with EU processes such as the Joint Humanitarian

Development Framework.”

"The EUTF was recommended to focus on bilateral cooperation in view of the

complexity of regional projects.”

The Evaluation further found that the EUTF offers added value in four ways.

Firstly, through its governance mechanism, the EUTF ensures a joint response by

engaging EU Member States actively.

Secondly, by its scale and scope it reaches a larger group of beneficiaries.

Thirdly, the EUTF exerts strategic influence over the focus and approach of the

programming, enabling Fund contributors and host countries to agree on shared

objectives.

Finally, the EUTF has made deliberate effort to bring coherence to the response to

the Syrian crisis while acknowledging country specificities, principally by insisting

on multi-sector, multi-country programming.

On coherence, coordination and complementarity, the evaluation found the “EUTF to

be internally coherent in that the chosen modalities generally have enabled the EUTF

to deliver according to the objectives and criteria set for the Fund. The EUTF is also

externally coherent, and the synergies and coherence between DG ECHO and the

EUTF are particularly strong. The multi-sector approach calls for strong coordination

with other actors, ensuring complementarity. The evaluation found that the EUTF’s

planning and governance mechanisms have enabled such coherence. As EUTF


colleagues have gradually increased in number at the EU Delegations, this has also

helped improve coordination with other actors. “

In particular, through the presence in the EUTF Board of the World Bank as manager

of the Global Concessional Finance Facility,12 and the Manager of the Syria Recovery

Trust Fund13, close coordination with other international mechanisms in response to

the Syrian crisis is ensured.

The evaluation also confirmed that the EUTF is achieving its managerial and efficiency

objectives as it is relatively large and fast, but recommends that with the growth of

the Fund, additional human resources need to be put in place to avoid bottlenecks.

The evaluation also positively assessed the relevance of the EUTF, and found that

“EUTF interventions are relevant and address the needs of beneficiaries in all

countries. Refugee, host community and internally displaced people (IDP)

beneficiaries are appropriately identified and targeted, drawing on the experience of

implementing partners and following EUTF criteria; and the sectors of intervention are

consistent with beneficiaries’ resilience and early recovery needs. … EUTF

interventions are also relevant to host country needs. The evaluation found evidence

of a positive trajectory from an initially centralised project identification process

managed in Brussels to a more inclusive, decentralised process that is aligned with

host country plans and contexts. These alignment processes fall within the broader

regional approach of EUTF, which allows for more streamlined and cost-effective

management processes. …”

The extension is recommended in the key conclusion of the strategic mid-term

evaluation: “Key conclusion: The protracted crisis is expected to continue, and it is

also unlikely that other funding instruments could adequately fill the gap if the EUTF

ceased its operations. Most of the assumptions presented during the set-up of the

EUTF have held, and the raison d’être for the EUTF remains broadly justified. In

addition, the EUTF has generally performed satisfactorily across the criteria assessed

by the evaluation, and the EUTF has clearly generated added value, compared to the

efforts EU Member States could have undertaken themselves.

Recommendation 1: The evaluation team recommends that EUTF is extended beyond

December 2019 to allow stakeholders to continue to respond to beneficiaries’ and

host countries’ needs as the protracted crisis continues.“

On the basis of the mid-term evaluation, a proposal was submitted to the Trust Fund

Board, which agreed that, based on continuous needs for Syrian refugees in the

Middle Eastern region, a proposal to extend Trust Fund Operations for an additional

year was appropriate.

o EUTF Results monitoring

Beyond this mid-term evaluation, the EUTF has also set up a robust Results

Framework to measure its project-based achievements, and put in place a M&E

mechanism to regularly aggregate data on project results into a comprehensive

results monitoring.

12 https://globalcff.org

13 http://www.srtfund.org/

http://www.srtfund.org/


The strategic overarching Results Framework of the EUTF Syria comprises results

from different levels -outputs, outcomes and impact, with emphasis on access to key

services and around four main education, health, economic and wellbeing outcomes

referring to the refugee communities and their host localities.

The EUTF Syria M&E framework contributes to accountability and transparency. It

informs external stakeholders and the public how the EU is responding to the Syrian

crisis with this specific financing instrument. It also provides relevant information for

internal management decisions in order to increase effectiveness. In the spirit of the

Agenda for Change, the EUTF Syria M&E Framework aims also to ensure upward and

downward accountability and transparency of EUTF support towards the EUTF Board

and the supported communities, respectively.

As of 30 September 2018, the EUTF results monitoring showed that more than 1.9

million individuals were being supported with the different EUTF projects, while the

target number for all end-of-project results is more than 3.7 million people. This data

is based on the first 40 projects of the EUTF, equalling funding of EUR 800 million,

around 60% of the funding adopted by the Operational Board so far.

The following tables provides a full breakdown of individuals supported by sector,

including target values and achievement progress


Number of beneficiaries across all sectors

(access to services by Individuals and sectors)

Regarding the type of support the EUTF is providing, the largest number of individuals

benefit from health-related services, mainly medical primary health care consultations

and examinations, which include medicine prescription.

Number of beneficiaries per country (Access to services country, individuals)

The highest number of people reached is in Lebanon, which is partially due to the

focus on health services there that can reach a very high number of people while not

a daily need such as water or education. In Jordan, there is more focus on WASH,

health and education infrastructure, which takes longer to complete and become

accessible to beneficiaries, hence less progress than in Lebanon or Turkey.

Education and protection

related actions show progress,

especially concerning the

access to basic and higher

education and to psychosocial

support and gender violence

based related services. The

total results so far for the

education sector are at:

180,356 individuals with

access to basic education

12,646 teachers trained

(local capacities);

177 education facilities

constructed or refurbished.


6,501 young people with access to higher and further education

The EUTF also aims at

promoting better livelihoods

for refugees and host

communities, through:

Annex 1:

• better employability

prospects with an emphasis on

women (individuals accessing

income);

• increased financial

capacity;

• better productive

capacities of target groups

(individuals and organisations

accessing inputs).

Annex 2:

Results in the livelihoods sector have so far reached 75,317 individuals and 738

organisations, namely micro, small and medium enterprises (MSME) in the region.

Geographically, regarding the access to livelihoods opportunities, the emphasis in this

sector is mainly Turkey (43%) followed by Lebanon (25%) and Jordan (24%).

The aim of support in the health

sector is to provide Syrian refugees

and host communities with:

• improved access to medical

care and health services;

• Strengthened human capacity

to deliver primary and secondary

health care services (with

emphasis on maternal and child

health), and

Improved health

infrastructure (including the

ones specifically for mother and child health).

The EUTF so far supports in the health sector at least 856,889 individuals with

access to healthcare, 3,838 health personnel with training and the equipment and

refurbishment of 66 primary health centres and hospitals in the region.

Geographically, the EUTF targets mainly Lebanon (59%), Iraq (10%) and Turkey

(19%) to ensure access to health care and services.

The Water, Sanitation and

Hygiene (WASH) sector relates

closely to the strategic aim of

improving health of Syrian

refugees and host communities,

specifically through:

Annex 3:

More access to water

services;


Strengthened WASH capacities; and

Improved WASH infrastructure.

In the WASH sector the EUTF so far benefits 59,944 people with a target of 816,055

individuals to have improved access to WASH services. 37 out of 128 planned water

and waste-water facilities have been completed. Geographically, WASH portfolio

comprises mostly Lebanon and Jordan.

Protection is one of the key priority sectors in the context of the EUTF, strategically

aiming at improving the wellbeing of Syrian and host community children, women

and adults, through:

Better access to psycho-social support services (and safe land);

Strengthened capacities to provide children, women and adult protection services;

and

Improved infrastructure for refugees and migrants.

The EUTF works with a wide range of partners, such as the Austrian Red Cross,

UNICEF, GIZ, World Vision, Italian Cooperation, AFD and partners, ASAM, UN

Women, IOM in the context of nine projects. Some of them are focused on the

protection of refugees and host communities, but others combine protection

components with social cohesion, health, and livelihoods related activities putting

different emphasis on specific groups, such as children (e.g. UNICEF), women and

girls (e.g. UN Women or IOM) or youth (e.g. World Vision).

The EUTF already reaches more than 300,000 people in this sector:

The figure below presents the Key Performance Indicators’ (KPIs) achievement

progress by displaying target values against current values in terms of access to

services. The largest targets can be found in the health sector, followed by WASH. In

terms of progress, it is worth noting that protection and Education -both basic and

higher education- are the leading sectors. On the other side, WASH, with 7%, is the

sector with the lowest progress ratio when it comes to individuals accessing the

services. It might be due to the fact that some WASH actions have been recently


begun its implementation and the WASH improvement processes, involving training,

infrastructure and awareness take longer to generate access related outputs.

KPIs’ achievement progress for All Sectors

(Access to services-Number Individuals)

A detailed overview on current values achieved in the past year on project implementation can be found in enclosed results report.

0 500000 1000000 1500000 2000000

HEALTH

WASH

SOCIAL COHESION

PROTECTION

BASIC AND HIGHER EDUCATION

LIVELIHOODS

ACCESS TO SERVICES

TARGET CURRENT VALUE


FINANCIAL REPORT

o Amounts pledged and received

At the end of 2018, the EU and 23 donors had contributed to the Trust Fund: the

EU Budget, 22 Member States and 1 non-Member State, with total contributions reaching

an amount of approximately EUR 1.65 billion. The contributions from the EU Budget

amounted by the end of 2018 to EUR 1.47 billion while the contributions from Member

States amounted to EUR 155 million and EUR 24.65 million from Turkey.


Donor All pledges €

Contributions as per

Contribution

Certificate (CC)

Payments in €

Status in the

Operational

Board

Voting rights

based on

contribution

certificate(s) with

at least one

payment received

Status in the

Trust Fund

Board

Voting

rights

EU 1.487.841.180 € 1.472.841.180 € 584.285.760 €Donor with

voting right144

Donor with

voting right1

Germany 45.000.000 € 45.000.000 € 45.000.000 €Donor with

voting right21

Donor with

voting right1

Denmark 40.361.228 € 40.361.228 € 40.361.228 €Donor with

voting right20

Donor with

voting right1

Austria 13.500.000 € 13.500.000 € 13.500.000 €Donor with

voting right13

Donor with

voting right1

Italy 11.000.000 € 10.000.000 10.000.000 €Donor with

voting right11

Donor with

voting right1

Netherlands 8.000.000 € 8.000.000 € 8.000.000 €Donor with

voting right8

Donor with

voting right1

Belgium 6.000.000 € 6.000.000 € 4.500.000 €Donor with

voting right6

Donor with

voting right1

France 6.000.000 € 3.000.000 3.000.000 €Donor with

voting right6

Donor with

voting right1

Czech Republic 5.000.000 € 5.000.000 € 5.000.000 €Donor with

voting right5

Donor with

voting right1

Poland 4.197.318 € 4.197.318 € 4.197.318 €Donor with

voting right4

Donor with

voting right1

Finland 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 €Donor with

voting right3

Donor with

voting right1

Sweden 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 €Donor with

voting right3

Donor with

voting right1

Hungary 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 €Donor with

voting right3

Donor with

voting right1

Slovakia 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 €Donor with

voting right3

Donor with

voting right1

UK 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 €Donor with

voting right3

Donor with

voting right1

Spain 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 € 3.000.000 €Donor with

voting right3

Donor with

voting right1

Estonia 950.000 € 950.000 € 950.000 € No presence Donor

Portugal 350.000 € 350.000 € 350.000 € No presence Donor

Bulgaria 300.000 € 300.000 € 300.000 € No presence Donor

Lithuania 100.000 € 100.000 € 100.000 € No presence Donor

Romania 80.000 € 80.000 € 80.000 € No presence Donor

Latvia 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € No presence Donor

Malta 20.000 € 20.000 € 20.000 € No presence Donor

Total EU Member

States158.908.546 € 154.908.546 € 153.408.546 € 112 15

Total EU and MS

pledges &

commitments1.646.749.726 € 1.627.749.726 € 737.694.306 € 256 16

Turkey 24.650.229 € 24.650.229 € 24.650.229 €Donor with

voting right16

Donor with

voting right1

Grand Totals 1.671.399.955 € 1.652.399.955 € 762.344.535 €Total voting

rights272

Total

voting

rights

17

EU Regional Trust Fund in Reponse to the Syrian Crisis

Status of contributions and voting rights as of 31 December 2018


Most of the EU budget contributions come from the ENI with EUR 913.47 million, followed

by IPA with EUR 361.74 million,14 DCI with EUR 56.37 million and Humanitarian Aid with

EUR 3 million. Overall EU budget contributions in 2018 amounted to EUR 189.6 million in

new commitments.

Source: DG Budget - Budget implementation report 2018

o Amounts paid

Amounts paid out in 2018 were EUR 227.6 million for projects as operational

expenditure, and EUR 3.5 million for administrative expenditure, as shown in the table

below:

Source: DG Budget - Budget implementation report

The EUTF had an overall implementation rate in 2018 close to 100% when it comes to

commitments of funds available. 75% are contracted, and 42% of all funds is already

14 In addition to the EUR 1334.578 million committed on the EU Budget an amount of EUR 139.685 million has

been contributed from reoriented IPA I funds via Turkey at the end of 2015. Together this corresponds to a total amount of EU contributions of EUR 1472,841 million as shown in the table on the previous page.

EUR '000

EU programme Committed for the EUTF Paid to the EUTF

2018 All 2018 All

EU budget - Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) – 56 366 - -

EU budget - European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) 189 018 913 475 261 267 447 463

EU budget - Humanitarian aid – 3 000 3 000 3 000

EU budget - Instrument for Pre-accession assistance (IPA II) 600 361 738 1 100 19 138

European Development Fund (EDF) - - - -

Total 189 618 1 334 578 265 367 469 601

EUR '000

Cumulative Amount made Available for

Commitments

Committed Amount

Implem. Rate

Commit.

Contracted Amount

Implem. Rate

Contrac.

Amount

Cumulative Amount made Available for

Payments Paid Amount

Overall Implem.

Rate

2018 All 2018 All All 2018 All All 2018 All 2018 All All

(1) (2) (3)=(2)/(1) (4) (5)=(4)/(1) (6) (7) (8)=(7)/(1

)

Administrative

(5 000) 14 370 4 8 086 56.27 % 3 544 8 086 56.27 % 4 894 10 630 3 544 8 086 56.27 %

Operational

249 449 1 638 744 319 1 542 621 94.13 % 349 360 1 221 896 74.56 % 309 640 776 843 227 562 682 627 41.66 %

Total

244 448 1 653 114 323 1 550 707 93.81 % 352 904 1 229 982 74.40 % 314 534 787 474 231 106 690 714 41.78 %


disbursed.

o Beneficiaries and amounts contracted

In 2018 the Trust Fund Manager signed 21 new project contracts for a total value of EUR

326 million. In addition, previously signed project contracts were increased by EUR 22.7

million while EUR 4.3 million were contracted for communication activities, evaluations

and staff. The details with a list of beneficiaries and amounts contracted are provided

below.

Partner Sector Objective Country Total EUR

1 EBRD WASH - water sanitation and

hygiene

Support to construction of the West Irbid Wastewater Network

Jordan 20.200.000

2 UNOPS Health Expanding and Equipping Ministry of Health Facilities Impacted by the Syrian Crisis in

Jordan Jordan 10.000.000

3 WHO Health

Strengthening the health care system resilience and provision of chronic

medications at primary health care centers for vulnerable Syrian refugee and Lebanese

host communities

Lebanon 13.400.000

4 FAO Livelihoods Restoring the Water Supply for Food

Production and Livelihoods in post conflict areas

Iraq 6.000.000

5 UNICEF Health Securing access to essential medical

commodities for most vulnerable population Lebanon 5.600.000

6 CISP WASH - water sanitation and

hygiene

Sustainable safe drinking water supply for vulnerable communities living in a more

protected environment Lebanon 7.200.000

7 UNICEF WASH - water sanitation and

hygiene

Mitigating social tensions among vulnerable populations through improved water services

in Lebanon Lebanon 5.000.000

8 NRC WASH - water sanitation and

hygiene

Improving access to safe and affordable water to vulnerable communities

Lebanon 7.799.950

9 Oxfam Italia

Food security Food assistance for migrants, asylum seekers and refugees hosted in governmental centres

in Serbia Serbia 8.299.994

10 Acted Resilience and

Livelihoods

Supporting resilience for host communities, returnees and internally displaced persons

(IDPs) in Iraq Iraq 7.919.420

11 OeRK Resilience IRIS - Increased resilience of Syrian

Armenian refugees and host population Armenia 3.000.000

12 EFI Women's equality organisation and

institutions

'Strengthening access to protection, participation and

Jordan, Lebanon,

Iraq 12.500.000

13 KfW Education EU Support to construct 10 schools in Jordan Jordan 33.000.000

14 UNHCR Higher Education Increasing access to Turkish language

learning and vocational training for Syrians under

Turkey 9.875.000


15 UNDP Decentralisation Sub national governance

Strengthening the Long-Term Resilience of Subnational Authorities in countries affected

by the Syrian and Iraqi Crises

Lebanon, Jordan

24.971.363

16 FAO, IFAD, WFP

Agricultural development

Enhancing resilient livelihoods and food security of host communities and Syrian

refugees in Jordan and Lebanon through the promotion of sustainable agricultural

development

Lebanon, Jordan

22.178.857

17 IMC, FPSC

Health Improving Access to Health Care Services for

Persons with Disabilities in Lebanon Lebanon 3.147.322

18 VNG Int. Decentralisation Sub national governance

Dealing with Displacement – resilient subnational government in communities in

the region affected by the Syrian crisis

Lebanon, Jordan

15.000.000

19 DRC Resilience and

Livelihoods

Strengthening resilience and income generating opportunities and supporting early recovery and stabilisation in areas of return in

Iraq

Iraq 24.000.000

20 EIB Municipal

infrastructure Technical assistance and support for the

municipal resilience facility (MRF) Turkey 71.806.941

21 UNRWA Multisector aid for

basic social services Strengthening the Resilience of Palestine

Refugees from Syria in Jordan and Lebanon Lebanon, Jordan

15.000.000

Total new projects 2018

325.898.847

Additional contract level (L2) commitments for top-ups in 2018

22.700.000

Communication and Visibility 2018

391.800

Evaluations

369.367

Total contracts commitments 2018

349.360.014

Administrative costs

3.543.642

Total contracted 2018

352.903.656

The graph below shows that European NGOs, development agencies and development

banks constitute around 50% of the Trust Fund’s portfolio in terms of implementing

partners. In Jordan and Serbia, direct support to government ministries (education,

reception centres) is possible and was used as an implementing modality.

In terms of management mode used, about 1/3 of the Fund is implemented by way of

direct management by the Commission, mostly with NGO’s, and about 2/3 through

indirect management with international organisations and delegated public service

bodies.


o KPI analysis

Overall the EUTF performed well on its KPIs, 90% of payments have been paid

within the deadline (see annex). The Trust Fund started in full swing on

implementation in 2018, on which basis challenging projects have been ROM

monitored. In 2019, significant efforts will be conducted to increase field monitoring.

INTERNAL CONTROL

o Control results

1.1.1 Control effectiveness as regards legality and regularity

The EU Trust Fund operates embedded in the general system of internal control

defined by the Commission. In addition the Trust Fund is subject to an external

audit.

As per the Constitutive Agreement of the Trust Fund and given its objective to

operate in a crisis and post-crisis situation, flexible procedures appropriate to the

local environment are used to ensure that the Fund is effective and responsive to the

needs identified. These procedures are in accordance with the Financial Regulations

provisions and are set up in DG NEAR's financial guides. Their use needs to be


justified on a case by case basis. A register of exceptions, derogations and prior

approvals granted under the Trust Fund together with non-compliance events

detected during the year is kept.

Project implementation is foreseen in direct management where the Trust Fund is the

Contracting Authority and signs procurement and grant contracts, or indirect

management by which project implementation is delegated to a third party, a EU

Member State Agency or International Organisation. Candidate entities to be

entrusted with budget-implementation tasks have to demonstrate a level of financial

management and protection of the EU's financial interest equivalent to that of the

Commission. International Organisations and Member States Agencies have to

provide Management declarations on the use of the funds they are entrusted with.

Ex-ante controls are carried out by the TF staff for all operations/transactions carried

out under the TF.

In implementing Trust Fund appropriations, reports and recommendations of the

different control bodies, notably the IAS and Court of Auditors, for the purpose of

providing an assessment of the effectiveness of risk management, control and

governance processes are taken into account by the Trust Fund staff , in addition to

the results of the audits carried out at the level of contractors/beneficiaries.

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) exercises the same powers over the Trust

Fund in its entirety, including its governance bodies and the representatives of

donors and observers participating in such bodies, as it does in respect of other

activities of the Commission.

4.1.1.1 Results of ex-ante controls

Final reports with request for payment for settlement of balance are paid on the

bases of expenditure verification report and the findings regarding the eligibility of

costs.

4.1.1.2 Results of external audits

A positive opinion was issued by the external auditors on the 2017 annual accounts

(included with last year’s annual report).

1.1.2 Fraud prevention, detection and correction

N/A. No cases forwarded for investigation

o Observations and recommendations made by IAS/ECA

The Trust Fund was subject of an IAS audit (Ares (2016) 503448 29-01-2016). The

IAS recommendations resulted in an action plan adopted by DG NEAR to implement

the 10 recommendations under its responsibility. All actions have been implemented

as planned by end of 2017 and were monitored in 2018. The new Trust Fund

guidelines are in place since August 2018.


o Assessment of the effectiveness of the internal control systems

The EU Trust Fund operates in the general system of internal control defined by the

Commission. In this framework, during its first year of operation the EU Trust Fund

put in place the organisational structure and the internal control systems suited to the

achievement of the policy and control objectives, in accordance with the standards

and having due regard to the risks associated with the environment in which it

operates.

Monitoring of the compliance and effectiveness of the internal control systems was

done on a continuous basis by the Trust Fund team and adjusted and complemented

where necessary.

Exceptions, derogations, prior approvals and non-compliance events that occurred

during the reporting period have been registered and documented.

The TF Manager ensured availability of a business management workflow process in

place based on EC standard operating procedures in line with PRAG and the

Companion. The workflow process also entails the timely appointment of negotiation

committees and a business management process structuring the negotiations.

The Trust Fund Manager has taken appropriate measures to ensure that, when

actions financed by the Trust Fund are implemented, the financial interests of the

Union and of the donors are protected by the application of preventive measures

against irregularities and fraud, by effective controls and, if irregularities or fraud are

detected, by the recovery of the amounts wrongly paid. The contracts and

agreements signed with third parties authorise the Commission to carry out controls

on the spot, to suspend payments and implementation of actions where serious

irregularities or fraud are noted, and to apply, where appropriate, effective,

proportionate and deterrent contractual penalties.

The following aspects to improve can be signalled which are mainly attributed to the

general environment of external aid in crisis situations:

While the introduction of the MIS application has been completed for all of the EUTF

ongoing and planned commitments and payments in DG NEAR has improved the

tracking, coordination and organisation of the TF portfolio, IT systems still need to be

developed in order to provide for the automatic registration of information that is

currently compiled manually (e.g. exceptions, derogations and non-compliance

events).

o Conclusions as regards assurance

In line with the growing financial resources of the EUTF, there have been notable

reinforcements of human resources in DG NEAR in 2017 of both the operational and

financial management of the EUTF in Directorate R and B, respectively. The

completion of all actions under the action plan in response to the recommendations of

the IAS audit by end of 2018 provides further assurance that the resources assigned

to the activities described in this report have been used for their intended purpose

and in accordance with the principles of sound financial management, and that the

control procedures put in place give the necessary guarantees concerning the legality

and regularity of the underlying transactions.


DECLARATION OF ASSURANCE (AND

RESERVATIONS)

I, the undersigned,

Manager of the European Union Trust Fund in Response to the Syrian Crisis,

In my capacity as authorising officer by sub-delegation

Declare that the information contained in this report gives a true and fair view15.

State that I have reasonable assurance that the resources assigned to the activities described in this report have been used for their intended purpose and in accordance with the principles of sound financial management, and that the control procedures put in place give the necessary guarantees concerning the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions.

This reasonable assurance is based on my own judgement and on the information at my disposal, such as the results of the self-assessment, ex-post controls, the observations of the Internal Audit Service for years prior to the year of this declaration.

Confirm that I am not aware of anything not reported here which could harm the interests of the European Union Trust Fund in Response to the Syrian Crisis.

Brussels, 15 February 2019

(signature)

Nadim KARKUTLI

15 True and fair in this context means a reliable, complete and correct view on the state of affairs in the

DG/Executive Agency.


ANNEX 9: Evaluations and other studies finalised or cancelled during the year

Studies finalised

or cancelled

in 2018

Title

CRIS

Decision/ contract n.

Reason Scope Type Asso-ciated DGs

Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

a. Studies finalised in 2018

DG NEAR

A4

Evaluation of the European Union’s

Cooperation

with Azerbaijan (2011-2016)

n/a Evaluate

first

EU assistance initiatives implemented over the 2011 – 2016 period.

This includes the actions

financed by the bilateral development programme as well as the assistance provided by regional initiatives

and thematic cooperation instruments

O

DEVCO

, AG

RI,

EM

PL,

EEAS

14

9.9

20

,00

Country evaluation https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood

-

enlargement/sites/near/files/azerbaijan_evaluation_eu_assi

stance_final_report.zip


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

DG NEAR A4

Evaluation of EU support to social

protection in external action 2007-2013

n/a Evaluate

first

EU support (policy dialogue and financial assistance) (IPA II, ENI,

DCI, EDF) provided for the development of social protection

systems in partner countries, more specifically on the social insurance and social assistance measures to address the following risks and needs:

unemployment, parental responsibilities, sickness and healthcare, work accidents/employment injuries disability, loss of a spouse or parent, old

age, housing and social exclusion.

O

DEVCO

, EM

PL,

EEAS

38

3.0

24

,00

Thematic evaluation

https://ec.

europa.eu/

neighbour

hood-

enlargeme

nt/sites/ne

ar/files/fin

al_evaluati

on_report.

zip

https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/final_evaluation_report.zip











Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

DG NEAR A4

Evaluation of EU Support for Security

Sector Reform in Enlargement and

Neighbourhood Countries (2010-2016)

n/a Evaluate

first

Ex-post assessment of the performance (relevance, efficiency,

effectiveness, coherence, complementarity and

coordination, impact, sustainability and EU value added) of EU support (political and policy dialogue and financial assistance) to security sector reform

(SSR) in the Enlargement and Neighbourhood beneficiaries between 2010-2016, on the basis of the 2006 EU policy

framework on SSR.

O

DEVCO

, H

OM

E,

JUST,

SG

, EEAS

40

9.4

23

,00

Thematic evaluation

https://ec.

europa.eu/

neighbour

hood-

enlargeme

nt/sites/ne

ar/files/20

180518-

security-

sector-

reform-

2010-

2016-final-

report_and

_annexes.

zip

https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/20180518-security-sector-reform-2010-2016-final-report_and_annexes.zip

















Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD

Albania

Evaluation of Private sector development/c

ompetitiveness, including interventions

in the agribusiness sector (IPARD-like project)

Decision 2016/039-356;

Contract 2017/388-624

"Evaluate First" The reason for this evaluation is to provide the EUD/EC, the interested stakeholders and the wider public with an overall sector-level independent assessment of the past and ongoing performance of EU intervention(in the PSD/C sector)

Sector-level evaluation based on a limited number of projects IPA

projects in the field of Private Sector Development in Albania,

including projects in the agribusiness sector.

O n/a

95

.91

6,0

0

n/a


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD Algeria

Programme d'actions pilote pour le

développement rural et l'agriculture

(PAP-ENPARD Algérie)

ENPI/2013/024-822

O Mid-term O

10

1.0

00

,00

Normal PPCM EVAL

module

EUD

Algeria

Programme d'appui à la diversification de l'économie

- Secteur

Pêche et acquaculture (DIVECO2)

ENPI/2012/023-469

O Mid-term O

46

.51

0,0

0

Normal PPCM EVAL

module

EUD

Bosnia and Herzegovin

a

Final

Evaluation of IPA 2011 Local Economic Development grant assistance to

BiH (Grant

scheme CfP - 11 grant contracts)

2017/383-

919

O IPA 2011 Grant Scheme

for LED assistance O

NEAR

95

.80

0,0

0

To validate the

success/lessons learnt of the Grant scheme for the future IPA assistance to LED

EVAL

module


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD

Republic of North

Macedonia

IPA/2017/389-748 (EC) Evaluation of

the impact of IPA and national funds

on fostering the reforms in the sector of Agriculture and Rural Development

389-748

impact evaluation in support

of programm

ing

policy area FC

AG

RI

12

7.6

20

,00

impact evaluation coupled with a Roadmap for aligning the country

ARD policy with post-2020 CAP

http://ww

w.mzsv.go

v.mk/cms/

Upload/doc

s/2017-

389748%2

0Revised%

20Final%2

0Report%

20311020

18.pdf

EUD Republic of

North Macedonia

IPA/2016/381-

372 (CL) Evaluation of the impact of IPA funds on

fostering the reforms in the sector of environment and energy

381-371

impact evaluatio

n in

support of

programming

policy area FC

CLIM

A

99

.48

0,0

0

The report

was not

published

officially

http://www.mzsv.gov.mk/cms/Upload/docs/2017-389748%20Revised%20Final%20Report%2031102018.pdf












Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD Georgia

Mid -term Evaluation - Justice

Programme

ENI/2014/037-376

FR Decision M-T

NEAR,

JUST,

HO

ME

76

.52

2,0

0

EVAL

module

EUD Georgia

Mid-Term Evaluation of

ENPARD

ENPI/2012/023-280

FR Decision M-T

NEAR,

AG

RI

17

6.9

12

,00

EVAL

module

EUD Jordan

Evaluation of Promoting Local Economic Development in Jordan (PLEDJ)

ENPI/2010/021-930 ENPI/2018/394-089

FR

Local Economic Development, 3

contracts

E

NEAR

30

.40

0,0

0

EUD Jordan

Trade and Transport Facilitation Programme Jordan

2008/019-568

FR

Decision on Trade and Transport

E

NEAR

75

.17

8,0

0


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD

Jordan

Support to the Electoral Process in

Jordan

2012/024-290 2011/023-

559

FR

Decisions on democratic

governance E

NEAR

67

.52

4,0

0

EUD Jordan

Skills for Employment and Social Inclusion

2014/033-672

FR

Decision on Skills for Employment

E

NEAR

n/

a

Contracted by the ETF Evaluation Office

EUD Jordan

Support to

Research, Technological Development and Innovation in Jordan –

Phase II

2011/023-

204

FR

Decision 23204 E

NEAR

n/

a

Part of a larger TA

contract on an exit strategy

EUD Kosovo*

Evaluation of the EU funded support to the Kosovo

Assembly

IPA/2018/399-707

FR

Democracy and Govenance - Assembly

Internal

Commissi

on

Activity

NEAR

30

.60

0,0

0

EVAL

module


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD Kosovo

Evaluation of EU Support to Judicial Reform

in Kosovo

IPA/2018/392-866

FR

Rule of Law - Judiciary

Internal

Com

mission

Activit

y

NEAR

85

.14

0,0

0

EVAL

module


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD Lebanon

Evaluation of the Support to the North

Lebanon Water Establishment in improving

water supply in target municipalities of Akkar district

336-149 FR

Programme : ENI/2014/037-715

Mid-term

98

.85

0,0

0

http://ww

w.cc.cec/E

UROPEAID

/cris/saisie

/cris.cfm?ti

cket=ST-

9273841-

8rnqLCnJP

MUwvxsAy

2ve08jk7v

4DB4AS7L

zsUd4dB6k

3l1rxM2PY

xjX7xFxy7

94HLcj5gY

tuDOzSWz

Np0xGITIG

-

jpJZscgsw

0KtyETpLK

3Deu-

ffmsnJlkVo

fN2MtJSRv

cTVziyYG0

75zJH1DD

sqpaCG8m

http://www.cc.cec/EUROPEAID/cris/saisie/cris.cfm?ticket=ST-9273841-8rnqLCnJPMUwvxsAy2ve08jk7v4DB4AS7LzsUd4dB6k3l1rxM2PYxjX7xFxy794HLcj5gYtuDOzSWzNp0xGITIG-jpJZscgsw0KtyETpLK3Deu-ffmsnJlkVofN2MtJSRvcTVziyYG075zJH1DDsqpaCG8m



























Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD Moldova

Mid-term evaluation of EU Transport

Infrastructure projects to the Republic of

Moldova

2018/398-733

L

This type of evaluation is foreseen in the

respective FAs and this evaluation is part of our

Evaluation Plan.

O n/a

23

.70

0,0

0

EUD Moldova

Final evaluation of budget support programme ''Support to

Public Finance

Policy Reforms in Moldova''

2014/033-684 ENI/2018/399-273 (EC)

L

Budget support programme ''Support to

Public Finance Policy

Reforms in Moldova''

O n/a

61

.45

0,0

0

EUD

Montenegro

Ex-post evaluation of

Montenegrin human Resources Development programme (IPA1,

component 4)

2016/039-356 –

Support measure 2016 for evaluation and monitoring

for the

enlargement and neighbourhood regions Contract 2017/390-769

O

Employment, education

and social policies O

EM

PL

98

.78

6,0

0

Component IV of IPA I was a wide and complex

component under the responsibility of DG EMPL. Given that a new phase was to be implemented by DG Near it was deemed

necessary to have some

recommendations.


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD Montenegr

o

Interim evaluation of the RDOP

2012-2013

2016/039-356 - Support

measure 2016 for evaluation

and monitoring for the enlargement and neighbourhood regions

Contract 2017/388-712

O

Transport and Infrastructures

O

REG

IO

87

.49

6,0

0

Component III of IPA I was a wide and complex component under the

responsibility of DG REGIO. Given that under IPA II DG Near

implements transport and infrastructure projects under indirect management, the recommendations from evaluation will strengthen our

programmes.

EUREP Palestine*

Technical assistance to

improve and develop the social protection system in

Palestine through

partnership planning and institutional capacity building (Phase II)

CRIS Decision:

ENI/2014/036-901 Contract n. 2017/390-967

O

58

.24

9,0

0

Evaluation of achievement of TA

support to the Ministry since 2013

Not published


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUREP

Palestine

Evaluation of 2016-2017 PEGASE Direct

Financial Support to the Palestinian

Authority ("PEGASE DFS")

CRIS Decision: ENI/2016/0

38-842 and ENI/2017/039-376

Contract n. 2018/395-526

O

81

.59

4,0

0

Foreseen in the FA https://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/

palestine-occupied-

palestinian-

territory-west-bank-and-gaza-

strip/55765/evaluation-20162017-

pegase-

direct-financial-support-

palestinian-authority_e

n

EUD

Tunisia

Programme d'appui aux politiques publiques de

gestion des ressources en

eau pour le développement rural et agricole (PAPS-Eau)

CRIS Decision 2010/021889 (n° de la

décision évaluée)

(CRIS contract ENI/2018/398503 = contrat pour l'évaluation)

FR

Evaluation finale d'un programme d'appui

budgétaire couvrant plusieurs contrats

FC n/a

13

8.8

40

,00

Projet de rapport final partagé avec les parties prenantes. Commentaires reçus et

en attente d'une version révisée pour

approbation.

https://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/palestine-occupied-palestinian-territory-west-bank-and-gaza-strip/55765/evaluation-20162017-pegase-direct-financial-support-palestinian-authority_en




















Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD

Tunisia

Programme d'appui à la compétitivité

des services (PACS)

CRIS Decision 2011/02277

2 (n° de la décision évaluée)

(CRIS contract ENI/2017/392394 = contrat pour l'évaluation)

FR

Evaluation à mi-parcours d'un programme

couvrant plusieurs contrats et secteurs

(secteur/contrats relatifs

aux services de santé + contrat d'appui aux PMEs du secteur des

services mais également industriel).

FC n/a

14

1.9

38

,00

N/A

EUD

Tunisia

Programme

d’actions pilote dans le cadre de l’initiative européenne pour le

développement agricole et rural (ENPARD)

CRIS

Decision 2013/024994 (n° de la décision évaluée)

(CRIS contract ENI/2018/398509 = contrat pour

l'évaluation)

FR

Evaluation à mi-parcours d'un programme

couvrant plusieurs contrats

FC n/a

39

.00

0,0

0

Projet de rapport final

partagé avec les parties prenantes. Commentaires reçus et en attente d'une version révisée pour

approbation.


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD

Tunisia

Programme d'Appui au Développemen

t des Zones Défavorisées (PAZD)

CRIS Decision 2011 / 023-

202 (n° de la décision évaluée)

(CRIS contract ENI 2015 / 369-465 = contrat pour l'évaluation)

FR

Evaluation à mi-parcours du programme d'appui

aux Zones défavorisées PAZD

FC n/a

75

,58

8.0

0

N/A

EUD Ukraine

Preparing

Assessment of EU ongoing support to justice sector reforms In

Ukraine

ENI/2010/021-849 ENI/2018/401-933

O

Contract

ENPI/2013/328-160 Project to Support

Justice Sector Reforms in Ukraine

fitness

check

72

.38

0,0

0

The purpose was to

perform an assessment of ongoing EU assistance to the justice sector reforms rendered by the project ''Support to

Justice Sector Reforms in Ukraine'' , and provide suggestions as to the scope and modalities of the

possible future EU assistance to the justice

sector reforms in Ukraine

b. Studies

cancelled in 2018


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

DG NEAR

A4

Thematic evaluation on support to

Public Administration Reform in

enlargement and neighbourhood countries

Evaluate first

Performance assessment of PAR related assistance

funded under IPA I, ENPI over the period of 2007-2013, draw

lessons from these past and on-going experiences and provide recommendations for the EC to improve its work in relation to PAR

O

DEVCO

, SG

22

1.6

06

,00

Cancelled due to poor quality of the evaluation work and Final Report.

EUD Republic of

North

Macedonia

IPA/2016/381-

718 Evaluation of the impact of IPA funds on fostering the

reforms in the sector of internal market

381-718

impact evaluation in support

of programm

ing

policy area FC

NEAR

10

7.6

80

,00

Cancelled due to poor

quality of the evaluation work and Final Report.

EUD Jordan

Support to

Democratic

Governance / Support to Non-State Actors

DEC 021-

931

FR Civil Society & Non-

State Actors E

NEAR

10

0.0

00

,0

0

Evaluation cancelled

with a view to include

the other components under the same decision


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD

Kosovo

Socio-Economic impact of EU

assistance in the Kosovo regions

038 065

A + C Ex-

post NEAR

40

.00

0,0

0 Not relevant anymore

EUD Lebanon

Evaluation of the decision Supporting Lebanon Inclusive and Sustainable

Socio-

Economic Development through Mine Action

FR Programme

ENPI/2013/23-316 FINAL

Cancelled and replaced by a verification mission of international organisations

EUD

Lebanon

Evaluation of Contracts related to the delivery and installation of Supplies within

the decision

Developing National Capability for Security and Stabilisation

O Programme

ENPI/2010/021-838

Cancelled; Evaluation of EU support to the security sector reform was conducted by DG NEAR


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD Libya

Review of Remote Management

and Remote Monitoring Modalities,

Risk Assessment and Risk Mitigation Practices in Libya

2016/381291/1

O humanitarian aid

modalities I

Cancelled as evaluation was done through direct award with Voluntas in

preparation of third-party monitoring exercise

EUD Libya

Libya Health

Systems Strengthening (LHSS) Programme

2012/303-

789

O Health I

Cancelled and replaced

by third-party monitoring in 2019 under specific contract

EUD Libya

Improving Health

Information System and Supply Chain

Management in Libya

2015/366-359

O Health I

Cancelled and replaced by third-party

monitoring in 2019 under specific contract

EUD Libya

PAF II (Public Administration Facility)

2015/359-555

O Governance I

Cancelled; more comprehensive ex-post evaluation foreseen in 2019


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD Montenegr

o

Promotion and protection of human rights

of Roma, Egyptians and other

vulnerable groups

Dec 2015/37-894

Ctr 2016/381-395

O

Social issues / Human Rights / Anti-discrimination

Covered by a ROM mission

EUREP Palestine

EU support to the Institutional strengthening

of the State

Audit Administrative Control Bureau (SAACB) – Phase 1 and 2

- in Palestine'

ENPI/2010/248-920 ENPI/2014/324-763

O

The evaluation is not relevant anymore due to latest context developments

EUD Moldova

Mid-term evaluation ENPARD

34128

O

Budget support programme ''ENPARD Moldova – Support to Agriculture and Rural

Development ''

Cancelled; included in the Mid-term evaluation and review of the National Agriculture and

Rural Development

Strategy for 20142020 launched by the R. Moldova Government


Studies

finalised or

cancelled in 2018

Title CRIS



Costs (EUR)

Comments

Reference

EUD Tunisia

Programme d'appui à la réforme et

modernisation du secteur de la sécurité de

la République tunisienne

ENI/2015/038-406

O

Reportée car sur 3 contrats, un a été résilié (Human Dynamics) et

un autre a été signé très tardivement (DCAF)

NEAR D5

Evaluation on the Municipal Window of the Infrastructure

Project Facility

related actions/projects under MCP -

Contracts

221084-225383-225824-216156-225419

O

Action - several decisions - several contracts

Final

evaluation

15

0.0

00

,00

No continuation of the same set up for later on programming

EUD Turkey

The EU acquis on asylum & migration vs the Turkish legislation

30

.00

0,0

0 Cancelled due to lack of

funds

EUD Turkey

Evaluation of performance of EU assistance in the area of fundamental

rights

30

.00

0,0

0 Cancelled due to lack of

funds


ANNEX 10: Specific annex related to “Financial Management”

1. Controls supporting the achievement of the objectives

The controls16 put in place by DG NEAR management provide reasonable assurance that

the internal control objectives are achieved, the risks related to financial management

are adequately managed and the legality and regularity of underlying transactions is

ensured. They take into account the multiannual character of the DG programmes as well

as the nature of the payments concerned.

DG NEAR's assurance is based on a number of controls, which are implemented either ex

ante or ex post

1 - Financial circuits: as in all DGs, the level of ‘ex-ante’ controls (before the approval

of the AOSD) consists in the tight supervision and checks of all operational and financial

aspects of transactions based on the financial circuits of the DG, assisted by very

comprehensive and detailed checklists. This is a major source of detection of errors.

2 - Supervision missions: these represent a management tool at the level of Directors.

They provide assurance to the AOSD, as well as insight into the Delegations' capacity to

manage EU external assistance and to achieve their goals. The supervision missions are

carried out in a cooperative and constructive spirit, aimed at enhanced mutual

understanding between Headquarters and the Delegation, at the exchange of information

as well as at the improvement of the Delegations' management of EU external

assistance. Each Delegation is visited every 2-4 years.

3 - Control plan: In direct management (IPA and ENI) DG NEAR carries out a robust

risk assessment at project-level at the beginning of each year, which is the basis of the

control plan. The objective is to have an additional layer of controls which the AOSD

activates if he perceives specific risks. It consists in a list of financial verifications and

operational controls.

The financial verifications are

3a - contractual verifications launched by the Commission (explicitly

required in contractual documents). This concerns mainly the Southern

Neighbourhood EUDs (Pegase, programme estimates) and occurs mostly every

year or

3b - risk based verifications (based on perceived risks that are not already

mitigated by a contractual control).

Since March 201817, financial audits have been replaced by expenditure

verifications focusing on legality/regularity of expenditure reported rather than on

delivering an ‘opinion’. These verifications can be coupled in specific cases with

system verifications; in indirect management with International Organisations,

verifications consist in agreed upon procedures, where controls are strictly

determined in agreements such as FAFA and in which auditors issue 'reports on

16 Where appropriate, these controls also apply to all the contributions of the EU Trust funds.

17 Ares(2018)1155969 of 01.03.2018

https://webgate.ec.testa.eu/Ares/document/show.do?documentId=080166e5b87f1c7b&timestamp=1543228664700


factual findings'.

All Financial verifications are listed in an Audit Plan validated by the FAST

Committee and are monitored in the Audit Module until all recommendations are

followed up.

The operational controls are

3c - Results-Oriented Monitoring (ROM), is a tool to report on the

performance and results of EU funded projects and programmes. It makes

reference to four criteria (relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability). This

provides basic information to generate future monitoring/evaluation/verification

and management decision at project/programme level,

3d - Evaluations, systematic and objective assessments of on-going or

completed projects, programmes or policies, their design, implementation and

results. Evaluations are usually performed by independent, external experts who

scrutinize an intervention against defined criteria such as relevance, efficiency,

effectiveness; sustainability, coherence and EU added value (OECD DAC and

European Commission Better Regulation evaluation criteria).

3e - On the spot checks, such checks complement monitoring in that they

ensure that contract / project deliverables are adequately verified on the spot,

along with aspects of legality and regularity, to support the operational visa

(‘certified correct’) or to provide supplementary assurance in IMBC that the

monitoring and controls of the national authorities / entrusted entities to support

their payment visas can be relied upon. On the spot checks can include an

operational and a contractual/financial dimension, in which case they involve both

operational and contracts and finance staff.

4 - Contractual verifications launched by the beneficiaries: These mandatory

expenditure verifications accompanying requests for payment are explicitly required in

contractual documents launched by the beneficiary. The terms of reference for such

controls are now fully aligned with those of financial verifications launched by the

Commission. Auditors are requested to deliver the list of all items checked. This should

increase transparency, reliability and allow for re-performance. This is an important

mitigating measure in view of the current reservation on grants in direct management.

5 - Pillar assessments of Entrusted Entities: The Commission may entrust budget

implementation tasks in indirect management to entrusted entities (IMEE) that

demonstrate a level of financial management and protection of the EU's financial interest

equivalent to that of the Commission. This ability is verified by carrying out an ex-ante

pillar assessment of the entity. These assessments are supervised either by DG NEAR or

other Commission services. It is a sine qua non condition to sign agreements with these

entities, but is not an ex-ante validation of the legality/regularity of future costs to be

submitted to the Commission.

6 - Controls in indirect management with Beneficiary countries IPA: The

Commission can entrust budget implementation tasks in indirect management to

beneficiary countries (IMBC). Before signing a financing agreement, DG NEAR carries out

system verifications in order to assess the effective and efficient functioning of the

control system in the beneficiary country in accordance with the requirements set in the

FR and the IPA regulation, transposed in a framework agreement signed with each

beneficiary country. These verifications constitute the key element giving assurance to

the AOSD on the readiness of the IMBC structures. These systems are reassessed on an


annual basis. Additional assurance is obtained by ex-ante/ex-post controls18 in

procurement and grant processes, review of the system/transactional audits of the

beneficiary country’s audit authority and the clearance of accounts procedure.

7 - IAS and ECA : Controls are also performed by the external audit bodies, the Internal

Audit Service (IAS) and the European Court of Auditors (ECA), and come in

reinforcement of the control system of the DG.

8 - Residual Error Rate: The residual error rate (RER) study enables the effectiveness

of the overall control framework to be evaluated, and forms an important part of the

information at the Director General’s disposal when signing the Declaration of Assurance.

Residual errors are those that have evaded all prevention, detection and correction

controls in the existing control framework.

The RER indicator is designed to identify residual errors which have not been detected by

the internal control system and conclude on its effectiveness. When the RER is below the

materiality threshold of 2% set by the ECA, it is a strong signal that the controls put in

place at all levels of the DG are effective. Moreover, besides the overall error rate, the

RER study reveals the common types of errors and therefore helps to avoid them in the future.

The RER methodology is regularly updated in order to take into account the

recommendations of the Court of Auditors and the IAS. The methodology takes into

account the multiannual nature of DG NEAR’s programmes, as the contracts closed

during the said period are considered for monetary unit sampling.

2. Cost of Controls

Breakdown of cost of controls ex-ante/ex-post

3. European Court of Auditors – Performance Audits

In 2018, five performance audit reports were published by the European Court of

auditors in which DG NEAR was involved. The reports of the performance audits for which

DG NEAR was in the lead are: ‘EU pre-accession assistance to Turkey’ published in March

2018 and ‘The Facility for Refugees in Turkey’ published in November 2018. The reports

of the performance audits for which DG NEAR was associated DG are: ‘European Union

Emergency Trust Fund for Africa’; ‘Transparency of EU funds implemented by NGOs’

published in December 2018 and ‘Centres of Excellence Initiative to mitigate chemical,

18

As of 2019 full ex ante controls will be applied in procurement in all IPA IMBC countries

Cost of control in 2018 by RCS (million) Cost of control % Expenditureex ante (M€) % ex post (M€)%

RCS 1 Grants in Direct Management 22,1 3,07% 19,5 2,70% 2,7 0,37%

RCS 2 Procurement in Direct Management 17,2 5,98% 14,3 4,97% 2,9 1,01%

RCS 3 Budget Support 8,6 2,05% 8,1 1,93% 0,5 0,11%

RCS 4Indirect Management w ith Beneficiary

countries 11,6 2,29% 10,4 2,05% 1,2 0,24%

RCS 5 Indirect Management w ith Entrusted Entities 20,4 1,72% 19,2 1,62% 1,2 0,10%

NO RCS Other 8,4 2,70% 8,0 2,58% 0,4 0,12%

Total 88,3 2,78% 79,5 2,50% 8,8 0,28%


biological, radiological and nuclear risks from outside the EU’ published in June 2018.

Special report no 07/2018: EU pre-accession assistance to Turkey: Only limited results so far, published on 14/03/2018

Objective

The Court’s objective was to assess the design and effectiveness of IPA implementation

in Turkey. The audit focused on answering the following question: ‘Has EU pre-accession

assistance to Turkey been well designed and effective?’ This question was broken down

into two sub-questions: (a) Was the IPA in Turkey well-designed by the Commission?

(b) Was the IPA effective in supporting its priority sectors in Turkey?

Main findings

The Court identified that IPA objectives were well designed by the Commission but IPA’s

effectiveness was limited. In practice, the IPA funds spent insufficiently addressed some

fundamental needs in the rule of law and governance sectors, where some critical

reforms are overdue. In areas where there was more political will, such as customs,

employment and taxation, IPA I projects have contributed to aligning Turkey with the

acquis and strengthening its administrative capacity. However, the sustainability of these

results is at risk because of the difficulties in spending the available IPA funds and the

backsliding on reforms.

When considering the design of IPA, the Court found that the Commission set objectives

properly but stated that in reality, the funds spent under the IPA I objectives have barely

addressed some fundamental needs: the independence and impartiality of the justice

sector, the fight against high level corruption and organised crime, press freedom, the

prevention of conflicts of interest, and reinforcing external audit and civil society. This is

due, according to the Commission’s own analysis, to lack of political will on the part of

the Turkish authorities.

The Court issued the following recommendations:

• Better target IPA funds;

• Improve the sector approach assessments;

• Increase the use of political and project conditionality;

• Improve monitoring of project performance;

• Reduce backlogs by applying indirect management selectively.

Commission position

The Commission considers the report to be constructive, mentioning real issues and

weaknesses, while acknowledging the complex political situation in which pre-accession

assistance has been delivered in Turkey.

The recommendations issued by the Court have been accepted and their implementation

is on-going.

Special report no 27/2018: The Facility for Refugees in Turkey:

helpful support, but improvements needed to deliver more value

for money, published on 13/11/2018


Objective

The scope of the audit was to examine whether the Facility effectively supported the

refugees in Turkey. The auditors focused on the management of the first tranche of

financing from the Facility (€3 billion) and on the results so far under its humanitarian

strand.

Main findings

The ECA found that, in a challenging context, the Facility had rapidly mobilised funds to

provide a swift response. Nevertheless, it did not fully achieve its objective of

coordinating this response effectively.

All the humanitarian projects audited provided helpful support to the refugees, mainly

through cash-based assistance, and most of them achieved their intended outputs.

However, half of them have not yet achieved the outcomes expected, and nine out of ten

had to be extended. The challenging operating environment hindered timely

implementation by NGOs.

The Commission used a comprehensive assessment to identify refugees’ priority needs.

However, disagreements with Turkey on how to address needs in municipal infrastructure

and socio-economic support meant these areas were insufficiently covered.

The Commission put in place appropriate measures to monitor humanitarian projects.

The main limitation was the Turkish authorities’ refusal to grant access to beneficiary

data for the two cash-assistance projects.

The auditors recommend that, in future, the European Commission should:

• better address refugees’ needs for municipal infrastructure and socio-economic

support;

• improve the streamlining and complementarity of assistance;

• implement a strategy for the transition from humanitarian to development assistance;

• improve the efficiency of cash-assistance projects;

• together with the Turkish authorities, address the need to improve the operating

environment for NGOs;

• scale up monitoring and reporting of the Facility for Refugees in Turkey.

Commission position

The Commission welcomes the ECA report, accepts its recommendations and is already

implementing them in its programming of the second tranche of EUR 3 billion.


Special report no 32/2018: European Union Emergency Trust Fund

for Africa: Flexible but lacking focus, published on 05/12/2018

Objective

The Court’s objective was to examine whether the EUTF for Africa is well-designed and

well-implemented. The audit focused on answering the following question: ‘Is the EU

Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing the root causes of migration well-

designed and well-implemented?’ This question was broken down into two sub-questions:

(a) Is the EU Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing the root causes of

migration well-designed? (b) Is the EU Emergency TF for stability and addressing the root

causes of migration well-implemented so far?

Main findings

The Court concluded that the EUTF for Africa is a flexible tool, but that it was not

designed to address efficiently the unprecedented challenges it faces. While the EUTF for

Africa has been fast when it comes to launching projects, weaknesses persist in their

implementation.

The objectives of the EUTF for Africa are broad. This has allowed flexibility in terms of

adapting the support to suit different and changing situations, but is less useful when it

comes to steering action across the three windows and for measuring impact. The

Commission has not comprehensively analysed and quantified the needs to be addressed

by the trust fund, nor the means at its disposal.

Compared to traditional development instruments the EUTF for Africa is faster in

launching projects, but their implementation faces delays similar to projects funded by

other means.

The project objectives were often not SMART and indicators used for measuring project

performance lacked baselines. The audited projects were at an early phase of

implementation but had started to produce outputs.

The EUTF for Africa has contributed to the effort of decreasing the number of illegal

migrants passing from Africa to Europe, but this contribution cannot be measured with

any level of certainty and the added value of the Trust Fund is therefore difficult to

capture.

The Court issued the following recommendations:

• Clarify the objectives of the EUTF for Africa

• Revise the selection procedure for projects

• Take measures to speed up implementation

• Improve the monitoring of the EUTF for Africa

Commission position

The ECA report on the EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa confirms the tool's clear

added value, commending that audited projects have already started producing concrete

results.

The recommendations made by the ECA are valuable input to the Commission's work,

and their implementation is already on-going.


Special report no 35/2018: Transparency of EU funds implemented by NGOs: more effort needed, published on 18/12/2018

Objective

The scope of the audit task was to assess the transparency of EU funds contracted with

NGOs. The Court assessed the Commission’s identification of entities as NGOs, where the

EU funds implemented by NGOs go and whether the Commission disclosed this

information in a transparent manner. The Court covered the main policy areas in which

NGOs implement EU funds, focusing in particular on the largest area, external action.

Main findings

The ECA concluded that the Commission is not sufficiently transparent regarding the use

of EU funds by NGOs. The assignment of NGO status in the Commission’s accounting

system, which is based on self-declaration, and the limited checks, make the

classification of an entity as an NGO unreliable. While the selection of NGO-led projects is

generally transparent, different Commission departments do not manage grants awarded

by third parties in the same way, and the selection process for NGOs among the UN

bodies audited is not always transparent.

The data collected on EU funds used by NGOs is not uniform, and the Commission does

not have comprehensive information, particularly with networks of international NGOs

and projects under indirect management. Furthermore, in indirect management, the lack

of information available hinders checks on costs.

Information on EU funds used by NGOs is published in several systems, but the amount

of detail disclosed is limited, although the Commission generally reports data on

humanitarian and development aid in accordance with international transparency

standards.

The ECA recommend that the European Commission should:

• improve the reliability of the information on NGOs in its accounting system;

• check the application of rules and procedures regarding EU grants to NGOs by third

parties;

• improve the information collected on funds spent by NGOs;

• adopt a uniform approach to publishing details of funds provided to NGOs;

• verify UN bodies’ publication of complete and accurate data on EU funding awarded to

NGOs.

Commission position

The Commission provides funding to NGOs in a transparent way and fully in line with the

rules as set out in the Financial Regulation. In this respect, the Commission does not

agree with the criticism of the European Court of Auditors that the Commission is not

sufficiently transparent.

The Commission accepts all of the recommendations except for the recommendation no 1

on improvement of the reliability of the information on NGOs in its accounting system,

due to the following reason:


‘The Commission wishes to be fully transparent on beneficiaries of EU funds, within the

limitations set by the current regulatory framework. However, while the term “NGO” is

widely used, it has no generally accepted definition either at the international level, or at

EU level. This is the reason why the Commission has, on its own initiative, developed a

system whereby organisations declare themselves as NGOs, under the pre-requisite that

the legal entity concerned is flagged as both a private and not-for-profit organisation.

Although it may result in different groups of recipients than what stems from concepts

applied at national level, the Commission prefers to follow this prudent approach, which

is based on objective and verifiable criteria. The Commission considers that any further

criteria would require an EU level harmonisation of the concept of NGO which should be

agreed by the legislator. A cross-country analysis of the legal framework of NGOs in six

European and non-European jurisdictions indicates diverse understandings and

designations of “NGO” between countries, and this suggests that harmonisation of the

concept may be problematic.’

Special report 14/2018: Centres of Excellence Initiative to

mitigate chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear risks from outside the EU (CBRN), published on 19/06/2018

Objective

DG NEAR was not the main focus of this audit, the objective of which was to assess

whether the Centres of Excellence Initiative contributed effectively to mitigating

chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear risks from outside the EU.

Main findings

The Court identified that partner countries are now more involved in the initiation and

implementation of projects, organization at regional level has been strengthened and

cooperation between decision-makers and implementing bodies has improved. While

some progress has been made, the role of the EU delegations and the speed of project

implementation are still not satisfactory.

The auditors recommend that the Commission and the EEAS:

• prioritise activities on the basis of a systemic risk assessment;

• strengthen the Initiative's regional dimension;

• further strengthen the EU delegations' role in the Initiative;

• identify potential synergies and other available funding sources;

• increase accountability and visibility of activities and results through improved

• monitoring and evaluation;

• overhaul the CBRN web portal to allow easy access.

The only recommendation addressed to DG NEAR states that ‘DG DEVCO and the EEAS

should work together with other relevant Commission Directorates-General, in particular

with DG NEAR, as well as with other donors in order to identify potential synergies and

available funding sources which could be better used to support CBRN activities.

Commission position

The Commission has accepted all recommendations and their implementation is on-

going.



ANNEX 11: Analysis of Key Performance Indicators

KPI Analysis 2018

DG NEAR

DG NEAR_aar_2018 Page 161 of 282

Table of contents Error! Bookmark not defined.

II.1 Summary 105

II.2 - Detailed analysis 105

KPI 1 – Accuracy of initial annual financial forecast for payments 105

KPI 2 – Accuracy of initial annual financial forecast for contracts 105

KPI 3 – Accuracy of initial annual financial forecast for decisions 105

KPI 4 – RAL Absorption Period 105

KPI 5 – Average Time to Grant 105

KPI 6 – % of Projects with a red traffic light for Implementation Progress 105

KPI 7 – % of Projects with a red traffic light for Achieving Objectives 105

KPI 8 – Reduction of Old Pre-financing 105

KPI 9 - Expired contracts as a % of the contract portfolio 105

KPI 10 – Reduction of Old RAL 105

KPI 11 – % of payments paid within the contractual deadline 105

KPI 12 – % invoices registered within 7 days of the Commission reception date 105

KPI 13 – Use of DEVCO/NEAR staff and respect of the flexibility arrangements 105

KPI 14 – Control Environment 105

KPI 15 – Risk assessment 105

KPI 16 – Control activities 105

KPI 17 – Information and Communication 105

KPI 18 – Monitoring activities 105

KPI 19 – % of projects visited by Commission staff and/or by the HOD, by project value

105

KPI 20 – % contracting of project evaluations in the Annual Evaluation Plan (AEP) 105

KPI 21 – Undue payments prevented by ex-ante controls as a % of the claimed amount

105

KPI 22 – % contracted of the Annual Audit Plan year N 105

KPI 23 – % implementation of the Annual Audit Plan year N-1 105

KPI 24 – % implementation of the Annual Audit Plan year N-2 105

KPI 25 – Ineligible amounts identified by audits as a % of the audited amount. 105


II.1 Summary

Results at global level

The global performance for DG NEAR in 2018 was steady compared to 2017, as presented

in the table below. A total number of 21 out of 25 KPIs were achieved corresponding to an

overall success rate of 84%, which is totally in line with last year. Although the success

rate in 2018 was stable compared to 2017, there has been a switch in the nature of the

KPIs below the benchmark. The 21 KPIs that reached the target are:

10 in the category A - 'Sound Financial Management and Efficient Use of EC Resources':

Accuracy of initial annual financial forecast for payments and decisions (KPI 1, KPI 3),

Time to Grant (KPI 5), % of Projects with a red traffic light for Implementation Progress

(KPI 6), % of Projects with a red traffic light for Achieving Results (KPI 7), Reduction of

Old Pre-financing (KPI 8), Expired Contracts as a % of the contract portfolio (KPI 9), % of

payments paid within contractual deadline (KPI 11), % invoices registered within 7 days of

the Commission reception date (KPI 12) and Use of DEVCO/NEAR staff and respect of

flexibility arrangements (KPI 13).

All 8 KPIs in the category B – Effectiveness of Internal Control Systems.

3 in the category C - 'Effectiveness of audit system': % contracted of the Annual Audit

Plan: Year N (KPI 22), % implementation of the Annual Audit Plan: Year N-1 and Year N-2

(KPI 23, KPI 24).


KPI Name (*) KPI result 2018 Annual

Target/Benchmark

KPI result

2017

A - Sound financial management and effective use of EC Resources

K01 Accuracy of initial annual financial

forecast for payments 90.31%▼

From 90% to

110% 91.10%▼


forecast for contracts 111.13%▼

From 90% to

110% 108.38%▲


forecast for decisions 96.13%▼

From 90% to

110% 99.99%▲

K04 RAL Absorption Period 4.35▼ Less than 4 years 4.24▼

K05 Time to Grant 71.76 No more than 90 N/A

K06 % of Projects with a red traffic

light for Implementation Progress. 3.87%▼

Not more than

10% 3.63%▲

K07 % of Projects with a red traffic

light for Achieving Results 3.87%▲

Not more than

10% 4.06%▲

K08 Reduction of Old Pre-financing 35.72%▲ At least 25% 31.23%▼

K09 Expired Contracts as a % of the

contract portfolio 14.76%▲

Not more than

15% 18.34%▼

K10 Reduction of Old RAL 22.61%▲ At least 25% 18.43%▼

K11 % of payments paid within the

contractual deadline 90.82%▲ At least 85% 88.62%▲

K12

% invoices registered within 7

days of the Commission reception

date

90.70%▲ At least 80% 88.44%

K13

Use of DEVCO/NEAR staff and

respect of the flexibility

arrangements

100.00%= Yes for 100% of

Delegations 100.00%=

B – Effectiveness of Internal Control Systems

K14 ICF – Control Environment 92.47% At least 80% N/A

K15 ICF – Risk Assessment 91.98% At least 80% N/A

K16 ICF – Control Activities 88.99% At least 80% N/A

K17 ICF – Information and

Communication 94.11% At least 80% N/A

K18 ICF – Monitoring Activities 93.49% At least 80% N/A

K19 % of projects visited by

Commission staff and/or the HoD,

85.68%▲ At least 80% 82.41%▲


by project value

K20

% contracting of project

evaluations in the Annual

Evaluation Plan (AEP)

77.84%▼ At least 75% 80.89%▲

K21

Undue payments prevented by ex-

ante controls as a % of the

claimed amount

5.12%▼ At least 2% 6.57%▲

C – Effectiveness of audit system

K22 % contracted of the Annual Audit

Plan: Year N 71.33%▼ At least 60% 75.99%▲

K23 % implementation of the Annual

Audit Plan: Year N-1 68.98%▼ At least 40% 69.68%▼

K24 % implementation of the Annual

Audit Plan: Year N-2 86.45%▼ At least 60% 96.62%▼

K25

Ineligible amounts identified by

audits as a % of the audited

amount

1.26%▼ At least 2% 1.37%▼

(*) Explanation of the table: The arrows indicate the trend compared to 2017 in terms of

improvement (upwards) or deterioration (downwards). In 2018 a new KPI was introduced,

KPI 5, which measures the average time to sign grant contracts. Consequentially, there

are no trends yet for KPI 5. In addition, the KPIs 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 related to the

Internal Control Framework have been updated based on the 17 Principles grouped into

five internal control components which were introduced in 2017 and implemented in 2018.

The two DG NEAR instruments for Pre-accession Assistance (IPAII) and European

Neighborhood (ENI) are measured against the same targets. However, as IPA is aimed at

a different objective than ENI, it is important to note that IPA has a longer implementation

cycle. The Financial Memorandum (FM) signed with the enlargement countries provides the

basis for multi-annual assistance implemented by the country. For the purpose of

coherence with ENI, the FMs are compared with projects which are measured under KPI6

and 7. Detailed explanation is given under the section of this report related to KPI6 and 7.

Priorities for 2019

The four remaining KPIs that are below the benchmark are the Accuracy of initial annual

financial forecast for contracts (KPI 2), the RAL Absorption Period (KPI 4), the Reduction of

Old RAL (KPI 10) and the Ineligible amounts identified by audits as a % of the audited

amount (KPI 25).

Improvement for these KPIs will be part of NEAR's priorities for 2019 as described below.

KPI 02, the Accuracy of initial annual financial forecast for contracts is slightly above the

target (111.13% against target value between 90% and 110%). This KPI is mainly

driven by Turkey which faced some technical issues in encoding three contracts.

KPI 04, the RAL absorption period is slightly above the target (4.35 years against target

value of less than 4 years). 16 Delegations did not meet the benchmark for this KPI. This

is the result of a combination of high financial amounts committed during the year and low


level of payment during the reporting year.

KPI 10 – Reduction of Old RAL. The overall result of 22.61% does not exceed the target of

at least 25%. Three Delegations did not meet the benchmark for KPI 10. Contracts holding

an old RAL relate mainly Pro forma registration (46%) and National Funds (19%):

The overall result is mainly due to the following factors:

• The increase in the number of contracts which could not be closed given their

different outstanding contractual & legal issues.

• For some decisions, contracts still have to be concluded. For other decisions, funds

should still be de-committed after closure. This did not happen on the one hand due

to audit and evaluations still to be undertaken, on the other hand, due to late

closure of contracts.

• Pending disbursements for Budget Support (BS) operations which have been

blocked since 2013 in Egypt and the need in recent years to explore alternative

options to Budget Support, leading to a significant increase in EU blending

operations with Egypt. Blending operations, usually concern major and highly

complex investment projects with an average implementation period significantly

longer than the average duration of EU programmes implemented under other

modalities.

As a mitigating measure, close follow-up on closure of contracts and the start in 2019 of

data quality campaigns will further improve the sound financial management and effective

use of EC resources for the 3 KPIs which did not meet the benchmark in 2018.

KPI 25 - Ineligible amounts identified by audits as a % of the audited amount. At DG NEAR

level, 1.26% or EUR 10.75 million of audited expenditure was found to be ineligible which

is lower than the 1.37% in 2017. Overall, this reflects that contracts are in general well

monitored by the HQs/EU Delegations (EUD) and ineligible costs are detected early.

However, in order to improve the identification of ineligible amounts by audits as a % of

the audited amount (KPI 25), the HQs/EUD will take additional measures towards cost-

effectiveness and improved audit performance.


Results at Delegation level:

It is to be noted, as highlighted below, that good results have been achieved at Delegation

level with an increased number of Delegations meeting targets for most of the KPIs in

2018.

% of green

KPIs

2016 2017 2018

Number of

Delegations

%

Number of

Delegations

%

Number of

Delegations

%

Total

Delegations 22 22

22

80% and

more 6 27%▲ 15 68%▲ 17 77%▲

60% and

more 21 95%▲ 21 95%= 21 95%=

Less than

50% 1 05%▲ 1 05%= 0 00%▲

At 2018 year end and thanks to the action plan implemented during the year, only one

Delegation, Syria, did not achieve the benchmark of more than 60% of green KPIs.

However, despite the current difficult situation in Syria, the performance of the Delegation

further improved compared to 2017. Its benchmark increased from 40% to 56%. For more

details, please see section II.2 "Detailed Analysis".

Overall Green KPI Result 2016 2017 2018

Albania 74% 76% 80%

Belarus 70% 92% 80%

Egypt 83% 84% 84%

European Union Office in Kosovo19 70% 80% 84%

Republic of North Macedonia 74% 92% 96%

Georgia 91% 96% 98%

Morocco 83% 88% 84%

Serbia 65% 76% 88%

19 This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR

1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence.


Syria 22% 40% 56%

Turkey 70% 80% 64%

Ukraine 78% 80% 92%

The general trend at KPI level is positive with steady improvements achieved for most of

the KPIs.

Accuracy of initial annual financial forecast for payments is continuously accurate and as

good as within benchmarks over the last 3 years (2018: 90.31%, 2017: 91.10% and

2016: 95.06%).

Accuracy of initial annual financial forecasts for contracts hasn't reached the benchmark

between 90% and 110% target in 2018. The KPI value of 111.13% is slightly above the

benchmark (2018: 111.13%, 2017: 108.38% and 2016: 91.45%).

Accuracy of initial annual financial forecasts for decisions is continuously accurate and as

good as within benchmarks over the last 3 years (2018: 96.13%, 2017: 99.99% and

2016: 99.06%).

The KPI on RAL absorption period does not reach the benchmark and remains slightly

above it over the last 3 years (2018: 4.35, 2017: 4.24 and 2016: 4.15).

During the last three years, DG NEAR has managed to improve the reduction of the

amount of old pre-financing. It has to be noted that this depends on the maturity of old

pre-financings as they fall into the reference period. The graphs below show the evolution

of reduction of old pre-financing in percentage and in amount.

28%

29%

30%

31%

32%

33%

34%

35%

36%

37%

2016 2017 2018

Reduction of Old Pre-financing evolution 2016 to 2018 (in%)


2.070 1.952

2.106

1.390 1.342 1.354

-

500

1.000

1.500

2.000

2.500

2016 2017 2018

Reduction of old pre-financing from 2016 to 2018 (in EUR million)

Old Pref 1/1/N Old Pref 31/12/N


The KPI on expired contracts reached the benchmark in 2018 whereas it was not reached

in the past years (2018: 14.76%, 2017: 18.34% and 2016: 15.62%). The evolution in

terms of percentage and numbers is illustrated by the graphs below.

0,0%

2,0%

4,0%

6,0%

8,0%

10,0%

12,0%

14,0%

16,0%

18,0%

20,0%

2016 2017 2018

Evolution of the expired contracts KPI since 2016

852 1,029 755

5,456 5,610 5,114

0

1.000

2.000

3.000

4.000

5.000

6.000

2016 2017 2018

Nbr of expired contracts since 2016

Expired Total EC Contracts


The amount of old RAL has not reached the benchmark in 2018. The situation varies from

one Delegation to another, some being unable to close old commitments due to

forthcoming evaluations or audits or late closure of contracts. Closure of contracts will be

set as a priority in 2019 in order to clean up the contract portfolio and reduce old RAL. The

two graphs below show the evolution of old RAL in percentage and in amounts.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

2016 2017 2018

Reduction of old RAL evolution 2016 to 2018 (in %)

594 574

836

377

468

647

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2016 2017 2018

Reduction of old RAL evolution from 2016 to 2018 (in EUR million)

Old RAL 1/1/N Old RAL 31/12/N


Ineligible amounts identified by audit as % of the audited amount has not reached the

benchmark (2018: 1.26% - EUR 10.75 million, 2017: 1.37% - EUR 8.94 million and 2016:

1.83% - EUR 8 million). Overall, this reflects that contracts are in general well monitored

by the Directorates and EU Delegations and early detection of ineligible costs. In order to

improve the rates, the HQs/EUD will take additional measures towards cost-effectiveness

and improved audit performance.

The implementation of all three audit plans has reached the benchmark over the last 3

years. This confirms the improvements enabled by the new audit system ,which has been

implemented over the last years.

Performance on projects implementation and results (KPI-6 and KPI-7)

KPI-6 and KPI-7 are forward looking and risk-based indicators calling for attention on

projects performing not as expected. The actual performance on these KPIs is above the

benchmarks of maximum 10 % red projects, with respectively 3.87% and 3.87%. The

actual performance is stable compared to previous year were the actual performance on

these KPIs 6 and 7 were respectively 3.63% and 4.06%.

In addition to the usual benchmarks on red projects for KPI-6 and KPI-7, the EAMRs report

on moderately problematic projects ("orange" flagging). While the number is substantially

higher than the red projects, they provide an indication of projects' ambitions in terms of

results. The majority of Delegations announce an increased policy dialogue and possible

extension of project duration as corrective measures to keep up to these high

expectations. Capacity of implementing partner and beneficiaries and correlated issues of

procurement are frequently cited as concern.

The performance may be different if considered in number of projects or in value of

projects. Therefore the EAMR provides data on KPI-6 and KPI-7 in both numbers and

values on orange and on red projects and on both combined. While on average the

performance is relatively similar at Directorate General level in value or in number of

projects, substantial differences may appear at the level of Delegations. For details see

section II.2.”Detailed analysis under KPI 6 and 7”.


II.2 - Detailed analysis

Results at KPI level

KPI 1 – Accuracy of initial annual financial forecast for payments

In 2018, NEAR achieved 90.31% of its financial forecasts for payments (EUR 3,342 million

out of a total of EUR 3,701 million forecasted for payments). In 2017, the result was at

91.10% and EUR 3,122 million.

90.31%▼

NEAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR R

NEAR

SG

UA

TF N

OA20

Total

KPI

Value

70.99

%

102.95

%

87.19

%

92.62

%

139.78

%

108.52

%

58.65

% 90.31%

Actual

s (in

EUR

million

)

586.28 1,344.

78 526.39 596.18 8.51 207.01 73.01

3,342.1

6

Foreca

sts (in

EUR

million

)

825.88 1,306.

25 603.70 643.72 6.09 190.76 124.48

3,700.8

8

Varian

ce (in

EUR

million

)

-

239.61 38.53 -77.31 -47.54 2.42 16.25 -51.47 -358.72

20 Trust Fund North of Africa


Within target: 15 Delegations21 and 5 HQ Units were well situated within the

targets/benchmarks of 90-110%.

Above target: Delegation exceeding the forecast was Egypt (119.45%). HQ Units

exceeding the forecast were NEAR A 02 (117.75%), NEAR R 05 (119.77%), NEAR B 01

(148.41%) and NEAR R 03 (/).

Below target: Remaining 6 Delegations and 5 HQ Units performed below the 90% with the

biggest gaps in actual amounts:

Payments forecast – KPI value below the target of 90%

Delegation/HQ

Unit

(in EUR million)

KPI INITIAL

FORECAST ACTUALS VARIANCE

NEAR D 02 0.00% 10.01 0.00 -10.01

Moldova 45.96% 106.39 48.90 -57.49

TF NOA 58.65% 124.48 73.01 -51.47

NEAR B 03 60.59% 67.87 41.12 -26.75

Turkey 70.08% 793.77 556.27 -237.50

Algeria 71.22% 47.47 33.81 -13.66

21 Serbia, Morocco, Georgia, Israel, Syria, Armenia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Tunisia,

Montenegro, West Bank & Gaza Strip, Albania, Azerbaijan, Lebanon, North Macedonia and

Ukraine.

Actuals 3122

Actuals 3342

Forecast 3427

Forecast 3701

2800

2900

3000

3100

3200

3300

3400

3500

3600

3700

3800

2017 2018

Payments forecasts 2017 vs 2018 (in EUR million)


NEAR C 02 76.53% 68.78 52.64 -16.14

European Union

Office in Kosovo 77.16% 61.63 47.56 -14.08

Belarus 77.84% 32.14 25.02 -7.12

Jordan 84.38% 95.78 80.82 -14.96

NEAR A 04 89.34% 7.08 6.32 -0.75

Directorates with the biggest gap in Actuals below Forecasts are NEAR A (EUR -240

million), NEAR C (EUR -77 million) and TF NOA (EUR -51 million).

KPI 2 – Accuracy of initial annual financial forecast for contracts

The Accuracy of initial annual financial forecast for contracts is slightly above the target

(111.13% against target value between 90% and 110%) compared to 108.38% in 2017

that was within the benchmark. This KPI deviation is mainly a result from changes

concerning two big contracts related to Turkey: Contract (Multi-annual Programme for

Transport) for €313.4 million was forecasted for 2017, but was introduced in the system

only in 2018 and a second contract (FRIT Promoting Integration of Syrian Kids into the

Turkish Education System) for €400 million that was signed only in 2018. The forecast for

the FRIT II extension was done in February 2018, at a time when the division of funding

between EC and the EU MS was still to be negotiated.

111.13%▼

NEAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR R

NEAR

SG

UA

TF N

OA

Total

KPI Value 252.16

%

96.16

%

96.36

%

93.16

%

334.07

%

93.54

%

60.09

%

111.13

%

Actuals (in

EUR million) 1,148 1,443 686 745 1 206 153 4,382

Forecasts (in

EUR million) 455 1,500 712 800 0 220 256 3,943

Variance (in

EUR million) 693 -57 -26 -55 1 -14 -103 439


Within target: 13 Delegations22 and 3 HQ Units23 were well situated within the

targets/benchmarks of 90-110%.

Above target: Delegations exceeding the forecast were: Egypt (127.58%) Israel

(178.29%) and Turkey (280.94%).HQ Units exceeding the forecast were: NEAR C 01

(113.38%), NEAR C 02 (127.88%), NEAR R 03 (334.07%), NEAR B 03 (429.95%) and

NEAR B 01 (/).

Below target: Remaining 6 Delegations and 4 HQ Units performed below the 90% with the

biggest gaps in actual amounts:

TOP 10 - Largest variance below Contracts Forecasts

Delegation/HQ Unit

(in EUR million)

INITIAL

FORECAST ACTUALS VARIANCE

NEAR B 02 359.01 106.02 29.53%

NEAR A 02 8.09 3.46 42.77%

Serbia 171.85 86.12 50.11%

Belarus 42.25 21.83 51.66%

Algeria 53.87 31.84 59.10%

22 Jordan, Ukraine, Tunisia, West Bank and Gaza Strip, Georgia, Bosnia & Herzegovina,

Lebanon, Syria, European Union Office in Kosovo, Montenegro, Morocco, the Republic of

North Macedonia and Albania.

23 NEAR A 04, NEAR C 03, NEAR D 05

Actuals

5.137,1

Actuals

4.382,0

Forecast

4.740,0

Forecast

3.943,1

0,0

1.000,0

2.000,0

3.000,0

4.000,0

5.000,0

6.000,0

2017 2018

Contracts forecasts 2017 vs 2018 (in EUR million)


TF NOA 255.42 153.48 60.09%

Armenia 42.72 26.76 62.65%

NEAR A 03 48.88 36.00 73.66%

Azerbaijan 13.44 10.93 81.32%

Moldova 131.32 107.23 81.66%

KPI 3 – Accuracy of initial annual financial forecast for decisions

In 2018, DG NEAR realised 96.13% of its financial forecasts for decisions (EUR 4,255

million against a total of EUR 4,426 million). The result has slightly decreased compared to

2017 (99.99%).

KPI 3 was calculated in 2018 in NEAR only on a Directorate level. Forecast on Decisions

level is done centrally at HQs. Delegations do not do forecast of future Decisions in any

NEAR IT tool.

96.13%▼

NEAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR R

NEAR

SG

UA

TF N

OA

Total

KPI Value 104.63

%

82.38

%

141.62

%

97.58

% -

94.91

%

72.06

%

96.13

%

Actuals (in

EUR million) 778 1,281 724 994 1 190 287 4,255

Forecasts (in

EUR million) 743 1,555 511 1,019 0 200 398 4,426

Variance (in

EUR million) 35 -274 213 -25 1 -10 -111 -171


KPI 4 – RAL Absorption Period

Once a new project is decided, the amount necessary for covering the related expenditure

for the entire duration of the project (usually 3 to 6 years) is put aside by the Commission

("commitment"). The "Reste à Liquider" (RAL) is the difference between the total financial

amount of projects decided and the payments made for those projects.

When dividing the RAL amount at the end of the year by the annual amount of payments

made during the year, it should arrive at an implementation period of less than 4 years

which is considered normal taking into account the multi-annuality of EU projects. Please

note that KPI 4 related to RAL absorption is not benchmarked at HQs level. The benchmark

is only applied at Delegation and DG levels. This is explained by the contracts of centrally-

managed decisions which are usually managed by different entities. The paid amount is

attributed to these entities whereas the decided amount that is left to be contracted is

attributed to the unit managing the decision. As a result the KPI calculation for these units

is not relevant and the benchmark cannot be applied.

The RAL absorption period for 2018 is slightly above the target (4.35 years against target

value of less than 4 years). This is in line with the result in 2017 (4.24 years). 16

Delegations did not meet the benchmark for this KPI. This is the result of a combination of

high financial amounts committed during the year and a low level of payment during the

reporting year.

The ENI lower payment level is largely explained by the underperformance of budget

support measures, where general eligibility criteria or result indicators triggering payments

have not been fulfilled by the beneficiary countries.

For IPA, the payments were influenced by the delays of implementation of activities under

indirect management through the Turkish Authorities, a situation which has not been

facilitated by the latest political developments in the country.

Given the fact that budget support and indirect management through beneficiary countries

contribute the lion's share of the payment delays, DG NEAR will review the best use of

these instruments in the next programming rounds and under the new MFF.

At Delegation level, the TOP and BOTTOM Delegations are as follows:

TOP 10 Delegations KPI result BOTTOM 10

Delegations KPI result

West Bank and

Gaza Strip 0.94 Egypt 10.30

Syria 1.72 Moldova 8.06

Israel 1.90 European Union

Office in Kosovo 7.15

Ukraine 2.52 Tunisia 6.52

The Republic of

North Macedonia 3.28 Algeria 6.52

Lebanon 3.73 Jordan 5.12


Albania 4.28 Turkey 4.94

Bosnia &

Herzegovina 4.46 Armenia 4.84

Belarus 4.50 Montenegro 4.72

Morocco 4.58 Azerbaijan 4.67

KPI 5 – Average Time to Grant

Please note that KPI 5 – Average Time to Grant is a new KPI compared to 2017. This KPI

was previously an Indicator and it is now benchmarked as KPI as from 2018. DG NEAR

signed grant agreements or notified grant decisions within 71.76 days which is below the

benchmark of No more than 90 days. The table below gives an overview by Directorate on

KPI 5 value and the average delay for signing grant agreements or notifying grant

decisions. In total, 179 grant agreements or grant decisions have been signed or notified

including 141 grant agreements or grant decisions signed or notified within the benchmark

of No more than 90 days.

HQ KPI result Total of grants Encoding Days

NEAR A 24.33 3 73

NEAR B 65.11 44 2,865

NEAR C 44.54 28 1,247

NEAR D 65.56 68 4,458

NEAR SGUA 303.00 7 2,121

84% of NEAR's Delegations reached the benchmark. The TOP 10 Delegations in terms of

KPI result are presented in the table below:

TOP 10


Montenegro 3.89

Turkey 6.64

The Republic of

North Macedonia

9.00

Egypt 15.67

Moldova 19.80

Morocco 36.00

Bosnia &

Herzegovina

37.11

Tunisia 37.75

Georgia 38.91

Jordan 43.20


KPI 6 – % of Projects with a red traffic light for Implementation Progress

KPI-6 is computed on the basis of the following question for each project: What is the

expected level of scheduled resources the project will be able to use before the end of the

project (< 75%, red; 75% - 90%, orange; > 90%, green).

On aggregate, NEAR is, with a score of 3.87%, below the benchmark of 10 % projects with

a red traffic light. For further comments, see KPI-7. In 2018, various KPIs are available for

Trust Funds and are included in the KPI Analysis. Trust Funds do their separate AOSD

reports which are attached to DG NEAR AAR 2018.

3.87%▼

NEAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR S

GU

A

TF

MAD

AD

24

TF N

OA Total

KPI result 0.00% 4.77% 4.92% 2.34% 1.47% 8.20% 3.85% 3.87%

Number of

projects

with red

traffic

light

0 42 25 16 2 5 1 91

Number of

ongoing

projects

59 880 508 683 136 61 26 2,353

Project

value with

red traffic

light (in

EUR

million)

0 639 193 124 45 104 6 1,112

Total

project

value (in

EUR

million)

3,612 5,721 2,378 2,575 758 1,042 297 16,383

Contextual

indicator 0.00% 11.17% 8.12% 4.83% 5.99% 9.97% 1.99% 6.79%

24 Trust Fund Madad: Trust Fund in Response to the Syrian Crisis


KPI 7 – % of Projects with a red traffic light for Achieving Objectives

KPI-7 is computed on the basis of the following two questions for each project:

7.1. What is the likely level that the projects will achieve in terms of output targets (<

75%, red; 75% - 90%, orange; > 90%, green)?

7.2. What is the risk that - regardless of any outputs achieved - the intended outcome of

the project will not be achieved (high, red; medium, orange; low, green)?

For KPI-7, the traffic light is awarded based on the worst-scoring of two questions. On

aggregate NEAR is, with a score of 3.87%, below the benchmark of 10 % projects with a

red traffic light.

3.87%▲

NEAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR

SG

UA

TF

MAD

AD

TF N

OA

Total

KPI result 1.69% 4.89% 4.33% 2.34% 2.21% 8.20% 3.85% 3.87%

Number of

projects with

red traffic

light for

achieving

results

1 43 22 16 3 5 1 91

Number of

ongoing

projects

59 880 508 683 136 61 26 2,353

Value of

projects with

red traffic

light for

achieving

results(in

EUR million)

3 538 160 82 85 104 6 979

Total project

value (in

EUR million)

3,612 5,721 2,378 2,575 758 1,042 297 16,383

contextual

indicator 0.08% 9.41% 6.74% 3.20% 11.27% 9.97% 1.99% 5.98%

Comments on KPI-6 and KPI-7

KPI-6 and KPI-7 are forward looking as they assess the probability to fully use the project

resources and to reach the expected level of outputs and outcomes at the end of the

projects. Orange or red traffic lights call for attention and indicate if corrective actions are

envisaged and if risks on implementation and on achieving results remain.


A project can be given an orange traffic light even if it is on schedule, if a risk remains. On

the other hand, a project behind schedule may be given a green traffic light if constraints

or issues have been solved and the project will now continue at full speed and make up for

delays. A project is defined as problematic if one of KPI-6 and/or KPI-7 is orange or red.

The table below shows the various indicators in value of projects (table 1) and in number

of projects (table 2). While on aggregate, the difference between number and value of

projects is small, higher variations may occur at the level of the Delegations.

In total, out of the 2,353 projects appearing in the EAMR with total value of EUR 16,383

million, 1,816 (77.18 %) received a green traffic light ("flag") on both KPI-6 and KPI-7 for

a total value of EUR 11.363 million (69.36 %); 428 projects (18.19 %) were flagged

orange on either KPI-6 or KPI-7 with a total value of EUR 3,808 million (23.24 %) and 109

(4.63 %) were flagged red with a total value of EUR 1,212 million (7.40 %).

Table 1: Performance indicators on KPI-6 and KPI-7 in value per DG NEAR Directorate

Legend – V (in Value):

- Overall: Overall Problematic Flag

- K5: Traffic light for implementation progress

- K6: Traffic light for achieving objectives

- K6.1: Risk of not meeting output targets

- K6.2: Risk of not achieving outcomes


Table 2: Performance indicators on KPI-6 and KPI-7 in number of projects per DG NEAR

Directorate

Legend – V (in Number):

- Overall: Overall Problematic Flag

- K5: Traffic light for implementation progress

- K6: Traffic light for achieving objectives

- K6.1: Risk of not meeting output targets

- K6.2: Risk of not achieving outcomes

The Commission defines high expectations from recipient Governments and implementing

partner and the targets are therefore set ambitious.

Since, the reality in the field is rarely ideal, it is also not rare that the performance is

moderately lower than the initial ambition. This may lead to revisiting the projects and

taking corrective measures, including intensified policy dialogue, as is the case e.g. with

budget support operations, where performance essentially depends on the action of the

Government.

Performance results per beneficiary country

The tables below rank the top 10 partner countries in relation to the problematic projects

(i.e. orange or red on KPI-6 and/or KPI-7) according to total absolute value of country

portfolio orange or red (table 3), % or orange or red projects in the country portfolio in

value (table 4) and total value of red projects (table 5).

Please note that the figures per Delegations presented below comprise for IPA Delegations

the full projects portfolio which includes all projects as well as Financial Memorandums25.

The tables below have been inserted in order to split the full portfolio between Financial

Memorandums and other Projects IPA Delegations. Financial Memorandums are further

explained and detailed as per Table 12 in KPI 7.

25 Financial Memorandums are the contracts representing the Delegation Agreements of

IPA Indirect Management with Beneficiary Countries. The specificity of these contracts,

which is unique to IPA, is that the full implementation is done by Local Authorities, who

are signing contracts (known as local contracts) and execute their payments.


IPA

Delegations

Total value of

Projects

portfolio

EUR million

Projects

excluding FM

EUR million

Financial

Memorandum

EUR million

Turkey 3,445 1,401 2,044

Albania 330 281 49

Serbia 421 353 68

The Republic

of North

Macedonia

299 92 207

Montenegro 96 56 40

Table 3: Top 10 Delegations for the total value (MEUR) of orange and red projects

Delegations Total value

of portfolio

EUR million

Green (G)

EUR million

Orange (O)

EUR million

Red (R)

EUR million

Problematic

(O or R)

EUR million

1 Morocco 1,187 274 448 466 914

2 Turkey 3,445 2,980 465 0 465

3 Egypt 1,115 657 425 34 459

4 Ukraine 758 415 257 85 343

5 Tunisia 777 479 292 5 297

6 Albania 330 105 196 29 225

7 Armenia 307 98 84 125 209

8

The

Republic of

North

Macedonia

299 114 185 0 185

9 Moldova 366 195 142 29 171

10 Jordan 506 340 147 19 167

Table 4: Top 10 Delegations for the % in total value (MEUR) of orange and red projects in


the portfolio

Delegation

s

Green

(G)

EUR

million

Orange

(O)

EUR

million

Red (R)

EUR

million

Problematic

(O or R)

EUR million

Total

value of

portfolio

EUR

million

% of

portfolio

problematic

in value

1 Morocco 274 448 466 914 1,187 76.94%

2 Albania 105 196 29 225 330 68.11%

3 Armenia 98 84 125 209 307 67.99%

4

The

Republic of

North

Macedonia

114 185 0 185 299 61.80%

5 Lebanon 128 125 20 145 273 52.97%

6 Syria 77 60 12 71 148 48.22%

7 Moldova 195 142 29 171 366 46.79%

8 Ukraine 415 257 85 343 758 45.23%

9 Algeria 148 51 66 116 264 43.98%

10 Egypt 657 425 34 459 1,115 41.13%


Table 5: Top 10 Delegations for the total value (MEUR) of red projects

Delegations

Green

EUR million

Orange

EUR million

Red

EUR million

% of red in

value

1 Armenia 98 84 125 40.61%

2 Morocco 274 448 466 39.23%

3 Algeria 148 51 66 24.83%

4 European Union

Office in Kosovo 126 25 36 19.08%

5 Ukraine 415 257 85 11.27%

6 Georgia 236 70 37 10.68%

7 Albania 105 196 29 8.72%

8 Moldova 195 142 29 7.98%

9 Syria 77 60 12 7.78%

10 Lebanon 128 125 20 7.36%

Table 6 shows the 15 green projects with the largest EU contribution, while table 7 lists

the top 15 most important red projects in value of projects and table 8 the 15 largest

projects with orange or red flags.


Table 6: Top 15 largest green projects (in EUR)

Country/Unit Title of project EU contribution in EUR

BS

Y/N

Turkey Annual Action Programme for Turkey for the Year

2014 - Objective 1 331,984,624

N

Turkey Promoting Integration of Syrian Children into

Turkish Education System (PICTES) 300,000,000

N

Turkey Multi-annual Action Programme for Turkey on

Employment, Education and Social policies 235,100,000

N

Turkey Action Programme for Turkey 2016 - Objective 1 233,900,000 N

Turkey Multi-annual Action Programme for Turkey on

Environment and Climate Action 231,530,000

N

Turkey

2012 National Programme for Turkey under the

Instrument for Preaccession Assistance - Transition

Assistance and Institution Building Component -

Part 1A

213,949,161

N

Turkey Education for all in times of crisis II 205,000,000 N

Turkey National Programme For Turkey IPA 2013 199,521,718 N

Turkey Multiannual Action Programme for Turkey on

Competitiveness and Innovation 187,800,000

N

Turkey Annual Action Programme for Turkey for the Year

2015 - Objective 1 186,656,039

N

Turkey

Part II EC - World Bank Partnership Program for

Europe and Central Asia Programmatic Single-

Donor Trust Fund - (No. TF072780) Education

Infrastructure for Resilience Activities in Turkey

150,000,000

N

Turkey

2011 National Programme for Turkey under the

Instrument for Preaccession Assistance - Transition

Assistance and Institution Building Component -

Part 2

148,589,523

N

NEAR D 05

Contribution Arrangement with respect to the

European Western Balkans Joint Fund under the

Western Balkans Investment Framework

145,500,000

N

NEAR B 01

Dummy contract governing the EC financial

contribution to the EU Regional Trust Fund Madad -

1st special measure 2017 ENI contribution to the

EUTF Madad

121,060,000

N

NEAR B 03

2017 -ENI contribution to the EU Emergency Trust

Fund for stability and addressing root causes of

irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa

121,060,000

N


Table 7: Top 15 largest red projects (in EUR)

Country/Uni

t Title of project

EU

contribution

EUR

BS

Y/N

Morocco Contrat pour le versement des différentes tranches

de l'appui budgétaire du programme PASS II 94,000,000 Y

Morocco Déboursement des tranches d'appui budgétaire du

programme ''Education II" 87,200,000 Y

Morocco Contrat de décaissement des tranches de l'appui

budgétaire du Programme RSA I 70,000,000 Y

Morocco

Déboursement des tranches d'appui budgétaire du

''Programme d'appui à la reforme du secteur de la

formation professionnelle au Maroc''

52,000,000 Y

TF MADAD

GRANT AGREEMENT WITH DANISH RED CROSS

"ADDRESSING VULNERABILITIES OF REFUGEES

AND HOST COMMUNITIES IN FIVE COUNTRIES

COUNTRIES AFFECTED BY THE SYRIAN CRISIS"

49,290,000 N

Ukraine Continued Support to the implementation of

Ukraine`s Energy Strategy 45,000,000 Y

Ukraine EU4Business: Network of Business Support

Centres in Ukraine 40,000,000 N

Morocco

Contrat pour le versement des tranches d'appui

budgétaire du programme d'appui à la promotion

de l'équité et de l'égalité entre les femmes et les

hommes au Maroc

37,500,000 Y

Algeria PAPS ENVIRONNEMENT (Programme d’Appui à la

Politique Sectorielle de l’Environnement) 34,000,000 Y

Morocco Contrat pour le versement des 4 tranches de

l'appui budgétaire du programme 31,500,000 Y

Georgia Support to Justice Sector in Georgia 30,000,000 Y

Morocco Programme d'appui à l'Emploi-PME 30,000,000 Y

Albania Sector Reform Contract for Public Administration

Reform 28,000,000 Y

Morocco Contrat de versement des tranches d'appui

budgetaire aux politiques migratoires 28,000,000 Y

Armenia

Support to the Government of Armenia for the

implementation of the ENP Action Plan and

preparations for the future Association Agreement

– Phase II

24,000,000 Y


Table 8: Top 15 largest projects flagged orange or red (in EUR)

Country Reference Title of project

EU

contribution

EUR

BS

Flag

(O/R

)

Turkey CTR37864

1

Improving the health status of the

Syrian population under temporary

protection and related services

provided by Turkish authorities

300,000,000 N O

The

Republic

of North

Macedoni

a

CTR38360

9

IPA II 2014-2019 Multi-annual

country action programme on

environment and transport, the

Republic of North Macedonia

151,216,553 N O

NEAR C

01 DEC39006

ENI CBC 2014-2020 / Poland-

Belarus-Ukraine 132,061,518 N O

Egypt DEC22905 Water Sector Reform Programme –

Phase II (WSRP-II) 120,000,000 Y O

Egypt DEC20494 HSPSP II-Health Sector Policy

Support Programme II 110,000,000 Y O

Morocco DEC37750

PROGRAMME D'APPUI A LA

CROISSANCE ET LA

COMPETITIVITE AU MAROC- PACC

100,000,000 Y O

Morocco CTR36900

4

Contrat pour le versement des

différentes tranches de l'appui

budgétaire du programme PASS II

94,000,000 Y R

Ukraine CTR38356

1

Support to Comprehensive Reform

of Public Administration in Ukraine

(budget support component)

90,000,000 Y O

Morocco CTR39476

3

Contrat pour le versement des 4

tranches de l'appui budgétaire du

programme d'appui à la Protection

Sociale

90,000,000 Y O

Morocco CTR36206

2

Déboursement des tranches

d'appui budgétaire du programme

''Education II"

87,200,000 Y R

TF

MADAD

LCM.T04.1

5

DELEGATION AGREEMENT: GIZ - "

QUDRA – RESILIENCE FOR SYRIAN

REFUGEES, IDPS AND HOST

COMMUNITIES IN RESPONSE THE

SYRIAN CRISES" - ACTION

DOCUMENT: REGIONAL

RESILIENCE & LOCAL

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME FOR

SYRIAN REFUGEES AND HOST

74,600,000 N O


COMMUNITIES

Morocco CTR28860

7

Contrat de décaissement des

tranches de l'appui budgétaire du

Programme RSA I

70,000,000 Y R

Tunisia CTR38249

9

Décaissement des tranches d'appui

budgétaire - programme PAR V 66,000,000 Y O

Morocco CTR37548

5

Contrat pour le versement des

différentes tranches de l'appui

budgétaire du programme Justice

65,500,000 Y O

Morocco CTR36811

0

Programme Réussir le Statut

Avancé phase II - RSA II - Volet

AB

63,000,000 Y O

Evolution of traffic lights between 2017 and 2018

Table 9 shows the changes in total numbers of projects per flag between 2017 and 2018

for those projects which were listed in both the 2017 and 2018 EAMRs.


Table 9: Evolution of flagging of projects

Flag 2017 Flag 2018 Number

Green Green 1,096

Green Orange 164

Green Red 22

Orange Green 144

Orange Orange 139

Orange Red 23

Red Green 10

Red Orange 18

Red Red 41

Total (G+O+R) appearing in the

2017 and 2018 EAMR's

1,657

Total problematic (O+R) 2017 483

Total problematic (O+R) 2018 537

While from 2017 to 2018 the total number of problematic projects slightly increased,

changes in categories (i.e. flags) showed substantial movements.

From the 69 projects flagged red in 2017, 28 were upgraded to orange or green and from

the 306 orange projects in 2017, 144 were upgraded to green, partly as a result of

remedial action taken by project managers in EU Delegations.

On the other hand 23 orange and 22 green projects in 2017 were downgraded to red in

2018, partly because of a changing project context (security and/or macro-economic

deterioration, climatic hazards).

A total of 41 projects were flagged red in both 2017 and 2018. This shows the quite

changing and difficult to predict context in which EU Delegations operate but also the high

level of commitment in monitoring and improving projects.

To strengthen aggregation and corporate reporting, the Delegations and HQ Units were

requested in the 2018 EAMR, for all projects flagged orange or red on KPI-6 and/or KPI-7,

to select 1 to 5 out of 10 main types of problems (selected on the basis of findings from

the 2015 EAMR) and to select 1 to 5 out of 10 main corrective measures.


The result of this analysis is shown in table 10:

Table 10: frequencies of type of problems or risks encountered in 2018

Problem Typology - frequency of

selection

Orange Red Orange or red

Count % Count % Count %

Low capacity/performance of

impl.partner/T.A./beneficiaries

(absorption/procedures)

197 29% 51 22% 248 27%

Political or economic instability or

general/sector policy issues 111 16% 44 19% 155 17%

Procurement issues/delays (calls for

tender/proposals/other) 82 12% 27 12% 109 12%

Blocking conditions (e.g. awaiting

voting of a law, an administrative

reform, a resettlement...)

79 12% 32 14% 111 12%

Low interest/commitment of

stakeholders - insufficient

coordination among stakeholder

76 11% 31 13% 107 12%

OTHER 60 9% 16 7% 76 8%

Insufficient co-financing/staff

contribution by Government or

partner organisation

32 5% 9 4% 41 5%

Insecurity/unrest 16 2% 5 2% 21 2%

Fiduciary risk (corruption, fraud...) 14 2% 6 3% 20 2%

Substantial flaws in the intervention

logic in assumptions 4 1% 8 3% 12 1%

Substantial flaws in the intervention

logic in risk assessment 4 1% 5 2% 9 1%

Natural disaster/hazard 2 0% 0 0% 2 0%

Total number of orange and red

projects 677 234 911

An important proportion of "problematic" projects, 248 of the total number of projects at

NEAR, is related to low capacity of the implementing partners or beneficiaries.

This can be explained by the high expectations that the EU has from the implementing

partner or beneficiaries, including the partner Governments, which may lead to an

overoptimistic design of a project.


Projects are implemented in a sometimes rapidly changing context which may lead to the

need to update the assumptions and risks, possibly with a correction in project design.

Finally, projects can often not be completely designed at formulation phase if there are no

baselines, if the project enters a new domain of cooperation, a new geographic area, with

new partners or innovative approaches. Therefore, there will always be a need to keep the

project design flexible and to adjust as fit.

Considering the above, an increase in policy dialogue, an increase in monitoring and a

possible extension of the project are logically the most frequent corrective measures

mentioned by Delegations.

Table 11: frequencies of suggested corrective measures

Problem Severity Orange Red Orange or red

Corrective Measure Count % Count % Count %

Increased monitoring

(internal/ROM/MTR) - increased

fiduciary control mechanism

151 21% 32 16% 183 20%

Intensified political dialogue

and/or donor coordination 139 19% 44 22% 183 20%

Extension of project anticipated

(this year or in later years) 121 17% 21 11% 142 16%

Moderate adaptation of

activities/budget reallocation 113 16% 15 8% 128 14%

Suspension or termination of

project 52 7% 16 8% 68 7%

OTHER 51 7% 8 4% 59 6%

Changes in

implementation/contractual

arrangements

37 5% 16 8% 53 6%

No new significant corrective

measures required/planned 21 3% 31 16% 52 6%

Security risk mitigation measures

impacting on performance 14 2% 10 5% 24 3%

Substantial change in intervention

logic 14 2% 4 2% 18 2%

Total number of orange or red

projects 713 197 910

Detailed explanations on the issues in each country are available in the respective EAMRs.


Table 12: Financial Memorandums

Financial Memorandum type of contract, as mentioned earlier in the document under

section II.1 Summary, consists of local contracts managed by the Beneficiary Countries.

Information on those local contracts is not available in CRIS IT system. For the 2018 EAMR

exercise a special algorithm was prepared to facilitate the assessment of Financial

Memorandums by the IPA Delegations. Each local contract per Financial Memorandum,

that was ongoing during the year 2018, was assessed by the Delegation separately using

the same rules as for other projects in the project list and then a weighted average was

used to asses Financial Memorandum globally.

Below tables show for each IPA Delegation, apart from Bosnia and Herzegovina and the EU

Office in Kosovo that did not have active Financial Memorandums (FMs) in 2018, the total

value of FMs, column 1-2, compared with local contracts still active in 2018 (column 3).

The columns 4-9 show the assessment made in relation to KPI6 and KPI7. The last three

columns present global assessment for each Financial Memorandum.

A. Turkey

B. Albania

Financial Memorandum TitleContracted

amount of FM

Total value of

ongoing local

contracts

under FM

Green Orange Red Green Orange Red KPI6 KPI7

Problematic

project in

2018

2012 National Programme for Turkey under

the Instrument for Preaccess ion Ass is tance -

Trans i tion Ass is tance and Insti tution

Bui lding Component - Part 1A

213,949,161 27,982,133 10 2 0 9 3 0 Green Green No

2011 National Programme for Turkey under

the Instrument for Preaccess ion Ass is tance -

Trans i tion Ass is tance and Insti tution

Bui lding Component - Part 2

148,589,523 18,764,513 5 0 0 5 0 0 Green Green No

National Programme For Turkey IPA 2013 199,521,718 87,619,162 35 3 2 35 2 3 Green Green No

Annual Action Programme for Turkey for the

Year 2014 - Objective 1331,984,624 42,825,262 25 1 2 24 3 1 Green Green No



Multi -annual Action Programme for Turkey

on Environment and Cl imate Action231,530,000 5,214,711 1 0 0 1 0 0 Green Green No

Multiannual Action Programme for Turkey on

Competitiveness and Innovation187,800,000 2,139,705 2 0 0 2 0 0 Green Green No

Multi -annual Action Programme for Turkey

on Employment, Education and Socia l

pol icies

235,100,000 5,917,355 2 0 0 2 0 0 Green Green No



Action Programme for Turkey 2015 Objective 2 58,500,000 748,000 1 0 0 1 0 0 Green Green No

Action Programme for Turkey 2016 Objective 1 233,900,000 1,000,000 1 0 0 1 0 0 Green Green No

Total 2,043,611,441 230,884,497

KPI 6 assesment for local KPI 7 assesment for local Global assesment


amount of FM

Total value of

ongoing local

contracts

under FM


Problematic

project in

2018

IPA 2012 18,700,000 15,075,853 1 0 0 0 1 0 Green Orange Yes

IPA 2013 14,300,000 13,078,761 6 0 0 4 2 0 Green Green No

IPA 2014 16,300,000 5,597,750 4 0 0 4 0 0 Green Green No

Total 49,300,000 33,752,364



C. The Republic of North Macedonia

D. Montenegro

E. Serbia


amount of FM

Total value of

ongoing local

contracts

under FM


Problematic

project in

2018

MAAP 2014-20 - Multi -Аnnual Аction

Programme for Environment and Transport151,216,553 30,242,608 3 1 0 3 1 0 Green Green No

TAIB 2012: National Programme for the

former Yugos lav Republ ic of Macedonia

under the IPA – Trans i tion Ass is tance and

Insti tution Bui lding Component for 2012

28,159,161 13,576,793 24 1 1 24 2 0 Green Green No

TAIB 2013: National Programme for the

former Yugos lav Republ ic of Macedonia

under the IPA – Trans i tion Ass is tance and

Insti tution Bui lding Component for 2013

28,008,357 16,515,483 16 1 0 15 2 0 Green Green No

Total 207,384,071 60,334,884



amount of FM

Total value of

ongoing local

contracts

under FM


Problematic

project in

2018

CBC AL ME 2014 4,760,000 1,165,918 2 2 0 3 1 0 Green Green No

CBC AL ME 2015 6,800,000 1,586,459 2 2 0 3 1 0 Green Green No

CBC KOS ME 2014 2,520,000 833,164 2 1 0 2 1 0 Green Green No

CBC KOS ME 2015 4,800,000 1,186,830 2 2 0 2 2 0 Green Green No

CAP 2014 Objective 1 Part 1 9,827,920 8,754,500 8 0 0 8 0 0 Green Green No

CAP 2014 Objective 2 Part 1 11,460,300 3,654,295 4 0 0 4 0 0 Green Green No

Total 40,168,220 11,506,877



amount of FM

Total value of

ongoing local

contracts

under FM


Problematic

project in

2018

IM Competitiveness and Growth 33,040,000 30,798,186 25 0 0 25 0 0 Green Green No

IM Democracy and Rule of Law 32,550,000 24,618,243 27 0 0 27 0 0 Green Green No

CBC SER – BiH 1,400,000 1,064,287 3 0 0 3 0 0 Green Green No

CBC SER – MNE 840,000 779,655 3 0 0 3 0 0 Green Green No

Total 67,830,000 57,260,371



KPI 8 – Reduction of Old Pre-financing

Four Directorates met the target minimum of 25% reduction. Between 01/01/2018 and

31/12/2018, the total amount of old pre-financing has decreased from EUR 2,106 million

to EUR 1,353 million. Old pre-financing is reduced by 35.72% (EUR 753 million).

35.72%▲ N

EAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR R

NEAR

SG

UA

NEAR

MAD

AD

Total

KPI Value 67.77

%

39.25

%

22.77

%

49.69

% 0%

12.90

% 100% 35.72%

Old pre-

financing

31/12/2018

(in EUR

million)

51.49 358.46 662.78 201.04 19.94 60.16 0 1,353.8

8

Reduction

in amounts

(in EUR

million)

159.77 590.03 858.14 399.65 19.94 69.07 9.73 2,106.3

3

KPI results, cleared amounts and open amounts at HQ level are presented in the tables

below.

Top HQ KPI Value Cleared Amount

in EUR million Top HQ

Open Amount at

the end of the

year in EUR

million

TF MADAD 100.00% 9.73 NEAR C 01 125.23

NEAR A 05 78.61% 18.38 NEAR D 05 74.49

NEAR C 02 58.25% 23.56 NEAR C 02 23.56

NEAR D 05 36.36% 74.49 NEAR A 05 18.38

NEAR B 02 21.88% 12.90 NEAR B 02 12.90

NEAR B 03 20.10% 2.69 TF MADAD 9.73

NEAR C 01 18.01% 125.23 NEAR B 03 2.69

NEAR A 04 6.68% 0.04 NEAR A 04 0.04

On the HQ level 7 out of 11 Units for which KPI 8 is applicable did not meet the target

minimum of 25% reduction. Please find below the main HQs:


NEAR B 02 (21.88%):

At Directorate’s level, this KPI is meeting the benchmark. It is due mainly to the good

performance in most of the delegations. By contrast, the value in HQ is slightly below the

benchmark. Unit B2 is committed to making all necessary efforts in order to reduce the HQ

global amount.

NEAR B 03 (20.10%):

The figures for Unit B3 are also slightly below the benchmark, which reflects the crisis

conditions particularly in Libya, affecting the implementation, reporting and the clearing of

expenditure.

NEAR C 01 (18.01%):

Given the important amounts that Directorate C manages under budget support, CBC and

also blending modalities, which are long term programmes (on average longer than 3

years), the amount of old pre-financing has not yet been reduced as much as the desired

general target (4 years). However, the indicator, has improved substantially compared to

2017 (12%) and it is just around 2% under the benchmark (25%), due to efforts of

clearing the CBC and Budget Support files. Expectation is that in 2019 the efforts will

increase and the target will be met.

NEAR A 04 (6.68%):

The old pre-financing amounts is linked to two contracts. In the first case, the open pre-

financing amounts to EUR 89 000 and concerns a 2005 contract with a pending decision to

write-off the debt due to the expiry of the claim. In the second case is a PRAG service

contract with a duration of five years and an end date in 10/2020 (open pre-financing of

EUR 916,298). In line with the standard PRAG contract conditions for service contracts,

the pre-financing is only cleared when at least 80% of the contract amount has been

consumed.


All TOP 10 Delegations that have cleared the highest amounts reach the benchmark.

Despite a green KPI, two Delegations appear in the TOP 10 Delegations with the highest

remaining open amounts.

TOP 10

Delegations

KPI

Value

Cleared

in EUR

million

TOP 10

Delegations

Cleared

amount

in EUR

million

TOP 10

Delegations

Open

Amount

in EUR

million

European

Union Office

in Kosovo

89.77% 23.83

Turkey 89.86

Egypt 101.75

Bosnia &

Herzegovina 81.74% 21.49

Lebanon 53.34

Ukraine 60.16

Albania 76.70% 50.76 Albania 50.76 Tunisia 57.75

Azerbaijan 71.94% 3.27 Egypt 46.81 Morocco 48.21

Turkey 66.86% 89.86 Syria 34.38 Turkey 44.53

Syria 59.60% 34.38 Tunisia 31.28 Lebanon 43.82

West Bank

and Gaza

Strip

57.58% 15.62

European

Union Office

in Kosovo

23.83

Moldova 37.45

Belarus 56.96% 5.83

Bosnia &

Herzegovina 21.49

Serbia 25.88

Montenegro 55.99% 3.71 Jordan 17.45 Syria 23.31

Lebanon 54.90% 53.34

Serbia 16.72

North

Macedonia 18.87


National Funds (ELARG)

6%

Pro forma registration

(Program Estimates, Budget Support)

3%

Financing Agreement

80%

Operational Grants 1%

Works+ Supplies 0%

Action Grants 10%

Distribution of old pre-financing by contract nature

As shown in the graph below, the most affected contracts by nature are the Financing

Agreements and the Action Grants Contracts that represent respectively 80% and 10% of

the total amount of open old pre-financing.

KPI 9 - Expired contracts as a % of the contract portfolio

Expired contracts are those that are open more than 18 months after the end of

operational implementation. At the end of 2017, 1,029 contracts or 18.34% of the total

number of open contracts (5.610) were expired. This is not an improvement compared to

2016: 15.62% and 852 expired contracts. Three Directorates did not meet the benchmark

target of less than 15% of expired contracts for this KPI:

14.76%▲

NEAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR R

NEAR

SG

UA Total

KPI 8 17.98% 14.40% 14.75% 13.14% 53.98% 5.91% 14.76%

N° of

expired

contracts

48 261 145 228 61 12 755

All

contracts 267 1,813 983 1,735 113 203 5,114

Values of expired contracts per Directorate are presented in the below table:


38.90%

NEAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR R

NEAR

SG

UA Total

Expired

contracts (in

million)

3,102 683 1,128 522 6,815 10 12,260

All contracts (in

million) 8,123 7,555 4,018 4,005 6,934 879 31,514

At Headquarter level, NEAR R (53.98%) remains with the highest number of expired

contracts.

TOP HQ KPI Expired

Contracts

NEAR B 01 0,00% 0

NEAR D 02 0,00% 0

NEAR A 02 4,76% 1

NEAR R 03 8,89% 4

NEAR A 04 9,52% 2

NEAR D 05 14,41% 33

NEAR B 02 22,84% 37

NEAR B 03 24,49% 12

NEAR A 05 25,00% 2

NEAR C 02 25,19% 33


Action Grants 40%

Financing Agreement 15%

National Funds 10%

[CATEGORY NAME] [PERCENTAGE]

Pro forma registration (Program Estimates,

Budget Support) 3%

Services 17%

Supplies 6%

Works 5%

Other 3%

Expired contract by contract nature

At Delegation level, 19 out of 22 Delegations have positive KPI results.

NEAR Delegations

Top 10 expired

contracts

31/12/2018

Managing Entity Expired

contracts KPI

European Union

Office in Kosovo 53 14,36%

Lebanon 48 20,78%

Albania 42 17,21%

Serbia 39 12,04%

Tunisia 29 12,13%

Algeria 28 15,14%

Egypt 28 12,33%

Georgia 28 11,97%

Turkey 28 16,57%

Morocco 26 12,09%

Grants (Action and operational) and Services contracts account for 58% of the number of

expired contracts:


Audited contracts

A total of 35 out of the 755 expired contracts have an ongoing audit by end 2018.

If the 35 expired contracts, that have already received the final audit report, had been

closed before end 2018, the KPI result would have been 5%. Special efforts should

therefore be made to speed up the contradictory phase with the auditee and the recovery

of ineligible expenditure or unspent pre-financing.

The table below shows the KPI results by contract type.

Nature Expired

Contracts

Exp. Ctr.

with Ongoing

Audit

Total ongoing

contracts

KPI by

Contract

Nature

Action Grants 299 0 2,199 13.60%

Administrative

Arrangements 1 0

6 16.67%

Financing

Agreement 116 1

659 17.60%

Functioning

Grants

(operating) 7

0

48

14.58%

Grant 2 0 2 100.00%

Late payment

interests 9 0

16 56.25%

Membership

Fees 1 0

2 50.00%

National Funds

(ELARG) 73 34

136 53.68%

Not applicable 2 0 2 100.00%

Pro forma

registration

(Program

Estimates,

Budget

Support) 23

0

141

16.31%

Programme

Management

Unit (ELARG) 7

0

7

100.00%

Recommitment 3 0 8 37.50%

Services 132 0 1,557 8.48%

Specific

contract (ex-

letter of 1

0 21

4.76%


contract, order

form, etc.)

Supplies 45 0 183 24.59%

Works 34 0 127 26.77%

Total 755 35 5,114 14.76%

KPI 10 – Reduction of Old RAL

The overall result of 22.61% does not meet the target of at least 25 %, but is a serious

improvement compared to the result in 2017 (18.43% in 2017). Three Delegations did not

meet the benchmark. Contracts with an old RAL relate mainly to pro-forma registration

(46%) and national funds (19%).

The overall result is mainly due to the following factors:

The increase in the number of contracts which could not be closed for various outstanding

contractual & legal issues.

For some decisions, contracts still have to be concluded. For other decisions, funds still

need to be de-committed after closure. This has not happened due either to audit and

evaluations still to be undertaken, or due to late closure of contracts.

Pending disbursements for Budget Support (BS) operations which have been blocked since

2013 in Egypt and the need in recent years to explore alternative options to Budget

Support, leading to a significant increase in EU blending operations with Egypt. Blending

operations, usually concern major and highly complex investment projects with an average

implementation period, significantly longer than the average duration of EU programmes

implemented under other modalities.

22.61%▲

NEAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR R

NEAR

SG

UA

Total

KPI 10 old

RAL 10.97% 21.16% 14.54% 33.69% 35.43% 67.45% 22.61%

Reduction

achieved in

amounts

(in EUR

million)

12.70 95.30 8.50 64.97 5.01 2.41 188.95

Old RAL

remaining

31/12/2018

(in EUR

million)

103.37 355.11 49.96 127.90 9.13 1.16 646.63

For HQ level, below tables' present KPI 10 results ranked from highest KPI value to lowest:


TOP HQ KPI

result

Cleared

amount

(in EUR

million)

TOP HQ

Cleared

amount (in

Eur million) TOP HQ

Old RAL

31/12/2018

(in EUR million)

NEAR A 02 100.00% 2.05

NEAR D

05 5.68

NEAR A

05 31.67

NEAR A 03 80.29% 0.40

NEAR R

05 4.99

NEAR D

02 26.45

NEAR R 05 36.55% 4.99

NEAR A

02 2.05

NEAR B

02 26.32

NEAR D 05 28.19% 5.68

NEAR C

02 1.79

NEAR C

02 24.43

NEAR B 03 10.25% 1.65

NEAR B

03 1.65

NEAR C

01 16.54

NEAR C 02 6.84% 1.79

NEAR A

03 0.40

NEAR D

05 14.47

NEAR R 03 3.13% 0.01

NEAR R

03 0.01

NEAR B

03 14.42

NEAR A 01 0.00% 0.00

NEAR A

01 0.00

NEAR B

01 11.24

NEAR A 04 0.00% 0.00

NEAR A

04 0.00

NEAR D

04 9.31

NEAR B 00 0.00% 0.00

NEAR B

00 0.00

NEAR R

05 8.67

At Delegation level, Delegations Moldova, Ukraine, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey Algeria and

Jordan with a TOP 10 KPI result are also among the TOP 10 in cleared amounts.

Delegations Egypt, Serbia, Lebanon, European Union Office in Kosovo and Albania figure

among the TOP 10 in terms of remaining old RAL to clear and they did not reach the

benchmark.

TOP 10

Delegations

KPI

result

Cleared

amount

(in EUR

million)

TOP 10

Delegations

Cleared

amount

(in EUR

million)

TOP 10

Delegations

Old RAL

31/12/2017

(in EUR

million)

Bosnia &

Herzegovina 97.41% 29.33

Morocco 46.99

Egypt 239.76

Morocco 90.21% 46.99

Bosnia &

Herzegovina 29.33

Turkey 63.88


Action Grants 2%

Financing Agreement

5%


19%

Pro forma registration

(Program Estimates, Budget Support)

46%

Services 5%

Works 4%

Other 19%

Reduction of old RAL by contract nature

Belarus 77.23% 1.43

Egypt 24.46

Serbia 41.12

Ukraine 67.45% 2.41

Turkey 15.55

Lebanon 19.74

Montenegro 63.95% 1.19

Serbia 15.37

Albania 16.94

Armenia 60.18% 2.54

Albania 12.00

Tunisia 13.11

Israel 52.47% 0.17

Tunisia 9.09

Algeria 12.17

North

Macedonia 49.55% 2.19

Lebanon 7.31

European

Union Office

in Kosovo

11.90

Albania 41.46% 12.00

European

Union Office

in Kosovo

4.19

Jordan 7.12

Tunisia 40.96% 9.09

Jordan 3.27

West Bank

and Gaza

Strip

5.23

Contracts holding an old RAL relate mainly to Pro forma registration (46%) and National

Funds (19%):


KPI 11 – % of payments paid within the contractual deadline

DG NEAR made 88.62% of the payments within the contractual deadline which is above

the benchmark of 85%. The table below gives an overview by Directorate on KPI 11 value

and the average delay for registration of invoices. The average delay for the registration of

invoices at the end of 2017 is 6.16 days. In total, 4,348 invoices have been paid in 2017

including 3.853 invoices paid within the contractual deadline.

90.82%▲

NEAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR R

NEAR

SG

UA

TF M

AD

AD

TF N

OA

KPI 11

payment

83.25

%

88.45

%

91.79

%

92.90

%

98.31

%

96.89

%

89.80

%

84.21

%

Average

delay for

registratio

n of

invoices

5.64 12.70 4.98 11.45 3.54 2.08 3.45 3.21

Total of

payments 203 1,507 792 1,492 59 161 49 19

All HQs have achieved KPI 11.

HQ KPI result Total of invoices Average Encoding

Days

NEAR A 88.83% 203 5.64

NEAR B 86.08% 1,507 12.70

NEAR C 90.26% 792 4.98

NEAR D 88.75% 1,492 11.45

NEAR R 96.15% 59 3.54

NEAR SGUA 98.93% 161 2.08

TF MADAD 89.47% 49 3.45

TF NOA 93.33% 19 3.21

NEAR Delegations represent 84.14% of the volume of payments. 95.45% of NEAR's

Delegations reached the benchmark (21/22). The TOP 10 Delegations in terms of KPI

result are presented in the table below.

TOP 10 Delegations KPI result TOP 10

Highest

no. of

KPI result


Action Grants 38%

Financing Agreement 5%


5%

Pro forma registration (Program

Estimates, Budget Support)

2%

Services 35%

Supplies 2%

Works 7%

Other 6%

Distribution of payments paid outside contractual deadline by nature

Delegations invoices

Bosnia & Herzegovina 98.64% European Union

Office in Kosovo

367 90.76%

Belarus 98.25% Serbia 273 90.48%

Moldova 98.20% Lebanon 246 83.74%

Ukraine 96.89% West Bank and

Gaza Strip

234 85.47%

Jordan 95.59% Bosnia &

Herzegovina

220 98.64%

Azerbaijan 95.51% Albania 218 88.53%

North Macedonia 95.04% Georgia 183 92.35%

Tunisia 94.25% Morocco 174 92.53%

Montenegro 93.59% Tunisia 174 94.25%

Morocco 92.53% Ukraine 161 96.89%

Most of the invoices paid outside the contractual deadline relate to grants and service

contracts which is consistent with the distribution of the total number of invoices amongst

contract types.


KPI 12 – % invoices registered within 7 days of the Commission reception date

DG NEAR registered 90.70% of the invoices within 7 days of the Commission reception

date which is above the benchmark of 80%. The table below gives an overview by

Directorate on KPI 12 value and the average delay for registration of invoices. The average

delay for the registration of invoices at the end of 2018 is 14.42 days. In total, 5,045

invoices have been registered in 2018 including 4,576 invoices registered within 7 days of

the Commission reception date.

HQ KPI result Total of invoices Average Encoding

Days

NEAR A 88.97% 263 6.55

NEAR B 90.84% 1,724 10.89

NEAR C 89.22% 928 13.58

NEAR D 91.09% 1,785 20.45

NEAR R 90.32% 62 4.06

NEAR SGUA 95.50% 200 2.04

TF MADAD 90.00% 60 3.52

TF NOA 91.30% 23 4.09

All of NEAR's Delegations reached the benchmark (22/22). The TOP 10 Delegations in

terms of KPI result are presented in the table below.

TOP 10


TOP 10

Delegations

Highest

no. of

payments

KPI

result

Moldova 98.44% European Union

Office in Kosovo 423 91.02%

Azerbaijan 98.00% Serbia 349 88.25%

Bosnia &

Herzegovina 95.67%

West Bank and

Gaza Strip 262 88.17%

Tunisia 95.63% Bosnia &

Herzegovina 254 95.67%

North Macedonia 95.54% Albania 234 91.45%

Ukraine 95.50% Egypt 232 85.34%

Morocco 95.26% Lebanon 214 92.99%

Armenia 95.05% Tunisia 206 95.63%

Jordan 94.84% Georgia 204 88.73%

Syria 93.62% Ukraine 200 95.50%


KPI 13 – Use of DEVCO/NEAR staff and respect of the flexibility arrangements

Global NEAR result of 100.00% is far above the benchmark of 80%.

100.00%

Directorate KPI result

NEAR A 100.00%

NEAR B 100.00%

NEAR C 100.00%

NEAR D 100.00%

NEAR SGUA 100.00%

KPI 14 – ICF – Control Environment


92.47%


NEAR A 100.00%

NEAR B 88.44%

NEAR C 97.60%

NEAR D 93.09%

NEAR SGUA 92.00%

KPI 15 – ICF – Risk assessment


91.98%


NEAR A 100.00%

NEAR B 90.00%

NEAR C 96.00%

NEAR D 89.55%

NEAR SGUA 95.00%


KPI 16 – ICF – Control activities


88.99%


NEAR A 100.00%

NEAR B 85.19%

NEAR C 89.33%

NEAR D 90.91%

NEAR SGUA 100.00%

KPI 17 – ICF – Information and Communication


94.11%


NEAR A 100.00%

NEAR B 91.11%

NEAR C 98.67%

NEAR D 92.73%

NEAR SGUA 100.00%

KPI 18 – ICF – Monitoring activities


93.49%


NEAR A 100.00%

NEAR B 90.00%

NEAR C 98.00%

NEAR D 92.73%

NEAR SGUA 100.00%


KPI 19 – % of projects visited by Commission staff and/or by the HOD, by project value

Results by Directorate in charge are presented in below table.

85.68%▲ N

EAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR

SG

UA

TF M

AD

AD

TF N

OA

Total

KPI result 88.46

%

87.17

%

74.92

%

90.46

%

88.69

%

79.71

%

80.84

% 85.68%

Project

value of

visited

projects (in

M€)

3,195 4,987 1,782 2,329 672 830 240 14.036

Project

value of

all projects

(in M€)

3,612 5,721 2,378 2,575 758 1,042 297 16.383

Number of

visited

projects

52 691 438 547 101 40 23 1,892

Number of

all projects

58 880 508 683 136 61 26 2,352

Contextual

indicator

89.66

%

78.52

%

86.22

%

80.01

%

74.26

%

65.57

%

88.46

% 80.44%

In 2018, 80.44% of the projects were visited, which represents 85.68% in value of the

projects.

The benchmark of 80 % in value has therefore been reached. Security and limitations in

staffing continue to represent constraints in field visits and although the benchmark has

been reached, the performance is uneven and the number of projects visited at least once

in the year should increase.

Lessons from the performance in project implementation and in achieving results

demonstrate the need for a close monitoring of projects in order to support policy

dialogue, capacity building and adjustments in project design. Given limited capacities,

some Delegations may prioritise visits to larger projects over smaller projects, which lead

to a better performance in total value of the projects visited.


The table below show the least performing Delegations in number of projects visited.

% of projects visited in number and in total value

Country Visited Not

visited

Total

projects

% visited in

number

% in visited

value

Armenia AM 31 10 41 75,61% 80,99%

Belarus BY 51 11 62 82,26% 85,98%

Bosnia &

Herzegovina BA

65 10 75 86,67% 82,09%

Egypt EG 79 36 115 68,70% 87,89%

Israel IL 28 23 51 54,90% 64,47%

Lebanon LB 105 23 128 82,03% 79,22%

Syria SY 18 15 33 54,55% 57,66%

Tunisia TN 94 19 113 83,19% 88,32%

Turkey TR 37 5 42 88,10% 88,63%

Ukraine UA 101 35 136 74,26% 88,69%


KPI 20 – % contracting of project evaluations in the Annual Evaluation Plan (AEP)

Global NEAR result at 80.89% is satisfactory and above the benchmark of 75%. This is

also the case at Directorates level as presented in the below table except for NEAR B

(73.33%).

77.84%▼

NEAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR

SG

UA Total

KPI result 100.00% 74.39% 80.85% 70.27% 100% 77.84%

Number of

Evaluations

implemented

4 61 38 26 15 144

Number of

Evaluations

planned

4 82 47 37 15 185

Evaluations

implemented (in

M€)

65.85 409.35 173.72 99.01 159.31 907.26

Evaluations

planned (in M€) 65.85 560.40 264.06 157.52 159.31 1207.14

Contextual

indicator 100.00% 73.05% 65.79% 62.86% 100.00% 75.16%

A total of 7 Delegations have contracted 100% of their evaluation plans in 2018: Egypt,

Turkey, Albania, Morocco, Moldova, Montenegro and Ukraine.

Delegations in Armenia and Syria have contracted less than 50% of the project evaluations

of the Annual Evaluation Plan while Delegations in Israel, Azerbaijan and Bosnia &

Herzegovina have contracted none of them. In most cases, if the KPI value is below target

for a given Delegation, this is due to delays in the implementation of a project or

programme and consequently the postponement of the contracting of the corresponding

evaluation to the next year.


KPI 21 – Undue payments prevented by ex-ante controls as a % of the claimed amount

At NEAR level, the percentage of ineligible amounts identified by ex-ante controls by the

end of 2018 is 5.12% which is well above the benchmark of 2%. It represents a total

amount of EUR 157 million of undue payment prevented. This is lower than in 2017

(6.57% and EUR 180 million). Results by directorate are presented in the table below:

5.12%▼

NEAR A

NEAR B

NEAR C

NEAR D

NEAR R

NEAR

SG

UA

TF

MAD

AD

TF N

OA

Tota

l

KPI 21 ex-

ante

ineligible

4.78% 6.46% 5.95% 1.37% 2.04% 8.56% 0.00% 0.00% 5.12%

Invoiced

amount

(in M€)

311.2

0

1,480.

50

513.5

9

546.4

0 2.38 94.14

104.6

6 7.05

3,059.

92

Ex-ante

ineligible

amount

(in M€)

14.88 95.57 30.56 7.46 0.05 8.06 0.0 0.0 156.5

8

The majority of ex-ante ineligible amounts are identified by Delegations: EUR 143.44

million or a share of 91.61% of the ineligible amount. The remaining EUR 13.13 million

identified by Headquarters was mostly found by HQ A and D.

TOP 10

Delegations

KPI

result

TOP 10

Delegations

Sum of

ineligible

amounts

(in EUR

million)

TOP 10

Delegations

Sum of

invoiced

amounts

(in EUR

million)

Moldova 33.73% Morocco 64.77 West Bank and

Gaza Strip 296.97

Morocco 24.11% Egypt 21.11 Morocco 271.81

Azerbaijan 17.98% Moldova 19.60 Turkey 265.10

Georgia 10.83% Ukraine 8.06 Tunisia 143.22

Tunisia 9.75% Armenia 5.49 Serbia 133.11

Ukraine 8.21% Georgia 4.13 Egypt 124.09


Jordan 7.28% Tunisia 3.74 Lebanon 120.66

Algeria 7.13% Turkey 3.57 Ukraine 94.14

Albania 3.61% Serbia 3.56 Albania 93.01

Belarus 3.05% Jordan 3.08 Georgia 86.39

A total of EUR 159.77 million of the total ineligible amount relates to Programme Estimates

and Budget Support payments making up 84.96% of the total ineligible amounts

identified.

Delegations with budget

support payments

Ex-ante ineligible

amount (in EUR

million)

Total Accepted Amount (in

EUR million)

Morocco MA 64.77 271.81

Egypt EG 21.11 124.09

Moldova MD 19.60 57.39

Ukraine UA 8.06 94.14

Armenia AM 5.49 46.51

Georgia GE 4.13 86.39

Tunisia TN 3.74 143.22

Jordan JO 3.08 81.33

Algeria DZ 1.35 32.48

Albania AL 1.26 93.01

Total 159.77 1,348.97

The distribution by contract nature is presented below (Budget Support payments are

included in PE category).


Action Grants 3% Financing Agreement

7%

Others 1%

PE 81%

Services 5%

Supplies 1%

NF 2%

Distribution of ex-ante ineligible amounts by contract nature


KPI 22 – % contracted of the Annual Audit Plan year N

At NEAR level, 71.33% of the audits foreseen in the Annual Audit Plan year N have been

contracted. This is well above the benchmark of 60% but slight lower than the 75.99% of

2017. This year not all Directorates are above the benchmark.

Results at Directorate level are presented in the table below:

71.33%▼

NEAR

A

NEAR

B

NEAR

C

NEAR

D

NEAR

SG

UA

Total

KPI 22 audit plan N 40.00% 63.25% 75.51% 85.56% 80.00% 71.33%

Number of audits in

audit plan N 20 117 49 90 10 286

Number of audits

contracted 8 74 37 77 8 204

Number of audits still

to be contracted 12 43 12 13 2 82

The TOP 10 Delegations are sorted by the highest number of audits in the audit plan with

a green KPI result.

The BOTTOM 10 Delegations are sorted by the highest number of audits still to be

contracted. Among them, 8 Delegations reached the benchmark. Syria has implemented

only 6.67% of the planned audits.

TOP 10

Delegations

Total

no. of

audits

KPI

result

BOTTOM 10

Delegations

No of

audits still

to be

contracted

KPI

result

North Macedonia

14 100.00%

Syria SY

14 6.67%

Lebanon 14 66.67%

Turkey TR 12 40.00%

Serbia 14 93.33% Lebanon LB 7 66.67%

Bosnia &

Herzegovina

13 92.86%

Albania AL

7 63.16%

Albania 12 63.16%

Georgia GE 5 66.67%

European Union

Office in Kosovo

12 92.31%

Tunisia TN

4 69.23%

Montenegro 11 100.00%

Algeria DZ 3 75.00%

Georgia 10 66.67%

Morocco MA 3 72.73%

Jordan 10 83.33%

Jordan JO 2 83.33%

Algeria 9 75.00%

Ukraine UA 2 80.00%


Action grants represent the highest number of audits planned and contracted.

KPI 23 – % implementation of the Annual Audit Plan year N-1

At NEAR level, 69.98% of the audits foreseen in the Annual Audit Plan N-1 have been

contracted. This result is well above the benchmark of 40%. All NEAR Directorates reached

the target.

69.98%▼

NEAR

A

NEAR

B

NEAR

C

NEAR

D

NEAR

SG

UA

Total

KPI 23 audit plan N-1 85.71% 69.31% 80.77% 63.04% 46.67% 69.98%

Number of audits in

audit plan N-1 14 101 52 92 15 274

Number of audits

contracted 12 70 42 58 7 189



The TOP 10 Delegations are sorted by the highest number of audits in the audit plan with

green KPI result. 20 Delegations are on target (out of which 4 have achieved a 100%

implementation rate).

The BOTTOM 10 Delegations are sorted by the highest number of audits still to be

contracted. 2 Delegations are below the benchmark (out of which, only Syria has a

12.50% implementation rate).

142

44

4 2

22

42

6

24

99

28

0 0 17

31

6 23

0

50

100

150

ActionGrants

FinancingAgreement

NationalFunds

OperationalGrants

Pro formaregistration

(ProgramEstimates,

BudgetSupport)

Services Supplies Works

Audits planned and contracted by contract nature year N

audit plan N no audits contracted


TOP 10

Delegations

Total

no. of

audits

KPI

result

BOTTOM 10

Delegations

No of audits

still to be

contracted

KPI

result

European

Union Office in

Kosovo

38 65.79%

Bosnia &

Herzegovina

1 88,89%

Morocco 17 76.47%

Georgia 1 88,89%

Albania 16 37.50%

Tunisia 1 88,89%

Ukraine 15 46.67%

West Bank and

Gaza Strip

1 75,00%

Armenia 13 61.54%

Turkey 2 83,33%

Jordan 13 100.00%

North Macedonia 2 66,67%

Turkey 12 83.33%

Egypt 3 70,00%

Algeria 11 45.45%

Montenegro 3 70,00%

Egypt 10 70.00%

Moldova 3 66,67%

Lebanon 10 40.00%

Morocco 4 76,47%


147

37 10 1

26 35

3 15

99

25 6 1

24 24 2 8

0

50

100

150

200

ActionGrants

FinancingAgreement

NationalFunds

OperationalGrants


(ProgramEstimates,

BudgetSupport)


Audits planned and contracted by contract natura year N-1


Action grants represent the highest number of audits planned and contracted.

KPI 24 – % implementation of the Annual Audit Plan year N-2

At NEAR level, 86.45% of the audits foreseen in the Annual Audit Plan year N-2 have been

contracted. This is significantly above the target of 60%. Only 2 NEAR Directorates did not

reached the target.

86.45%▼

NEAR

A

NEAR

B

NEAR

C

NEAR

D

NEAR

SG

UA

Total

KPI 24 audit plan N-2 83.33% 80.67% 100.00% 90.00% 81.82% 86.45%

Number of audits in

audit plan N-2 6 150 43 100 11 310

Number of audits

contracted 5 121 43 90 9 268



All Delegations were on target (out of which 16 have achieved a 100% implementation

rate).

The BOTTOM Delegations are those with audits still to be contracted and are sorted by the

highest number of audits.


BOTTOM 10 Delegations No of audits still to be

contracted KPI result

Lebanon 17 26.09%

European Union Office

in Kosovo 8 80.00%

Algeria 4 80.95%

Syria 3 40.00%

Montenegro 2 71.43%

Ukraine 2 81.82%

Egypt 1 93.33%

West Bank and Gaza

Strip 1 94.74%

Morocco 1 93.33%

Tunisia TN 1 94.44%

The majority of audits in audit plan N-2 relate to programme estimates and grants. It is

also almost exclusively for these contract types that the remaining contracting has to be

done.

141

33

1 7

33

63

10 22

122

24

0 7

32

58

6 19

0

50

100

150

ActionGrants

FinancingAgreement

NationalFunds

OperationalGrants


(ProgramEstimates,

BudgetSupport)


Audits planned and contracted by contract natura year N-2



KPI 25 – Ineligible amounts identified by audits as a % of the audited amount.

At NEAR level, 1.37% or EUR 8.94 million of audited expenditure was found to be ineligible

which is lower than the 1.83% or EUR 8 million of 2016. Overall, this reflects that

contracts are in general well monitored by the HQs/EU Delegations (EUD) and ineligible

costs are detected at earlier stages. This is also translated by the level of residual error

after all controls are performed (0.51%).

As indicated in the table below, NEAR D has reached the benchmark and NEAR B has the

largest audited amount.

1.26%▼

NEAR

A

NEAR

B

NEAR

C

NEAR

D

NEAR

SG

UA

Total

KPI 25 audit ineligible 1.45% 1.14% 1.11% 1.57% 4.34% 1.26%

Ineligible expenditure (in

M€) 0.30 6.89 1.01 1.90 0.65 10.75

Audited expenditure (in M€) 20.83 606.83 90.18 120.92 14.99 853.75

Among the TOP 10 Delegations in terms of KPI results, only eight Delegations have

reached the benchmark for KPI 25:

TOP 10

Delegations

KPI

result

TOP 10

Delegations

Sum of

ineligible

amounts

(in M€)

TOP 10

Delegations

Sum of

audited

expenditur

e (in M€)

Bosnia &

Herzegovina

14.95%

Jordan 1.58

West Bank and

Gaza Strip 422.84

Israel 11.85% Egypt 1.34 Egypt 37.73

Jordan 8.04%

Bosnia &

Herzegovina 1.33

European

Union Office in

Kosovo

36.65

Morocco 6.07% Morocco 1.09 Serbia 34.63

Ukraine 4.34% Tunisia 0.81 Moldova 27.36

Belarus 4.28% Ukraine 0.65 Tunisia 24.03

Egypt 3.54% Algeria 0.61 Algeria 19.88

Tunisia 3.35% Israel 0.49 Albania 19.69

Algeria 3.08%

North

Macedonia 0.39 Jordan 19.60

North

Macedonia

3.03%

Belarus 0.35 Turkey 19.46


ANNEX 12: Performance Tables

The performance reported in this Annex is based on a set of indicators that were

established in the Strategic Plan 2016-2020 of DG NEAR. Latest known results 2018

about the state of play of those indicators26 give information about the progress made in

2017 towards the achievement of objectives set for 2020.

During the strategic planning period DG NEAR works towards the achievement of 7

specific objectives, which make a contribution to 4 general objectives of the Juncker

Commission.

The ENI and the IPA II instruments are the key tools facilitating year-to-year progress

towards fulfilling the 7 specific objectives. To this end, under each specific objective a

reference is made to the spending programme that supports the objective (IPA II or

ENI) in the Performance Tables of this Annex.

The purpose of ENI and IPA II is laid down in the respective legal basis covering the

period of the financial perspective 2014 to 2020. Their objectives and indicators have

been feeding the establishment of the strategic planning 2016-2020 and, therefore,

indicators reported in this Annex generally reflect the legal requirements of the 2014-

2020 programmes also laid down in the programme statements27 on a year-to-year

basis.

The achievements of DG NEAR described below are therefore– to the greatest possible

extent- aligned with the performance information included in the programme

statements for the Draft Budget 2019.

26

and in comparison with a baseline set for the majority of cases.

27 The Programme Statements for 2017 are to be found in the Commission documents, COM(2017) 400 - May

2017, as one of the twelve ‘Working Documents’ accompanying the Draft Budget adoption. The IPA and ENI Programme Statements constitute the main instrument for justifying the operational appropriations requested by the Commission in the Draft Budget. These Statements are coherent with the corresponding legal bases and provide details on the resources which are dedicated to each spending Programme.


General objective 1- A Stronger Global Actor – Corporate Impact

Indicators

General objective 1: A stronger global actor

Corporate Impact indicator: GDP per capita (current prices-PPS) as % of EU level in

countries that are candidates or potential candidates for EU accession

Source of data: Eurostat

Baseline (2014) Interim Milestone Target 2020

32.5%28 for WEB (except

Kosovo29)

62%30 for Turkey (baseline

according to Eurostat)

Increase by 2020

Latest known results 2018

Western Balkans 34 %

Current situation 2018

Albania GDP per capita (in 2016) is EUR 3728 (30% of EU 28 in PPS - 2017 estimate) Bosnia and Herzegovina GDP per capita (in 2016) is EUR 4494 (32% of EU 28 in PPS - 2017 estimate) Kosovo GDP per capita (in 2016) is EUR 3304 (26% of EU 28 in PPS - 2017 estimate) The Republic of North Macedonia GDP per capita (in 2016) is EUR 4691 (36% of EU 28 in PPS - 2017 estimate) Montenegro GDP per capita (in 2016) is EUR 6355 (46% of EU 28 in PPS - 2017 estimate) Serbia GDP per capita (in 2016) is EUR 4904 (36% of EU 28 in PPS - 2017 estimate)

Turkey:62%

Corporate Impact indicator: Ranking to measure political stability and absence of

violence in countries part of the European Neighbourhood Policy

Definition: This indicator measures perceptions of the likelihood that the government will

be destabilized or overthrown by unconstitutional or violent means, including politically

motivated violence or terrorism. Higher values in percentile rank indicate better

governance ratings.

For Neighbourhood South (NS): Number of countries in a percentile rank above 10

For Neighbourhood East (NE): Number of countries in a percentile rank above 30

28 Updated info from central services for this baseline at the end of 2017: 34%

29 No 2014 data available for Kosovo

30 Updated to 64% as per info from central services for this baseline end 2017


Source of Data: Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) project (WB group)

http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index

Baseline (2014) Interim Milestone (2015) Target 2020

Neighbourhood East: 33.89

4 countries above 30

Neighbourhood South: 11.99

5 countries above 10

4 countries above 30 Neighbourhood East:

Increase the number of

countries above 30 to 5

Neighbourhood South:

Increase the number of

countries above 10


Neighbourhood East: 3 countries above 30, overall : 27.16

Armenia is 20

Azerbaijan is 19

Belarus is 46

Georgia is 32

Moldova is 39

Ukraine is 7.

Neighbourhood South: 5 countries above 10


General objective 1- A Stronger Global Actor – Neighbourhood

Specific objective: 1

Increased stability in the Neighbourhood in political, economic, and security

related terms

Related to spending programme ENI

Result indicator: For Neighbourhood countries, development of more tailor-made

partnerships covering core issues of common interests

Definition: The purpose of the reviewed ENP is to build more effective partnerships

between the EU and the neighbourhood; hence having an indicator on the new partnerships

is highly relevant to measure the success of this policy.

Differentiation is the hallmark of the new ENP, recognising that not all partners aspire to EU

rules and standards, and reflecting the wishes of each country concerning the nature and

focus of its partnership with the EU. Therefore, the partnerships should be tailor-made.

Core issues proposed for cooperation will notably include economic development for

stabilisation (e.g. economic modernisation, employment, transport, connectivity, energy,

climate action), the security dimension, and migration and mobility.

At the core of the revised ENP, there is also the idea that the ENP and the related

partnerships should reflect EU interests and the interests of our partners.

DG NEAR will contribute to launching work leading to the development of these new

partnerships, working in close cooperation with the EEAS. It will support the development

of partnerships, where relevant with its financial assistance.

Source of data: European Commission (DG NEAR)

Baseline Interim Milestone 2017 Target 2020

Not applicable Complete negotiation on

new association

agreements with

Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Complete discussions

with interested countries

on more tailor-made

partnerships

New association

agreements in force or

provisionally applied with

Azerbaijan and Armenia.

New priorities established

Latest known results (situation on 31/12/2018)

Armenia has concluded a Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA)

with the EU 1n November 2017, and has adopted joint EU-AM Partnership Priorities, signed

in Feb 2018.

CEPA provisionally entered into force in June 2018. Azerbaijan: Negotiations for a new EU-Azerbaijan agreement are on-going, whereas the

Partnership Priorities were adopted in October 2018.

Belarus is close to finalising joint Partnership Priorities with the EU.

Result indicator: Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements (DCFTA) with Morocco

and Tunisia

Definition: Continued participation in EU's awareness raising and negotiation efforts in

relation to DCFTA with Morocco and Tunisia. Ensure implementation of financial assistance


to accompany the DCFTA negotiations

Source of data: European Commission (DG TRADE and NEAR)

Baseline 2015 Interim Milestone 2017 Target 2020

Both DFCTA negotiated New DCFTA in force or

provisionally applied


Morocco: Negotiations on DCFTA suspended in 2014 and not relaunched.

Negotiations are ongoing with Tunisia but no negotiations sessions took place with Morocco

since 2016. Joint programming proves difficult, as the attitude of the MS in the field is quite

different from instructions coming from the respective capitals.

The nomination of a Chief Negotiator in October 2017 revived the EU-Tunisia ALECA

negotiation process. An ambitious work plan for 2018 has been agreed upon between both

parties with the objective to finalise the ongoing negotiations in 2019, with a fourth round

foreseen during Q2 2019.

Result indicator: Joint programming: development of joint programmes between the

Commission's financial assistance and that of the Member States

Definition: This indicator looks at the number of joint programmes for financial assistance

implementation which are concluded with EU Member States within the period covered by

the Strategic Plan

Source of data: European Commission (DG NEAR)


No joint programmes

concluded

Neighbourhood East : 3

programmes concluded

Neighbourhood South : 5

programmes concluded

(Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon,

Morocco, Palestine)

4 programmes concluded

5 programmes concluded

Current situation 2018

Development partners’ joint analysis of the situation on Armenia was carried out in 2018. It

will be updated in 2019 with the intention to work towards the Joint Programming agenda

in Armenia over 2019.

Azerbaijan: In 2018, an EU+ joint analysis of the VET sector was commissioned by the EU

Delegation and presented to EU+ partners.

There is currently no Joint Programming in Belarus, however a joint analysis was done in

2016 and an annual donor coordination meeting is organised by EEAS/DG NEAR in

Brussels.

A Joint Analysis for Georgia was endorsed by all EUMS HoMs and Switzerland on 11 April

2017 and still forms the basis for cooperation today, thereby making possible closer

synergies and helping to avoid the duplication of aid efforts. With all mid-term

programming largely completed, the EUMS have discussed to update the joint analysis.

Elements of joint response are included, by means of setting common goals. The Gender

Action Plan was incorporated into the Joint Analysis and will feature in all updates to the

document.

Moldova - On 28 February 2018, the EU Delegation to the Republic of Moldova together

with the EU Member States and Switzerland presented the first European Joint

Development Cooperation Strategy to the Government of the Republic of Moldova. This

Joint Programming Document serves as a key reference for planning future EU assistance

to the Republic of Moldova by presenting a consolidated view of development priorities


agreed amongst European donors. This Joint Strategy reflects the revised European

Neighbourhood Policy, the Association Agenda 2017-2019 and Eastern Partnership Priorities

including the 20 Deliverables for 2020 and is aligned with the Republic of Moldova's

National Development Strategy.

1 joint programme concluded for Palestine.

Specific objective 1 Increased Stability in the Neighbourhood Region in political,

economic, and security related matters;


All new initiatives and REFIT initiatives from the Commission Work Programme

Description Indicator Target date

Multi-annual financial

framework (initiative to be

launched with a 2025

perspective)

Comprehensive proposal for

the future Multi-annual

Financial Framework beyond

2020 followed by proposals

for the next generation of

programmes and new own

resources (legislative, incl.

impact assessment, Art. 311

TFEU plus sectoral bases)

Q2 2018


The Commission adopted its proposal for the whole Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF)

post-2020 on 2 May 2018. The specific legislative proposals for the new Neighbourhood,

Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) and for the Instrument for

Pre-accession assistance (IPA III) were adopted on 14 June 2018.

Important items from work programmes/financing

decisions /operational programmes


Implementation of the

revised Association Agendas

and Partnership Priorities

Multiannual and annual

programming documents are

in line with the revised

Association Agendas and

Partnership Priorities

Throughout 2018


SSFs, Multiannual European Joint Strategy for Palestine and related annual

programming documents elaborated and adopted in line with revised AA and PPs.

Armenia: The Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA) between the

EU and Armenia, signed in November 2017, entered into force on 1 June 2018. In line with

the CEPA, Armenia and the EU have jointly developed Partnership Priorities, signed in

February 2018, which will guide future bilateral cooperation in key areas structured along

the Four EaP priorities. AAP 2018 is in line with the Single Support Framework for EU

support to Armenia 2017-2020, as well as the Partnership Priorities, and focus on economic

development in the pilot regions and strengthening democracy and civic participation in

Armenia in view of the upcoming snap parliamentary elections in spring 2019.

Azerbaijan: The Single Support Framework 2018-20, in line with the Partnership Priorities

(PPs), was approved in December, followed by the AAP 2018, supporting one of the 4 main

areas of PPs, people-to-people contacts (education).

Belarus: The EU-Belarus Partnership Priorities are close to finalisation and signature is


expected before the end of the year. The Single Support Framework 2018-2020, in line

with the Partnership Priorities and structured along the four EaP priorities, was adopted in

autumn, followed by the AAP 2018. Bilateral support this year focus on resource efficiency;

professional exchanges and people-to-people contacts; independent media and enhanced

professional reporting and support to implementation of the Partnership Priorities.

Georgia: The priorities and indicative allocations of the Single Support Framework 2017-

2020 (adopted in December 2017) reflect the revised European Neighbourhood Policy and

the revised Association Agenda between the European Union and Georgia. Bilateral support

in the context of the AAP 2018 (to be approved before the end of the year) will focus on

Priorities 2 and 3 and the Complementary Support and StratComm Pillar of the Single

Support Framework, namely on Security, Public Finance Management, Energy Efficiency,

and on the implementation of the Association Agreement, including additional support to

Georgia's participation in EU programmes and agencies. Additional projects on Local

Currency Lending, Solid Waste Management and a project on Water Supply and Sanitation in Adjara will be channelled through the Neighbourhood Investment Platform.

Moldova: The Single Support Framework 2017-2020 for EU Support to Moldova (adopted

in 2017) reflect the revised European Neighbourhood Policy, the revised Association

Agenda between the European Union and Moldova and the Eastern Partnership priorities

reflected in the guiding document on the ”20 Deliverables for 2020”. Bilateral support in

the context of the AAP 2018 (to be approved before the end of the year) will focus on

programmes benefiting citizens directly. It may include support to the socio-economic

development of two focal regions, support to confidence building measures with

Transnistria, support to anti-corruption mechanisms and the support to Eramus + and to

the fight against gender violence.


Revised Partnership Priorities

and new agreement with

Azerbaijan

Partnership Priorities

revised and agreed with

Azerbaijan

Agreement with

Azerbaijan concluded and

signed

First half of 2018

December 2018


Azerbaijan: Negotiations for a new agreement with AZ have slowed down and are

continuing in 2019. Partnership Priorities were formally adopted in October.


Partnership Priorities with

Morocco and subsequent

new Single Support

Framework for 2018-2020

Political dialogue with

Morocco resumed (EEAS

in the lead);

Partnership Priorities and

2018-2020 SSF drafted

and approved;

By end of 2018


The Action Plan implementing the EU-Morocco Association Agreement was extended by one

year to cover 2018. The current 2014-2017 SSF was extended too.

Commissioner Hahn visited Rabat on 14 September to start a process towards relaunching

EU-Morocco partnership, to define the focus of co-operation activities for 2019-2020, and

in parallel to start a deeper reflection on the longer term perspective for the partnership.

In the meantime the financial assistance was pursued in 2018 (under the extended SSF)

with a bilateral envelope worth EUR 182 M.



Joint communication to the

European Parliament and the

Council on "Strengthening

EU support for Tunisia"

rolled out and the EU-Tunisia

privileged partnership

further deepened

Pursue the


provisions of the joint

communication and of

the Single Support

Framework 2017-2020

Adoption,

implementation, and

regular update, of a

Roadmap of short-term

(6 month) measures to

implement key reforms

Draft, finalise, and adopt

strategic priorities for the

period 2018-2020

Continue brainstorming

on the future of the EU-

Tunisia relation beyond

2020 )

Throughout 2018


The EU and Tunisia agreed the strategic priorities for their partnership in 2018-2020 during

the 14th meeting of the EU-Tunisia Association Council held in Brussels on 15 May 2018.

A high-level joint mission EU-IFIs to Tunisia was led by Commissioner Hahn on 12 July

2018 to discuss with Tunisian authorities about challenges and measures to implement

those key reforms.

Visit of President Juncker and Commissioner Hahn in November 2018.


Multiannual programming

process

and joint programming

(2018–2020) with 4-531

Neighbourhood South

countries

Multiannual (2017–2020)

programming process with

Azerbaijan

Multiannual (2018–2020)

programming process with

Ukraine (2018–2020)

Launch and completion of

Egypt, Jordan and

Lebanon Single Support

Frameworks (SSF) for

2017-2020,

Completion

Implementation started

through the adoption of

2018 Annual Action

Programme for Ukraine

Completion

by end of 2018

31

Depends on a pending decision on the revision or extension of Libya's programming document


Multiannual (2018-2020)

regional programming

process for Neighbourhood

South and East


SSF for Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon used as frameworks for AAPs 2018. The multiannual

programming for regional South passed the ENI Committee and was adopted on

05/10/2018 C(2018)6362.

The 2018-2020 SSF for Algeria was adopted, following the Association Council held in May

2018.

Azerbaijan: The SSF 2018-2020 was adopted in December 2018.

Implementation of Multiannual Programming SSF 2018–2020 for Ukraine started in 2018

with the adoption of 2018 Annual Action Programme for Ukraine through two decisions

(dated 25/07/2018 and 26/11/2018).


ENI annual programmes

2018 ENI country action

programmes and regional

programmes for all countries

of the Eastern Partnership

region

Relevant Special Measures

(including Syria and possibly

Libya).

ENI umbrella programme

allocations

Adoption

Decided

Throughout 2018


All Annual Action Plans and Special Measures for 2018 adopted.

All country AAPs and RAPs are in progress. Umbrella programmes allocated in March

(Ukraine €50M, Georgia €40M and Armenia €10).

The 2018 Annual Action Programme for Ukraine (as part of Multiannual Programming

2018–2020) was adopted through two decisions in July and November 2018.


Coordinated efforts with the

International Financial

Institutions to support

Partner Countries in their

implementation of structural

reforms

Joint programmes for

structural reforms agreed

with the International

Financial Institutions

Annual AMICI Mapping

updated (for the South)

At least one joint

programme approved per

region (Western Balkans,

East, South) by the end of

2018


Consistent with the line pursued by the EU, aiming at strengthening joint messages and

coordinated efforts, a High Level meeting with the IFIs, the national authorities and

stakeholders, led by Commissioner Hahn, has taken place in Tunis on 12 July. Coordinated

efforts as regards Private Sector Development are also took place in the Coordination

Platform for the EU Initiative for Financial Inclusion.

The European External Investment Plan (EIP) was launched in Neighbourhood South

countries (Lebanon, Jordan, Morocco and Palestine) between February and July 2018 to

present the new guarantee mechanism and the thematic priorities of the EIP to


representatives of public, private sector as well as to local financing institutions.

In June and November 2018, the EFSD Guarantee Board gave a positive opinion on 28

guarantee proposals corresponding to a total guarantee coverage of EUR 1.54 billion. The

guarantee coverage for South Neighbourhood amounts to indicatively EUR 286 million.

The Luxembourg Group meeting was organised in January in Brussels and in December in

London. The MENA Days with the World Bank and the EIB was organised in March.

EAST: achieved. All contracts under the Structural Reform Facility implemented by the IMF,

the EBRD and the WB are ongoing.


Strategic framework for

supporting Security Sector

Reform

Support to the roll-out of

the ENP review for the

Security Chapter

Support to the


Joint Communication on

Security Sector Reform

(2016)

Throughout 2018


ENP review / security: joint EEAS-COM stocktaking paper presented in PSC on 3/7/2018

Joint Communication on SSR: Implementation report presented to CODEV/CIVCOM/PMG on

26/9/2018


EU support to the two-state

solution in the context of the

MEPP reviewed, with a focus

in the near-term on Gaza

Link established between

direct EU financial assistance

and actual progress in key

reforms

COM/EEAS "stand-alone"

Non-paper

Adoption of action

document including an

incentive based approach

Throughout 2018


- Presentation of COM/EEAS "stand-alone" MEPP review Non-paper to Gymnich (31 August

2018) and to MS on 31 October (MENA Directors meeting)

- Implementation of conclusions of the MEPP review non-paper is ongoing.

- The related PEGASE multiannual Action document including an incentive based approach

was adopted in February and the respective FA was signed in April 2018.


Capacities of civil society in

the Southern and Eastern

Neighbourhood strengthened

i) bedding in of the

mechanism for structured

dialogue;

ii) preparation of programme

for youth, culture and

media;

iii) implementation of Young

Mediterranean Voices

Southern Neighbourhood :

Number of Programme in

preparation to support civil

society capacities:

The new Civil Society Hub is

established and running;

2018 Civil Society forum

South is held; a new co-

operation framework on

youth, media and culture is

formulated based upon

sector wide evaluation;

Throughout 2018

(ENI Committee Autumn

2018 for youth, culture,

media programme)


initiative at regional level

and especially targeting

young women and men.

Eastern Neighbourhood: Civil

Society Forum with its

Working Groups reformed

and contributing to policy

discussions, in particular,

within EaP multilateral

architecture.


The Majalat Hub bringing together CSOs from the Southern Neighbourhood for structured

dialogue started in February 2018, putting in place the decision-making organs and

nominating their members. After a preparatory meeting in Amman on 20-21 September,

the South Civil Society Forum was successfully held in Brussels on 20-21 November to

discuss recommendations from civil society organisations on a number of policy priorities.

An Action Document for a new regional programme on Youth and Culture for the

Neighbourhood South was adopted C(2018) 7685 on 16/11/2018.

Eastern Neighbourhood: The EaP Civil Society Forum committed to restructuring to reflect

the new EaP architecture. Selection of 2018 Forum delegates was made in line with the

new architecture. An internal reform that would transpose those changes into the

governance of the Forum was approved in October 2018 and entered into force on 1

November 2018.


Support the Development of

key regional institutions

Anna Lindh Foundation: new

leadership is in place;

flagship "Youth Med Voices"

programme launched (with

EU support)

By the end of 2018


A new action grant for the Anna Lindh Foundation Phase V 2018-2021 was launched in

December 2018. The appointment of Mr Nabil Al-Sharif as the new Executive Director has

been decided by the Board of Governors on 18 July.

The flagship "Young Med Voices" programme is ongoing, several national debates, virtual

exchanges and policy dialogues with EU Officials have taken place throughout 2018.


Implemented TAIEX

activities contributing to

AA/DFCTA priorities and

security sector reform;

Events took place Throughout 2018


The EaP 20 deliverables map the key role of TAIEX in establishing sustainable structures to

prevent and fight corruption, to ensure that legislation and institutional changes are

implemented effectively and that relevant anti-corruption mechanisms guarantee rule of

law.

Two TAIEX Workshops on combating corruption and two events on supporting public

administration reform were implemented in the Eastern neighbourhood.

In the South, TAIEX continued supporting its partners to make them more prepared in case

of security threats, especially linked to terrorism and crimes committed in the internet, by

organizing 10 activities across the region. Among them, representatives from Morocco,

Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Lebanon and Jordan gathered in Beirut with MS experts to

attend a TAIEX regional workshop on Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism in the

MENA region to discuss key challenges and best practice on the subject.


Additionally, a TAIEX training map in support of the General Border and Crossing was

implemented to enhance the capacity of border staff, in cooperation with EUBAM Palestine.


Strengthened Eastern Partnership; support regional cooperation between

southern neighbours, including through the Union for the Mediterranean;

promote cross border cooperation between member states and partner

countries

Related to spending programmes ENI

Result indicator: Number of ministerial, platform and panel meetings under the Eastern

Partnership.

Definition: DG NEAR, in coordination with the EEAS and the line DGs, is supporting policy

dialogue in the Eastern Partnership countries at different levels (ministerials, platforms,

panels), in view of enhancing relations with partner countries and developing our sectorial

reforms and cooperation. This process is expected to become more focused and results-

oriented ensuring closer links between policy priorities and financial support within the

spirit of the four priority areas agreed at the Riga Summit (May 2015) and on the basis of

the ENP Review Communication, which promotes partnership, ownership and

differentiation. DG NEAR provides funding for the organisation of policy dialogue events

through the dedicated Facility.

Source of data: Events facility contract managed by NEAR


Between 70 and 80 policy

dialogue events were

organised

80 policy dialogue events

organised

This target is based on the

2014-2015 Management

Plans.

90 policy dialogue events

organised


In 2018, 87 EaP events have been organised in the 6 EaP countries, Brussels and some EU

Member States. Among them – Ministerial meetings, Senior Officials meetings, launching of

the new EaP architecture, the high-level conference in Vienna, the Business Forum in

Vienna, platforms, panels, working groups, trainings and conferences.

Result indicator: Progress on Eastern Partnership (EaP) priorities.

Definition: The main four priority areas of the EaP were defined at the Riga summit in

2015. Progress can be monitored in the sectoral policy platforms and other relevant

activities/events. DG NEAR mainly supports the different processes through policy

coordination and financial assistance.

Source of data: DG NEAR, European Council and outcomes from platforms and ministerial

sectoral meetings, implementation of relevant assistance projects.


Establishment of the main

priority areas at the Riga

Summit in 2015

1. strengthening

institutions and good

governance

Strategic progress mainly in

the areas of:

Market opportunities:

Development of the three

DCFTAs (i.e. Ukraine,

Georgia, Moldova) and

Significant progress in the

four priority areas

established at the Riga

Summit in 2015.


2. increasing mobility

and people to people

contacts

3. market opportunities

4. interconnections.

assistance provided

Interconnections:

Approval of the extension

of the core TEN-T

network at ministerial

level.

Endorsement of the single

project pipeline by the EaP

countries, IFIs and the EU.


Based on our 2018 monitoring of the 20 Deliverables for 2020, progress has been noted in

all areas, particularly in the areas of stronger economy, stronger connectivity and stronger

society. Some challenges still remain in the area of rule of law, shrinking space for civil

society and independent media.

Result indicator: Increased credibility of the Union for the Mediterranean through a high

number of ministerial meetings establishing regional sector priorities and through the

engagement of regional cooperation, finance and planning ministers via the holding of UFM

ministerial conferences on regional cooperation and planning

Definition: DG NEAR, in coordination with the EEAS and the line DGs, is supporting policy

dialogue in the Southern Neighbourhood countries at different levels (ministerial, platforms

etc.), in view of enhancing relations with partner countries and developing our sectorial

reforms and cooperation. It also provides funding for the organisation of policy dialogue

events through its projects and a dedicated facility.

The Ministerial meetings are organised under the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM). A

dynamic regional dialogue could be expected to generate ministerial meetings in a given

sector about every 2 to 3 years.

This indicator is relevant to measure the results of DG NEAR's under this specific objective

as the Southern Neighbourhood as such remains one of the least integrated in the world,

hence organising regional cooperation meetings can prove already challenging. Indeed, the

overall political climate in this region remains tense, affecting the possibilities for regional

cooperation.

Whilst in recent years there has been progress on specific regional agenda-setting, there is

also a need to ensure cross-cutting political and financial support to these agendas. This

can be achieved with a closer involvement of ministers in charge of international

cooperation/national budgets etc.

Source of data: Unit NEAR B2 and events facility contract managed by NEAR


Three ministerial

establishing regional sector

priorities

Three ministerial foreseen in

2016 establishing regional

sector priorities

Three ministerial per year

(15 in total)


2016-2018

Overall, the target of holding three UfM Ministerial per year was successfully reached in

2016 and 2017. The year 2018 was marked by a change of leadership within the UfM

Secretariat (new Secretary General took office in July 2018) and a tense regional context

(among others due to a change of US policy towards the Middle East) which rendered the

organisation of Ministerial conferences in Neighbourhood south countries more difficult.

UfM Ministerial on Blue Economy Brussels, 17th November 2015

UfM Ministerial on Cooperation and Planning, 02 June 2016, Jordan


3rd UfM Ministerial Conference on Employment and Labour, 26-27 September 2016,

Jordan

Union for the Mediterranean Ministerial Meeting on Energy, Rome, 1st December 2016

UfM ministerial meeting on Water, Malta, 27 April 2017

UfM Ministerial on Sustainable Urban Development - Cairo 22 May 2017

4th UfM Ministerial Meeting on Strengthening the role of Women in Society, Cairo, 27

November 2017

10th Union for the Mediterranean Trade Ministerial Meeting, Brussels, 19th March 2018


Ministries of Finance,

Planning and International

Cooperation relatively un-

engaged in regional

cooperation.

No cooperation ministerial

ever held

UfM Ministerial on Regional

Cooperation and Planning

successfully organised in

2016

A regular process of

coordination around

financing of regional

integration is operational


The Ministerial Declaration on Co-operation and Planning was adopted in June 2016 and the

Regional Forum took place in October 2018 in Barcelona.

Result indicator: Progress on specific regional objectives defined in ministerial

declarations under the Union for the Mediterranean.

Definition: Each Ministerial meeting indicates specific regional cooperation and integration

objectives, and progress is monitored in the various sectoral policy platforms put in place

to enable discussions on issues and progress. Progress is dependent on many stakeholders'

actions, and is not fully under control of DG NEAR directly. DG NEAR supports the

developments measured by this indicator through its policy coordination role and its

financial assistance (in particular regional projects).

Source of data: UFM Secretariat, line DGs and EU agencies, UN, and NEAR B2

Baseline 2014 Interim Milestone Target 2020

N.A. Tangible progress in the key

elements for regional

integration and cooperation

identified in the Ministerial

Declarations, such as:

Regional transport

network identified

Progress in

depolluting the

Mediterranean

Electricity

connections between

countries enhanced


The year 2018 was marked by a change of leadership within the UfM Secretariat (new

Secretary General took office in July 2018) and a tense regional context (among others due

to a change of US policy towards the Middle East) which rendered the organisation of

Ministerial conferences in Neighbourhood south countries more difficult. However, one UfM

Ministerial took place successfully on trade, the first one to be organised in this sector since


2010.

Work within the UfM framework continued fully in 2018 through an important number of

regional dialogue platforms, supported by EU regional programmes. Regulatory

convergence and coordination improved in view of integrating energy markets amongst

others through dialogue within the UfM energy platforms.

10th Union for the Mediterranean Trade Ministerial Meeting, was held in Brussels, 19th

March 2018

Result indicator: Number of Financing Agreements signed with partner countries under

the new ENI CBC programmes

Definition: The signature of the Financing Agreement (FAs) between the Commission and

partner countries in the new ENI-CBC programmes, allows for the implementation of the

ENI-CBC programmes adopted by the Commission.

16 ENI-CBC programmes were included in the ENI-CBC programming documents. An

additional programme was included (Baltic Sea) but its implementation is part of DG

REGIO's portfolio. The total EU's financial contribution amounts to approximately EUR 1

billion.

Out of the above 16 programmes, only 13 were adopted by the Commission in 2015. Due

to political reasons, two programmes (PL-RU and LT-RU) were not submitted to the

Commission for adoption in 2015, and the other programme (Mid-Atlantic), although

submitted, has not been adopted by the Commission yet.

23 FAs needs to be signed in 2016 to implement the 13 ENI-CBC adopted programmes. If

some of the remaining 3 programmes were adopted by the Commission in 2016 then

additional FAs would be signed in 2016/2017.

Source of data: DG Near as responsible DG for the ENI-CBC programmes


0 n/a 23 FAs signed between the

Commission & participating

countries which correspond

to the 13 ENI-CBC

programmes adopted by the

Commission. If some of the

3 remaining ENI-CBC

Programmes were adopted,

then additional FAs would be

signed in 2016/2017


16 CBC programmes are in place.

24 of 25 Financing Agreements (corresponding to the 15 CBC programmes) entered into

force by end 2018. The last one entered into force in January 2019.

Specific objective 2: Strengthened Eastern Partnership; support regional

cooperation between southern neighbours, including through the Union for the

Mediterranean; promote cross border cooperation between member states and

partner countries



Follow-up of 2017 Brussels Platforms and Panels, All by the end of 2018


Summit commitments and of

the "20 Deliverables for

2020".

Putting in place the revised

Eastern Partnership

architecture as a delivery

mechanism for the "20

Deliverables for 2020"

operational and

monitoring the


"20 Deliverables".

New key initiatives

including "Youth and

Education Package"

have clear work

programme.


All Platforms and Panels met in accordance with the work programme planned for 2018.

The 2018 monitoring of the "20 Deliverables for 2020" has been carried out, showing good

progress on most of the deliverables. The results of the monitoring contributed to the

discussion at the Foreign Affairs Ministerial of 15 October 2018 and provided the basis for

the Eastern Partnership Conference in Vienna on 7 December 2018.

The Youth and Education Package has been successfully launched and the Eastern

Partnership European School has opened its doors in Tbilisi on 4 September.


At least one sub-granting

scheme from to civil society

in each of the EaP countries

49 Civil Society Fellows in

the Eastern Partnership

Strategic partners

identified and sub-

granting calls

launched in all 6

countries

Fellows are selected

and trained

By end of 2018


49 Civil Society Fellows in the Eastern Partnership were selected and are undergoing

leadership training in Eastern Partnership (2016 – 2018).


Support the UfM sector

policy dialogue with partner

countries;

Provide institutional support

to the UfM;

Union for the

Mediterranean

declarations are followed

up through yearly sector

dialogues involving the

full range of relevant

stakeholders;

Recommendations by the

Task Force for the UfM

Roadmap are endorsed

by Senior Officials

Meetings (SOM);

Throughout 2018


Financial support to UfM Secretariat for the period 2019-2021 has been adopted

C(2018)7631, on 14/11/2018. A follow up meeting to implement recommendations of the

UfM 2017 Women Ministerial in Cairo was held in Lisbon on 9/10/2018. The regional

campaign to prevent and combat violence against women and girls in Southern

Mediterranean countries was launched.

Recommendations for the future of the UfM as well as on the labelling reform were

endorsed by Foreign Ministers in the UfM Regional Forum, which took place in October


2018 in Barcelona to mark the anniversary of the Barcelona Declaration.

The UfM regional water agenda was presented to the SoM in December.


2018 ENI Multi-country

Programmes for both East

and South

2018 Programmes adopted

by the Commission

Throughout 2018


AAP 2018 for regional South have been adopted on 14/11 and 16/11/2018.

C(2018)7631 and 7685.


Advancing TEN-T long-term

investment action plan

Single prioritised

investment pipeline

agreed upon

Related institutional and

regulatory reforms

initiated

Strategic investment

projects on transport

interconnection funded

by the NIF

Throughout 2018


Lebanon on course to become the 5th Neighbourhood South country to join the UNECE

AETR agreement.

Egypt is in the process of setting up a land transport regularity authority.

Negotiations are ongoing regarding TEN-T extension and project pipeline.


Technical Assistance and

Information Exchange

instrument (TAIEX)

Implemented regional TAIEX

activities.

Throughout 2018


In the first semester of 2018, the TAIEX and Twinning instruments continued to support

fundamental rule of law and economic reforms and contribute to strengthening institutional

capacity, stability and prosperity. TAIEX organised 452 activities for the first six months of

2018.

A TAIEX Regional Workshop on Justice Surveys contributed to raise awareness of the

benefits and procedures of justice surveys between Eastern partnership countries.

One TAIEX Multi-beneficiary Workshop on Trade in Services supported good cooperation

and trade liberalisation in the neighbourhood South region

Specific objective 3: The enlargement countries are more ready to join the

EU, in particular in the fundamental areas of rule of law, public administration

reform and economic development, reaping the benefits of closer integration

with the EU before accession.

General objective 1 – A Stronger Global Actor – Enlargement


The enlargement countries are more ready to join the EU, in particular as regards


the fundamental areas of rule of law, public administration reform and economic

development, reaping benefits of closer integration with the EU before accession

and ensuring continued progress in the accession negotiations where relevant.

Related to spending programme IPA

Result indicator: Readiness indicators on fundamental areas of political criteria (Areas:

Judiciary, Fighting organised crime, Freedom of expression, Fight against corruption, Public

administration reform).

Definition: These indicators aim at showing where the seven enlargement countries stand

in terms of their preparations for meeting key areas of the political accession criteria,

namely the functioning of the judiciary, fight against corruption, fight against organised

crime, freedom of expression and Public administration reform.

In each of these areas, the state of play (i.e. the readiness) is assessed according to the

following five-tier standard assessment scale: Early stage – Some level of preparation -

Moderately prepared - Good level of preparation – Well Advanced

These indicators have been introduced in the enlargement country reports of 2015. For

further details, please see the Communication on the EU Enlargement Strategy32.

These result indicators are particularly relevant for DG NEAR since they show the results of

its enlargement policy and financial assistance as regards two main fundamentals of the

enlargement strategy (i.e. The rule of law and fundamental rights and public administration

reform). DG NEAR role is to support the enlargement countries to address the core issues

measured by these indicators. These indicators provide also greater transparency in the

enlargement process and should facilitate greater scrutiny of reforms by all stakeholders.

Source of data: Annual enlargement country reports – European Commission


Five cases of early stage of

preparation in these areas

Reduced number of cases of

early stage of preparation in

these areas

A majority of countries are

moderately prepared in

these areas33


Albania

Albania has made important steps forward in the functioning of the judiciary and the rule of

law, in particular as it concerns the fight against corruption and organised crime. A Sector

Reform Contract assists in the implementation of the anti-corruption strategy and a sector

reform contract for the implementation of the justice reform is in preparation. An expert

mission in 2018 helped the preparation of the anti-cannabis strategy, which will be

supported by EU assistance. The JLS sub-committee convened on 11 and 12 July 2018. The

International Monitoring Operation (IMO) supported the temporary re-evaluation of judges

and prosecutors ("vetting") notably by providing international observers for the

observation/supervision of the work of the "National Vetting Bodies".

The PAR special group was postponed to April 2019. Political dialogue was intensified on

the follow-up of the public administration and the public finance management strategies.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

As assessed in the interim report, Bosnia and Herzegovina’s justice system has some level

32 COM (2016) 715 final, 09.11.2016

33 Assuming that there will not be any backsliding on these areas, the target implies that by 2020 at least 3

more countries become moderately prepared on the functioning of the judiciary; at least four more countries become moderately prepared on the fight against corruption; at least four more countries become moderately prepared on the fight against organised crime; at least four more countries become moderately prepared on freedom of expression. As for the public administration reform area, a majority of countries are moderately prepared in this area already in 2015.


of preparation as regards the functioning of the Judiciary, the fight against corruption, the

fight against organised crime.

In 2018 several peer reviews were conducted in the area of rule of law (on corruption

prevention, trafficking in human beings, drug abuse, counterterrorism, enforcement of civil

judicial decisions) and fundamental rights (on non-discrimination, gender equality and

women’s rights, freedom of assembly, legal aid, prison system and the prevention of

torture and ill-treatment). In-depth expert discussions took place on the reform of the

judiciary and on fight against serious crime. Findings fed into the policy dialogue with BiH

(SAA JLS sub-Committee, Structured Dialogue on Justice) and in the preparation of the

Opinion.

Bosnia and Herzegovina is at an early stage with the reform of its public administration. In

2018, in addition to the annual PAR Special Group, a more frequent dialogue on PAR was

launched. This will serve as technical meetings with institutions in charge of PAR at all

government level.

Kosovo

In 2018, several peer reviews were conducted in the area of rule of law in Kosovo

(including countering terrorism and violent extremism, freedom of expression, enforcement

of judicial decisions). The yearly SAA Justice, Freedom and Security subcommittee took

place and discussed the state of play in these areas. Kosovo is at an early stage/has some

level of preparation to apply the acquis and the European standards in both the area of

judiciary and fundamental rights and justice, freedom and security.

In 2018, the annual PAR Special Group took place. Policy dialogue was conducted, in

particular to support Kosovo's preparation of a major legislative package of PAR (laws on

the functioning and organisation of state administration and independent agencies, on

public officials and on salaries).

The Republic of North Macedonia

In 2018 several peer reviews were conducted in the area of rule of law (including

countering terrorism and violent extremism, judicial training for judges and prosecutors,

administrative procedures and administrative justice, and enforcement of judicial

decisions). There is also technical assistance in support of intelligence reforms. The yearly

SAA Justice, Freedom and Security subcommittee took place and discussed the state of

play of urgent reform priorities and progress in key sectors such as judicial reforms,

fundamental rights, prevention and fight against corruption and fight against organised

crime. The Republic of North Macedonia is moderately prepared/has some level of

preparation to apply the acquis and the European standards in both the area of judiciary

and fundamental rights and justice, freedom and security. The country is in constant

dialogue with the EC for advancing reforms and fully implementing the Urgent Reforms

priorities.

Montenegro

During the reporting period accession negotiations advanced further with two additional

chapters being opened, bringing the total of open chapters to 32, three of which are

provisionally closed. Under the overall Stabilisation and Association Agreement framework,

all the foreseen SAA Council and Committee, the seven Sub-Committees and the PAR

Special Group took place. Only one chapter remains to be opened (chapter 8-competition).

As regards the enlargement package and the ability to assume to the obligation of

membership, important work on alignment and preparation for the implementation of the

acquis took place in most areas. As regards the fundamental sectors, the country remained

moderately prepared in the areas of judiciary, fundamental rights, justice, freedom and

security and public administration reform.

Serbia

During the reporting period negotiations with Serbia advanced, with additional four

chapters opened, bringing the total to 16 Chapters open. Under the overall Stabilisation

and Association Agreement framework, all the foreseen SAA Council and Committee, the

seven Sub-Committees and the PAR Special Group took place. As regards the enlargement


package, the country continues having some level of preparation in the areas of judiciary,

fundamental rights, justice, freedom and security and is moderately prepared in the area of

public administration reform.

Result indicator: Readiness indicators on fundamental areas of Economic criteria (i.e.

functioning market economy and competitiveness in the EU)


in terms of their preparations for meeting key areas of the two economic accession criteria,

namely the existence of a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with

competitive pressures and market forces within the Union.

In each of these areas, the state of play, the state of play (i.e. the readiness) is assessed

according to the following five-tier standard assessment scale: Early stage – Some level of

preparation - Moderately prepared - Good level of preparation – Well Advanced.

These indicators have been introduced in the enlargement country reports of 2015. For

further details, please see the Communication on the EU Enlargement Strategy34.


its enlargement policy and financial assistance as regards one main fundamental of the

enlargement strategy (i.e. economic criteria). DG NEAR role is to support the enlargement

countries to address the core issues measured by these indicators. These indicators provide

also greater transparency in the enlargement process and should facilitate greater scrutiny

of reforms by all stakeholders.



Four cases of early stage of

preparation in these areas



these areas

A majority of countries reach

a good level of preparation

in these areas35


Albania

Albania has made some progress and is moderately prepared in developing a functioning

market economy.


Bosnia and Herzegovina has made some progress, but is still at an early stage of

establishing a functioning market economy. The country is also at an early stage in

achieving the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the

Union. The participation in the ERP process prepares BiH for their future participation in the

EU’s economic policy coordination procedures. Under IPA 2018, the country receives two

million of euro of technical assistance for capacity building to government institutions at all

levels to prepare the ERP. The Commission plans to issue the Opinion on BiH in 2019 which

will be a roadmap for reforms, including in the socio-economic field.

Kosovo

In 2018 Kosovo has made some progress and was at an early stage of developing a

functioning market economy and in its capacity to cope with competitive pressures and

market forces within the Union.


34

COM (2016) 715 final, 09.11.2016

35 Assuming that there will not be any backsliding on these areas, the target implies that by 2020 at least two more countries reach a good level of preparation on the functioning market economy; at least three more countries reach a good level of preparation on the capacity to cope with competitive pressures and market forces within the Union.


In 2018 the country had a good level of preparation in developing a functioning market

economy and a moderate level of preparation to cope with competitive pressures and

market forces within the EU. With respect to both economic accession criteria the country

has made some progress compared to the previous period.

Montenegro

In 2018 the country was moderately prepared in developing a functioning market economy

and in its capacity to cope with competitive pressures and market forces within the

Union. The assessment was unchanged with respect to the previous reporting period.

Serbia

In 2018 the country has made good progress and it is moderately prepared in developing a

functioning economy and in its capacity to cope with competitive pressures and market

forces within the Union.

Result indicator: Degree of readiness and alignment to the acquis as reflected in the

country reports


in terms of their preparations for fulfilling the obligations stemming from the membership,

including the alignment to the acquis.

In each of the acquis chapters36, the state of play (i.e. the readiness) is assessed according

to the following five-tier standard assessment scale: Early stage – Some level of

preparation - Moderately prepared - Good level of preparation – Well Advanced

For further details, please see the Communication on the EU Enlargement Strategy37.


its enlargement policy and financial assistance as regards the third accession criteria38. DG

NEAR role is to support the enlargement countries to address the issues measured by these

indicators. These indicators provide also greater transparency in the enlargement process

and should facilitate greater scrutiny of reforms by all stakeholders.



51 cases of early stage of

preparation in the 35

chapters39.



these areas

A majority of countries are

moderately prepared in

these areas.


Albania

Under the enlargement package 2018, the country was assessed as moderately prepared

(or with a higher level of standard in the assessment scale) in 18 chapters.


Pending the release of the opinion, there was an interim report published in April 2018. It

only focused on fundamentals such as rule of law, fundamental rights and economic

governance. A first fully-fledged assessment against the 33 policy chapters will be carried

out in the Opinion on BiH’s application for EU membership to be released in 2019.

36 BiH and Kosovo are assessed according to the European Standards, not the chapter structure.

37 COM (2016) 715 final, 09.11.2016

38 This criteria is about the administrative and institutional capacity to effectively implement the acquis and ability to take on the obligations of membership.

39 BiH and Kosovo are assessed according to the European Standards, not the chapter structure.

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/policy/glossary/terms/acquis_en.htm


Kosovo

Under the 2018 enlargement package, Kosovo was assessed at an early stage in 16 areas

of EU standards, some level of preparation in 7 areas, and moderately prepared in 3 areas.




Montenegro



Serbia

Under the enlargement package 2018, Serbia was assessed as moderately prepared (or

with a higher level of standard in the assessment scale) in 27 chapters.

Result indicator: Public Administration Reform (PAR) strategy framework, which is in line

with the Principles of Public Administration

Definition: This indicator aims at showing the progress of the seven enlargement

countries with the preparation, adoption and implementation of a strategic framework on

PAR, addressing the following core areas of PAR: Policy development and coordination,

Public service and human resources management; Accountability of Administration and

Service delivery. These core areas are in line with the new approach on PAR, as advocated

since the 2014-15 enlargement strategy and further defined by the Principles of Public.

Source of data: National authorities in the Enlargement countries leading Public

Administration Reforms


3 countries 5 countries are

implementing a PAR strategy

framework in line with the

Principles of Public

Administration

7 countries are

implementing a PAR strategy

framework


Albania

The country has Public Administration Reform Strategy since 2015. It performed a mid-

term review and recently revised its action plan for 2018-2020. The strategy received

assistance through a sector reform contract under IPA 2015.


The revised Public Administration Strategy (PAR) has been adopted by the governments of

the Federation of BiH (FBiH) and of Brcko District (BD) as well as of the Council of Ministers

of BiH; the adoption by the government of Republika Srpska (RS) is expected in 2019.

Kosovo

The strategic framework for public administration reform consists of 4 strategies on better

regulation, policy planning and coordination, modernisation of public administration and

public financial management. Implementation has been weak, mainly due to

over‑ambitious planning and lack of resources. The strategy received assistance through a

sector reform contract under IPA 2016.

the Republic of North Macedonia

The public administration reform strategy is in place since 2017. A monitoring framework

for the 2018-2022 public administration reform is in place. The costing of the public

administration strategy was not entirely reflected in the 2018 annual budgets and the

medium-term expenditure framework. Implementation of the reform strategy continues to


rely largely on external donor funding.

Montenegro

The country has a Public Administration Reform Strategy in place since 2016. The strategy

is being implemented with substantial financial support from an IPA-funded sector reform

contract since 2017. The first fixed tranche was paid in 2018.

Serbia

The country has a Public Administration Reform Strategy in place since 2015. The strategy

is being implemented with substantial financial support from an IPA-funded sector reform

contract since 2016. The first two fixed tranches and the first variable tranche were paid in

2018.

Result indicator: Public Financial Management (PFM) reform programmes

Definition: This indicator aims at showing the progress of the seven enlargement

countries with the preparation, adoption and implementation of credible and relevant PFM

reform programmes.

The 2013-14 and 2014-15 enlargement strategies have gradually introduced a new policy

on Public Financial Management (PFM) in the enlargement countries. Improved public

financial management, including revenue administration and collection are of fundamental

importance for the functioning of the state and for implementing the reforms needed for EU

integration. Countries have been invited to prepare "credible and relevant" PFM reform

programmes/strategies

Both the enlargement strategy and the budget support guidelines highlight that an

acceptable PFM reform programme is both relevant and credible. Relevance means how key

constraints and weaknesses identified in different assessments (e.g. PEFA, SIGMA baseline

assessment, IMF Tax Administration Diagnostic Assessment Tool TADAT) are addressed in

the PFM strategy/programme. Credibility refers to the quality of the reform process in

terms of its 'realism', appropriate sequencing and prioritisation of actions, institutional

arrangements, allocation of resources, implementation track record and political

commitment to the reforms.

Source of data: Ministries of Finance in the Enlargement countries


Only 1 country implements a

credible and relevant PFM

reform programmes

5 countries are

implementing credible and

relevant PFM reform

programmes

All 7 countries are

implementing credible and

relevant PFM reform

programmes by 2020


Albania

The country has a PFM strategy since 2014. It is currently undergoing a mid-term review,

which shall set the strategic priorities beyond 2020. The strategy received assistance

through a sector reform contract under IPA 2014.


The state level, the FBiH and the District of Brcko have developed and adopted their PFM

strategies. The RS still needs to finalise and adopt its PFM strategy before the process of

consolidation into a country-wide strategy can take place. The adoption is planned for

2019.

Kosovo

As regards the strategic framework, implementation of the 2015-2019 public internal

financial control strategy and action plan adopted in June 2016 remains slow. In addition to

the overarching PFM Reform Strategy, Kosovo institutions have developed more specific

strategies in the PFM area such as Public Internal Financial Control Strategy (PIFC) 2015-


2019 and the National Public Procurement Strategy (NPP) 2017-2021. The Public Internal

Financial Control (PIFC) Law was adopted in April 2018. IPA supports the implementation of

the PFM reform programme through a sector reform contract under IPA 2017.


Following the adoption of the PFM Reform Programme in 2017 the country presented the

Annual Action Plan in 2018 and issued an Annual Monitoring Report on Implementation of

the 2018 Action Plan for Public Financial Management Reform Programme. A draft 2019

Action Plan was also presented in 2018.

Montenegro

The country has had a Public Finance Management Reform Programme since 2016. IPA

supports its implementation through the provision of technical assistance under AAP 2014.

There are growing concerns that the reform programme action plan is behind schedule, this

may create difficulties for the next disbursements of the sector reform contracts.

Serbia

The country has had a Public Finance Management Reform Programme since 2016 that

covers all relevant sub-systems. The program is currently under revision, which should

provide for a more realistic planning and costing, better sequencing, improved indicators

and increased emphasis on results and performance. IPA supports the implementation of

the PFM reform through a sector reform contract.

Specific objective 3: The enlargement countries are more ready to join the

EU, in particular in the fundamental areas of rule of law, public administration

reform and economic development, reaping the benefits of closer integration

with the EU before accession.



Communication from the

Commission to the European

Parliament, the Council, the

European Economic and

Social Committee and the

Committee of the Regions: A

Credible Enlargement

Perspective for the Western

Balkans (PLAN/2017/2171)

Adoption by College

February 2018


The Communication was adopted by the College on 6th February 2018

Multi-annual financial

framework (initiative to be

launched with a 2025

perspective)

Comprehensive proposal for

the future Multi-annual

Financial Framework beyond

2020 followed by proposals

for the next generation of

programmes and new own

resources (legislative, incl.

impact assessment, Art. 311

TFEU plus sectoral bases)

Q2 2018



Completed -MFF Commission proposal adopted in May 2018 and legislative proposals for

the future instruments under Heading VI (Neighbourhood and the World), and the

Instrument for Pre-accession assistance (IPA III), which remains a separate instrument,

adopted in June 2018.


Contribute to draft Council

Conclusions

Adoption March 2018 (tbc)

June 2018


Completed: NEAR D, in cooperation with NEAR A, contributed to preparation of the Council

conclusions on enlargement and stabilisation and association process, which were

successfully approved by Council on 26/06/18


Contribute to the

preparations of the EU23

Western Balkans Summit in

Sofia and a possible summit

declaration

Adoption May 2018


Completed: DG NEAR successfully contributed to the preparation of the EU-Western

Balkans summit that took place in Sofia, Bulgaria, on 17 May 2018. EU leaders agreed on

the Sofia declaration, with which the Western Balkans partners have aligned themselves.


Communication on the

Enlargement package,

including country reports

Package is completed and

published, with the Economic

Reform Programmes

exercise fully integrated.

April 2018


Fully achieved. Package 2018 and annual assessments of the Economic Reform

Programmes for the Western Balkans and Turkey completed and published on 17 April

2018


Preparations for the

Enlargement package 2019

Guidance note issued and

process launched.

September 2018


Completed. Note on preparation of the 2019 Enlargement package sent to CAB in

September for approval on the process and timing. After approval, the guidance note was

issues and the preparation process for the Enlargement package 2019 has been launched.


Accession negotiations:

This includes preparing

Benchmark Reports, and

Draft Commission Positions

(DCP), as well as monitoring

progress in fulfilling the rule

of law interim benchmarks

for Serbia and Montenegro in

view of preparing non-

Progress on accession

negotiations with

Montenegro/Serbia through

preparation and submission

of DCPs and benchmark

assessment reports to

COELA on chapters where

the necessary conditions

have been fulfilled

Throughout 2018

Several reports/DCPs per

year, as necessary


papers (twice a year) to the

Member States and interim

benchmark reports (IBAR).


Montenegro: Two DCPs were in COELA for Montenegro in 2018, the discussion was

successful and resulted in Chapter 17 opened at an inter-governmental conference (IGC) in

June 2018, and Chapter 27 opened at an IGC in December 2018.

Serbia: 4 chapters (13, 17, 18 and 33) were open in two inter-governmental conferences

in June and December. Draft Common Positions for four more chapters (2, 4, 9 and 21)

were sent until January 2019 to the Council for debate.

Albania: follow-up to the

Commission's conditional

recommendation to open

accession negotiations

Commission

recommendation/report to

the Council on Albania's

progress towards the

required reforms

Once conditions are met in

2018


Albania has continued to deliver on the various processes that are crucial for the opening of

accession negotiations.

The vetting continues to be a very successful endeavour, which brought concrete and

tangible results.

As regards the track record against corruption and organised crime, some important

development were also noted. Law enforcement operations have continued, also in the

framework of international police cooperation.


The Republic of North

Macedonia – follow-up to the

Commission's conditional

recommendation to open

accession negotiations

Commission

recommendation/report on

the country's progress

towards the implementation

of the political agreement

and the Urgent Reform

Priorities

Once conditions are met in

2018


In line with the Council Conclusions, the Commission is strongly engaged to support the

reform efforts of the country, including through the technical explanation of the EU acquis,

and to accompany the implementation of the Prespa agreement.


Kosovo : Progress in delivery

of reform commitments

under the SAA assessed

Kosovo report and the SAA

fora

By end of 2018


Kosovo continues to implement provisions from the SAA, which entered into force on 1

April 2016. Through the European Reform Agenda (ERA), Kosovo and the EU have defined

key priorities to guide the first phase of SAA implementation. While progress has been

made, implementation of key ERA priorities is slow and some remain outstanding.

Recently, preparations have begun to potentially move the ERA to a second phase,

containing a new set of priorities.


Commission Opinion on the

merits of Bosnia and

Herzegovina's application for

Adoption by College,

prepared on basis of in-

depth analysis of detailed

By the end of 2018


EU membership answers from BiH on all

areas of the EU acquis and

necessary follow up;

deployment of expert

missions; comprehensive

stakeholder consultation and

– possibly drafting of the

opinion itself.


Commission opinion not issued yet. The new target date (due to delays in replying to the

questionnaire by BiH) is set at Mid-2019


Coordination of the

Economic Reform

Programmes (ERP) exercise

for the Enlargement

countries and adoption

together with Enlargement

package as integrated

process

Key economic

recommendations feed fully

and directly into the overall

conclusions and

recommendations for the

enlargement policy

2018 assessments and draft

council conclusions adopted

according to schedule fixed

in 2017

April 2018 (assessments)

June 2018 (council

conclusions)


Completed by the target dates of April and June 2018: 2018 Economic Reform Programmes

(ERPs) were submitted by Western Balkans and Turkey, outlining medium - term

macroeconomic and fiscal framework as well as structural reforms, covering the period

2018-2020.

NEAR D, with NEAR A prepared the assessment of the ERPs and related draft policy

recommendations. The Economic and Financial Dialogue between the EU and the Western

Balkans and Turkey took place on 25 May 2018, at the end of which joint conclusions were

issued.


Implementation and/or

adoption of comprehensive

public administration reform

(PAR) programmes and

public financial management

reform programmes (PFM) to

support the development of

horizontal capacities to

implement the acquis.

Number of countries in

which PAR and PFM

strategies and/or action plan

are implemented/updated in

line with the Principles of

Public Administration

At least 5 countries in 2018.


Completed. 5 countries have already updated their PAR Action Plans (APs) in 2018: Albania

revised the PAR AP (2018-2020) and the document is pending adoption; MNE updated its

PAR AP 2018-2020 in January; North Macedonia adopted its PAR strategy 2018-22 in

February; Kosovo* has updated the AP on PAR modernisation (2018-20) in July and the AP

on Better Regulation (2018-20) has been adopted in September; Serbia has also updated

its PAR AP (2018-20) and adopted it in September.

In BiH, 3 out of 4 levels of administration have adopted a country-wide PAR and PFM


strategy 2017-2020 (adoption still pending in Republika Srpska) and all levels are currently

working on the AP. The final adoption should occur in the course of 2019.

Albania, the Republic of North Macedonia, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo have adopted

and are implementing relevant PFM reform programmes. All these countries also prepare

annual monitoring reports on implementation of the PFM programmes and organise a PFM

dialogue meetings with internal and external stakeholders. Bosnia and Herzegovina has

been working on a country-wide PFM programme, but it is yet to be adopted. In Turkey,

PFM has not been a key priority.

Monitoring the Stabilisation

and association agreements

(SAA) and the


reforms in the Western

Balkans (WB) and the

Association Agreement with

Turkey

SAA and AA Council,

Committee, and Sub-

committee / Special Groups

meetings held with the

Western Balkans countries.

All Western Balkans

countries:

1 SA Council

1 SA Committee

7 Sub-committees + 1-2

PAR Special Group (and, for

Kosovo, a normalisation

Special Group)


With Turkey, the Subcommittee 5 Innovation took place in April; the Customs Union Joint

Committee in May and the Subcommittee 2 Internal Market in June. Planning on next

meetings in pending re-engagement by Turkish side following elections and new

government restructuring. 3 PAR Special Groups (BiH, Serbia and Kosovo) organised in the

first half of 2018: with MK and MNE to take place in October.

Albania: SAA Council November 2018, SAA Committee October 2018, 3 Sub-committees.

The PAR Special Group is postponed to April 2019. BiH: SAA Council July 2018, SAA Committee March 2018, 7 Sub-committees + 1 PAR

Special Group

Kosovo: SAA Council December 2018, SAA Committee October 2018, all sub-committees

and PAR Special Group have already been organised in 2018.

The Republic of North Macedonia: SAA Council July 2018, SAA Committee June 2018, 7

sub-committees and PAR Special Group took place in 2018.

Montenegro: Under the overall Stabilisation and Association Agreement framework, all

foreseen SAA Council and Committee, 7 Sub-Committees and the PAR Special Group took

place.

Serbia: Under the overall Stabilisation and Association Agreement framework, all foreseen

SAA Council and Committee, 7 Sub-Committees and the PAR Special Group took place.


Complement the

enlargement process

through Initiatives at multi-

country level in close co-

operation with civil society,

regional organisations,

public administrations and

IFIs.

Initiatives implemented Throughout 2018


Continued support (including financial) to Civil Society and independent media, support to

regional initiatives to develop public administration, support to regional organisations (but

also rationalisation and streamlining of those organisations), continuous dialogue with IFIs

on the broad connectivity agenda (e.g. during a dedicated IFI day on the Western Balkans

in June).


Regional Co-operation is at the heart of the Commission’s Western Balkans strategy

(adopted on February 6th). The Commission continues to promote a broad connectivity

agenda, in close co-operation with the IFIs, and regional co-operation / reconciliation

activities, involving civil society. This has included many summits (both the EU-Western

Balkans Summit in Sofia and the Western Balkans Summit, in London) and many

Ministerial-level meetings


Monitoring of

implementation of EU-

Turkey Statement, including

Joint Action Plan on

Migration

Periodical reports Throughout 2018


Contributions made to two European Agenda on Migration reports, in March and May 2018,

in particular on the implementation of the Facility for Refugees in Turkey. Also, the latest

Steering Committee on the Facility for Refugees in Turkey was held on 18th June 2018, in

the presence of representatives of the 28 Member States. The first part of the session was

dedicated to assessing continuation of commitments of Turkey under the EU-Turkey

statement of March 2016 and conditionality.


High level event on freedom

of expression in Western

Balkans and Turkey

Event organised, in

cooperation with the

European Parliament

May 2018


A Conference on the situation of media and freedom of expression in Turkey was

successfully held on 3-4 May 2018 at EP in Brussels.

A Conference on media and freedom of expression in the Western Balkans was successfully

held in September 2018 in Skopje with all Western Balkans Countries


Revised Indicative Strategy

Papers 2014-2020 for IPA

beneficiary countries

Adoption Q2 2018


Completed: All Revised IPA II Indicative Strategy Papers 2014-2020 approved by the IPA

Committee in May (multi-country strategy) and July 2018 (country strategies) and adopted

by the Commission in August 2018.


2nd West Balkans media days Event Q3 2018


The conference took place on 17-19 September in Skopje


2018 IPA II country and

multi-country action

programmes

Adoption

Q3/Q4 2018


2018 IPA programmes for Turkey were presented to the IPA Committee in November and

adopted in December.

Multi-country programmes: The preparation of the multi-country programmes 2018 was


completed according to schedules. The first Multi-country programme was adopted by the

College in July 2018. The Multi-country Programme on connectivity 2018-2019 and the Civil

Society Facility and Media Programme 2018-2019 were adopted by the College in

November and December 2018, respectively.

Additionally, 9 IPA-IPA CBC programmes for 2018-2019 and 2020 and a support measure

for technical assistance for CBC programmes between IPA II beneficiaries for the year

2018 has been adopted between October and December 2018.

Albania: AAP 2018 was presented at the IPA Committee in November 2018 and adopted

by the College in December 2018.

Bosnia and Herzegovina: The preparation of the BiH Action Programme 2018 was

completed according to schedules, presented at the IPA Committee in October 2018 and

adopted by the College in December 2018.

The Republic of North Macedonia: country action programme for 2018 was adopted on

3 August 2018.

Kosovo: country action programme for 2018 was adopted on 6 December 2018

Montenegro: The preparation of the Montenegro Action Programme 2018 was successful;

the programme was presented at the IPA Committee in October and the financing decision

was taken in November.

Serbia: The preparation of the Serbia Action Programme 2018 was completed according to

schedule, presented at the IPA Committee in October 2018 and adopted by the College in

December 2018.




instrument - TAIEX

Implemented TAIEX events

in the field of rule of law and

public administration reform.

Throughout 2018


Peer Review Missions are an important part of TAIEX activities, which allow geographical

units to attain an in-depth analysis and assessment of the situation in their countries. The

conclusions and recommendations from the extensive expert reports often feed into

different Commission documents. 10 peer reviews were carried out in the first semester of

2018 on rule of law matter.

In the Western Balkans, the exercise of case-based peer reviews was particularly

successful. The distinguished feature of case-based peer review missions is that the

analysis of real cases allowed the experts to see the operational capacity of the local

authorities in the whole lifecycle of cases, from the outset at the pre-trail phase until the

trail phase. As the analysis had to be made from different angles, the selection of experts

has been done with care so as to make sure that the different aspects of an investigation,

ranging from law enforcement, judges and public prosecutors could be understood and

discussed during the peer review. Also, as the exercise was replicated in all the countries,

we aimed at engaging the same team of experts as much as possible so as to ensure a

good comparability. This approach will be replicated in support of the Western Balkans

Strategy.

TAIEX has also engaged on the front of strategic communication in the Western

Balkans to increase the capacity of public administrations of the candidate countries

and potential candidates to better communicate about their governments' choice

and commitment to join the EU.

In relation to the implementation of under the February 2018 Western Balkans

Strategy, the 57 actions confirm the need for TAIEX in vast sectors of the acquis,

with a specific focus on connectivity, internal market, transport and environment.

Nine TAIEX activities on the Public Administration Reform have been implemented in

the Western Balkan Region, focusing on human resources management and on the


modernisation of the civil service.


IPA I and II implementation

and budgetary execution

The benchmarks for KPIs on

contract and payment are

met

December 2018


Albania

2018 KPIs for contracting and payments were met.



Kosovo

2018 KPI 1 for payment was not met, while KPI 2 for contracting was met.



Montenegro


Serbia

2018 KPI 1 for payments was met, while the KPI 2 for contracting was not met.

Specific objective 4:

Improved connectivity within the Western Balkans and with the EU.

Improved good neighbourly relations among Enlargement countries with a view to

overcoming the legacy of the past

Related to spending programme IPA

Result indicator: Progress in completing the Core transport network and the Core

transport corridors.

Definition: The EU adopted, in January 2014, a new transport infrastructure policy to put

in place a powerful European transport network across the 28 Member States. These new

guidelines refocus transport financing on a tightly defined new core network, the Trans-

European Transport Core Network (TEN-T core network), which will form the

backbone for transportation in Europe's single market. It will remove bottlenecks, upgrade

infrastructure and streamline cross border transport operations for passengers and

businesses throughout the EU. Within the Western Balkans Six framework, the

European Commission and the six Prime Ministers from the Western Balkans agreed, on 21

April 2015 in Brussels, on indicative extensions of the TEN-T core network in the

Western Balkans region. In Riga, on 22 June 2015, the Western Balkans Six Transport

Ministers confirmed the maps of the comprehensive and core networks extending the TEN-

T network in the Western Balkans. A list of priority projects was agreed at the Vienna

Summit in August 2015.

Source of data: East Europe Transport Observatory (SEETO) Annual Report; Western

Balkans Investment Framework Annual Assessment


24 priority projects on the

list agreed in Vienna

At least 33% priority

projects approved/under

75% of 24 priority projects

identified in Vienna

approved/under


implementation implementation


There has been significant progress in completing the Core transport network and the Core

transport corridors (65% out of the 24 priority projects approved and under

implementation, compared to 54 % at the end of 2017).

Result indicator: Progress in implementing the Projects of Energy Community Interest.

Definition: The South East Europe Energy Strategy adopted in October 2013 outlines the

key objectives and actions needed to create a regional energy market, as well as the

investment needs for energy efficiency and renewable energy. A list of Projects of Energy

Community Interest (PECIs) was subsequently adopted, identifying in particular the

electricity and gas interconnections as key areas that would contribute to the Western

Balkans economic development and further EU integration

Source of data: Energy Community Annual Report (revision of the PECI list in 2016);

Western Balkans Investment Framework Annual Assessment


20 electricity and gas

projects in 2013 PECI list

At least 33% of the 20

relevant PECI project

approved/under

implementation

At least 75% of the 20

relevant PECI projects

approved/under

implementation


Progress in the implementation of the existing Project of Energy Community interest (PECI)

priorities has continued (25% of the 20 relevant PECI projects approved/under

implementation at the end of 2017). There has been no new project launched in 2018,

however, the energy Community has identified and approved the 2018 list of PECI projects,

which includes 11 new projects that could benefit for IPA assistance (among which 2

electricity, 7 gas and 1 oil).

Result indicator: Progress in implementing the soft measures on energy and transport

Definition: As agreed at the Vienna Summit in August 2015, the Western Balkans

countries have to complement the investments through the implementation of soft

measures aiming to increase the added value of the infrastructure investments. The soft

measures will require limited funding but a strong political commitment. They

include measures such as aligning and simplifying border crossing procedures, railway

reforms, information systems (ITS), road safety and maintenance schemes, unbundling

and third party access, regulator independence, licensing and permitting regimes, customer

switching, etc.

Source of data: Conclusions of Western Balkans Ministerial meetings and Summits


40 short and long term

measures for energy and

transport agreed in Vienna

New baseline 2016, updated

after the Paris summit: 86

measures for transport/84

measures for energy

50% of short term measures

in Vienna list implemented

85% of all 40 soft measures

in Vienna list implemented


Transport:

With reference to Connectivity reform measures (CRM) in transport sector there is some

progress. One of the greater developments in the reporting period were the activities


undertaken in the frame of the four projects carried out by Connecta Technical Assistance

on four regional measures: road safety, maintenance, Intelligent Transport System (ITS),

and road border-crossing facilitation.

The following represents a summary of all measures from the Connectivity reform

measures management plan (CRMMP) which entails the regional and national measures

originally agreed at the Western Balkans Summit in Vienna in 2015 and the additional

measures agreed at the 2016 Summit in Paris. In total, the Western Balkans have

implemented 13 transport measures or 15%. Frontrunner is Albania with 3

implemented measures, Serbia 3, Montenegro 2, Kosovo 2, the Republic of North

Macedonia 2 and Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.

Overall score (regional and national measures combined) – Albania 80%, Bosnia and

Herzegovina 30%, the Republic of North Macedonia 55%, Montenegro 81%, Serbia 74%,

Kosovo 61%.

Energy:

The EU funded technical assistance provided by the Secretariat proved very useful to

support concrete measures in the six Western Balkans countries, but still overall, the level

of achievement remains unsatisfactory.

In total the Western Balkans have implemented 16 energy measures or 19%.

Frontrunner is Serbia with 6 implemented measures, Montenegro 4, Kosovo 3, the Republic

of North Macedonia 2 and Bosnia and Herzegovina 1. In 2018 overall progress, which

includes also regional measures, represent 5% of achievement compared to 2017.

Result indicator: European Commission contributes to smooth organisation of Berlin

process summits.

Definition: The European Commission is looking at boosting regional economic

development and connectivity in the Western Balkans as well as to improve good

neighbourly relations between Western Balkans countries. The aim will be to continue

progress achieved to date, notably through the "Berlin process" and the "Western Balkans

Six" format, which brings together heads of state and government from the region and is

strengthening the countries' ownership of regional co-operation.

Source of data: Conclusions of Western Balkans Ministerial meetings

Baseline 2015 Interim Milestone

2016-2018

Target 2020

N/A Connectivity Package

endorsed by summit

At least 2 Western Balkans

Ministerial meetings

organised in preparation of

summit

Connectivity Package

endorsed by summit

At least 2 Western Balkans

Ministerial meetings

organised in preparation of

summit


The connectivity package for 2018 was endorsed by President Juncker at the Sofia summit,

EU-28 and Western Balkans, on 17 May 2018. The London Summit of the Berlin Process,

with its Declarations on security matters, and on missing persons was organised on 10 July

2018. Several ‘Sherpas’ meetings of Advisors to Prime Ministers monitored the

implementation of Connectivity Reform Measures. Sectorial meetings of Ministers of Foreign

Affairs and Ministers of Interior took also place in June 2018. A Meeting of Ministers of

Economy took place in July 2018.


Main outputs for 2018:


Progress on the connectivity

reform measures on

transport and energy;

Progress in completing the

Core transport network and

the Core transport corridors;

progress in implementing

the Projects of Energy

Community Interest and the

set-up of the seat,

administrative

arrangements, etc. of the

Transport Community

Treaty.

Endorsement of the 2018

connectivity package for the

Western Balkans

Mid 2018


The 2018 connectivity package was endorsed at the EU-Western Balkans Sofia summit on

17 May 2018 (with the Western Balkan Guarantee Fund announced at the London Western

Balkans Summit). The EU will provide grants for additional 11 high-priority transport

projects (road, rail, ports) worth €190 million, leveraging up to €1 billion in loans.

The 2015, 2016 and 2017 projects continue to be implemented. These are mainly transport

projects on the Core Transport network. After the Transport Community Treaty was signed

in Trieste, the Headquarters Agreement was signed at the London Western Balkans

summit. The Commission is continuously monitoring the implementation of the Connectivity

Reform Measures, both through 3-monthly meetings of advisors to Prime Ministers as well

as letters to the Prime Ministers.


2018 IPA II Multi-country

Programmes prepared in line

with national and regional

needs

Programmes adopted by the

Commission

Mid - 2018


The preparation of the multi-country programmes 2018 was completed according to

schedules. The first Multi-country programme was adopted by the College on 31 July 2018

– C(2018) 5074 final for a total amount of € 195.15M. The Multi-country Programme on

connectivity 2018-2019 and the Civil Society Facility and Media Programme 2018-2019

were adopted by the College in November and December 2018, respectively.

Additionally, 9 IPA-IPA CBC programmes for 2018-2019 and 2020 and a support measure

for technical assistance for CBC programmes between IPA II beneficiaries for the year

2018 has been adopted between October and December 2018


IPA I and IPA II

implementation/budgetary

execution

Benchmarks for KPIs on

contract and payment are

met.

December 2018


Albania

2018 KPIs for contracting and payments were met




Kosovo

2018 KPI for contracting was met, KPI for payment was not met



Montenegro


Serbia

2018 KPI for payment was met, KPI for contracting was not met

Multi-country - HQ -Unit D5





instrument - TAIEX

Implemented TAIEX

activities in the field of

energy, transport,

connectivity

Throughout 2018


Continued organisation of TAIEX regional events to assist enlargement countries in

improving and consolidating good neighbourly relations through events of common interest

(energy, transport, connectivity, migration, judicial and police cooperation, etc.) and

political relevance.

During the reporting period, TAIEX implemented the following events: Energy 3; Transport

23 including 1 regional workshop; Information Society and Media 13.

General objective 2 – Towards a New Policy on Migration

Specific objective: 5 : Stem the influx of irregular migrants to the EU by

addressing the root causes of destabilisation, forced displacement and irregular

migration in Enlargement and Neighbourhood countries.

Promote mobility and mutually beneficial migration.

Related to spending programmes IPA and ENI

Result indicator: Implementation of the Facility for Refugees in Turkey

Definition: The implementation of this facility will be measured by the amount for which

the Steering Committee of the Facility has provided guidance and by the amount

committed.

The Facility for Refugees in Turkey is the answer to the October 2015 European Council's

call for significant additional funding to support refugees in Turkey. The Facility will

provide a joint coordination mechanism for actions financed by the EU budget and national

contributions made by the Member States, designed to ensure that the needs of refugees

and host communities are addressed in a comprehensive and coordinated manner.

To ensure coordination, complementarity and efficiency in the financing, the Steering

Committee of the Facility will provide strategic guidance and decide on which types of

actions will be supported and through which financing instruments. The Steering

Committee will monitor and assess the implementation of the Facility. It will be composed


of representatives of Member States, the Commission and of Turkey, in an advisory

capacity.

The assistance provided under the Turkey Refugee Facility will be conditional on the

compliance by Turkey with the EU-Turkey Joint Action Plan, which aims to bring

order into migratory flows and help to stem irregular migration, and the EU-Turkey

Statement from 29 November 2015.

DG NEAR will be in charge of chairing the Steering Committee, managing its

secretariat; and implementing the actions conducted under IPA. This result indicator

is of high relevance to measure the results of DG NEAR's action on this specific objective

since the Facility will be managed by DG NEAR and because Turkey, by its geographical

position, is a major first reception and transit countries for migrants.

Source of data: Facility monitoring reports


Not applicable EUR 2 billion, on which

Steering Committee has

provided guidance

EUR 3 billion on which

Steering Committee has

provided guidance.

Corresponding amounts

should be committed by

31.12.17


Implementation of the Facility for refugees is on-going, with the full EUR 3 billion envelope

of the 1st tranche contracted by end of 2017, through 26 projects under the responsibility

of NEAR.

An agreement among Member States on the financing of the 2nd tranche was finally

reached on 29th June at the Council and it provides for a EUR 3 billion envelope of financial

assistance to refugees and host communities in Turkey made of EUR 2 billion from the

Union budget and EUR 1 billion from Member States’ contributions.

Following the Council’s agreement on the second tranche, the Commission started

programming discussions with the Turkish authorities in October 2018. These discussions

led to an overall agreement with Turkey on the mobilisation of the second tranche,

including the priority areas, objectives, sector allocations, implementation modality and

transition. This allowed the Commission to adopt a Special Measure on education for EUR

500 million in December, and for ECHO to launch its Humanitarian Implementation Plan

2018. Also in December 2018, the EU Delegation signed a EUR 400 million contract to

ensure continued access to education for refugee children.

The comprehensive monitoring system for the Facility became operational in mid-2018.

Result indicator: Implementation of the EU Regional Trust Fund in response to the Syrian

Crisis

Definition: The EU Regional Trust Fund in response to the Syrian Crisis (EUTF) will

continue its activities, mainly linked to the contracting and delivery of projects adopted by

two Board meetings and identified until end 2015 and the preparation of a new pipeline of

projects, in all the countries affected by the Syrian crisis.

The EUTF was established in December 2014 with the overall objective to provide a

coherent and reinforced aid response to the Syrian crisis on a regional scale,

responding in the first instance to the needs of refugees from Syria in neighbouring

countries, as well as of the communities hosting the refugees and their administrations, in

particular as regards resilience and early recovery.

Following the Commission Communication of 23 September 2015 with proposals on

Managing the refugee crisis, the Commission inter alia proposed a substantial increase

of funding in support of Syrian refugees and their host countries through the Trust

Fund, amounting to more than EUR 500 million in appropriations. It has also received


contributions and pledges from 19 Member States amounting to EUR 60 million.

The Trust Fund is managed by DG NEAR who chairs the TF board and is in charge of

developing actions to be submitted to the board.

Source of data: N/A


2 Board meetings held

Actions for EUR 387.5 million

adopted

EUR 17 .5 million contracted

At least 2 Board meetings

held

At least Actions for EUR 250

million adopted

At least EUR 300 million

contracted

At least EUR 1 billion

mobilised and implemented

through the Fund (target

from 23 Sept 2015

communication)


In 2018 two Operational Board meetings were held, in respective meetings 14 Action

Documents for a total funding of EUR 290.5 million were adopted by the Trust Fund’s

Operational Board. One written procedure was launched to adopt an EUR 1.2 M

Communication Action.

With EUR 289 million mobilised by the Trust Fund for Lebanon and Jordan this year alone,

the European Union continues to demonstrate its resolve to respond to the needs arising

from the Syria conflict, and stand side by side with the refugees and the countries hosting

them under difficult conditions.

In the reporting period the following actions were adopted by the Operational Board

between June and December 2018:

EUR 122 million on 14 December 2018:

EUR 83 million for access to education and basic health care, to support livelihoods

through cultural heritage development, and to provide higher education opportunities

to Syrian refugees and vulnerable communities in Jordan;

EUR 27 million to provide livelihood opportunities in the fields of agricultural

development and through micro-loans, as well as social protection and higher

education to Syrian refugees and vulnerable communities in Turkey;

EUR 9.5 million to strengthen mother and child critical health care services, as well as

support to livelihoods through cultural heritage development in Iraq.

EUR 167 million on 20 June 2018:

EUR 100 million to improve access to education for Syrian refugee children in Lebanon

EUR 52 million to support to social assistance to vulnerable refugees and host

communities affected by the Syrian crisis in Lebanon


Lebanon

EUR 3 million to strengthen the resilience of Palestine Refugees from Syria, in Jordan

As of 30 September 2018, the EUTF results monitoring shows that at least 1,868,871

individuals are being supported with the different EUTF projects, while the target

number for all end-of-project results is 3,734,609 people. This data is based on the

first 40 projects of the EUTF, equalling funding of EUR 800 million, e.g. around 60% of

the funding adopted by the Operational Board so far.

At the end of 2018, the EU and 23 donors contributed to the Trust Fund: the EU

Budget, 22 Member States and 1 non-Member State, with total contributions reaching

an amount of approximately EUR 1.65 billion. The contributions from the EU Budget

amounted by the end of 2018 to EUR 1.473 billion while the contributions from Member

States amounted to EUR 154.51 million and EUR 24.65 million from Turkey.


The EUTF reached by December 2018 key performance benchmarks of 94% committed,

79% contracted and 56% paid. In 2018 EUR 323 M was committed, including top ups,

EUR 353 M contracted and EUR 231 M paid. The contracted amount met targets despite

the contracting delays experienced linked to the negotiation of the sanctions clause with

strategic implementing partners.

Two Trust Fund Board meetings were held in 2018 and two strategic meetings with

donors in which it had been agreed to submit a proposal for the extension of the Trust

Fund based on the emerging needs in the region affected by the Syrian crisis. The EUTF

conducted significant reach out in advocacy and communication in 2018 and events had

been organised to raise awareness on the situation and living conditions of Syrian

Refugees, such as photo exhibition, event in Flagey, new website, publishing of movies

a.o. This has led to improved strategic positioning of the EUTF in the region as a critical

instrument in addressing the needs of Syrian refugees. An exit strategy is being defined

for the EUTF reducing its support in Turkey and the Western Balkans, based on the

mandate of the EUTF in bridging the humanitarian development nexus.

Result indicator: Implementation of the Emergency Trust Fund for stability and

addressing root causes of irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa – North of

Africa Window.

Definition: The European Commission has launched an “Emergency Trust Fund for stability

and addressing root causes of irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa”, made

up of EUR 1.8 billion from the EU budget and European Development Fund, combined

with contributions from EU Member States and other donors. The EU Trust Fund for Africa

was signed by the President of the European Commission Jean Claude Juncker, along with

25 EU member states, as well as Norway and Switzerland, and was launched at the Valletta

Summit on Migration on November 12th 2015 by European and African partners.

The Trust Fund benefits a coherent group of countries across Africa crossed by the major

migration routes. These countries are part of three regional operational windows: the Sahel

region and Lake Chad area, the Horn of Africa and the North of Africa.

DG NEAR is in charge of managing the North of Africa window, comprised of Morocco,

Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt.

The North of Africa window will be focused at improving migration management in all its

aspects, including contributing to the development of national and regional strategies on

migration management, containing and preventing irregular migration and fight against

trafficking of human beings, smuggling of migrants and other related crimes, effective

return and readmission, international protection and asylum, legal migration and mobility,

enhancing synergies between migration and development.

The first operational committee of the North of Africa window will take place around mid

2016 to examine a first pipeline of projects. The preparation of projects for 2017 will start

in parallel and it is expected that the following operational committees will be able to

achieve a higher level of commitments.

Source of data: Reports of the operational committee of the North of Africa window


Launching of the North of

Africa window – No

operational committee +

preparation of a first pipeline

of projects

Operational committees of

the NA window approve a

pipeline of EUR 40 million

Projects worth the totality of

ENI + MS funds pledged are

approved by the operational

committees.


In 2018, the North of Africa window has committed EUR 285 million for ten new

programmes, the replenishment of ongoing actions and contributions to two cross-regional

programmes. Out of a total budget of EUR 592.4 million (EUR 580.2 million, net of admin


costs), as of 31 December 2018, the North of Africa window has committed EUR 582.2

million for programmes capturing the political priorities of the European Council

Conclusions, as well as the objectives of EUTF for Africa’s strategy and Regional

Operational Framework.

Result indicator: Further Visa liberalisation with relevant countries (i.e. Georgia, Armenia,

Ukraine, Kosovo, Turkey)

Definition: Visa liberalisation is the result of 'Visa Liberalisation Dialogues' conducted

between the EU and third countries. Through the Visa Dialogues, the EU takes gradual

steps towards the long-term goal of visa-free travel for short term stays on a case-by-

case basis, provided that conditions for well-managed and secure mobility are in place.

These dialogues are reserved for enlargement and East neighborhood countries.

Visa-free regime can fulfill the purpose of increasing people-to-people contacts

between the EU and the third countries, hence helping to develop special relationships

between the EU and the concerned Neighbourhood countries or helping to advance the

integration process in case of Enlargement countries.

In terms of process, the Commission reports on the implementation by the third country of

the related Visa Liberalisation Action Plan (VLAP). Once all benchmarks are met by the

third country in a sustainable manner, the Commission is in a position to propose to

transfer this country to the list of third countries whose nationals are exempt from visa

requirement (Regulation 539/2001). Finally, the European Parliament and the Council

decide whether to approve the Commission's proposal, taking into account possible

migration and security risks.

Within the Commission, DG HOME is in the lead for conducting Visa Liberalisation

Dialogues, with support from DG JUST, the EEAS and DG NEAR.

Source of data: European Commission (DG HOME and DG NEAR)


Ukraine: Ukraine meets

criteria for visa liberalisation,

based on the commitments

taken in the sixth VLAP

report

Georgia: Positive appraisal

of benchmarks under the

Visa Liberalisation Action

Plan

Armenia: Preliminary

discussions on Visa

Liberalisation

Kosovo: visa liberalisation

dialogue launched with

Kosovo on 19 January 2012

Turkey: visa liberalization

dialogue started in

December 2013

Ukraine: Entry into force of

visa liberalisation for Ukraine

Georgia: Entry into force of

visa liberalisation for Georgia

Armenia: Discussions on

Armenia's request to launch

a Visa Liberalisation

Dialogue

Kosovo: Visa liberalisation

possibly granted to Kosovo

Turkey: Visa liberalisation

granted to Turkish citizens in

the Schengen zone by

October 2016 once the

requirements of the

Roadmap are met.

Armenia: Advancement on

fulfilling benchmarks for Visa

Liberalisation


Adoption of first report under the Visa Liberalisation Suspension Mechanism (12/2017):

Ukraine continues to fulfil the benchmarks but needs to take immediate actions to ensure

full implementation and sustainability of the reforms.


Georgia: the visa liberalisation benchmarks continue to be fulfilled as confirmed by the

Second Report under the Visa Suspension Mechanism published on 19 December 2018.

While concrete measures have been put in place by Georgia to address irregular migration

challenges, further immediate action is needed to address these challenges, including

increasing numbers of unfounded asylum applications. Organised crime groups from

Georgia (as well as from the other 7 countries) are active across a broad range of criminal

activities in the EU, including trafficking of illicit goods, property crime, money laundering,

trafficking in human beings, drugs, migrant smuggling and cybercrime.

Armenia: the technical conditions to launch a visa liberalisation dialogue – the satisfactory

implementation of the Visa Facilitation and Readmission Agreements – are considered to be

fulfilled by the Joint Committees set up for the monitoring of the agreements, since their

3rd meetings held in June 2016. Decision to launch a visa liberalisation dialogue requires

the endorsement of the Council. In January 2019, Armenia launched a series of visits to EU

MS to discuss visa liberalisation in the framework of CEPA.

Kosovo: the remaining two benchmarks still need to be met.

Turkey: On the implementation of the Visa Liberalisation Roadmap there are still 7

outstanding benchmarks, out of 72, that Turkey must meet.

In addition, the implementation of the provisions related to Turkish National Readmission

Agreement is not satisfactory and Turkey is not implementing the Readmission Agreement

provision for third country. Backsliding has also been noticed on other readmission

benchmarks closed in May 2016, such as the observance of bilateral readmission obligation

– as Turkey is not implementing the bilateral protocol with Greece and considers the

bilateral agreement with Bulgaria obsolete.

Planned evaluations:

-Migration and border management, 2019 – thematic;

-Security, 2016 –thematic40;



Monitoring of negotiations

and alignment by candidate

countries and potential

candidates to EU standards

and acquis related in

particular to chapters 23 and

24.

Monitoring reports Throughout 2018


Albania: SAA Justice and Home Affairs sub-committee took place in 11 - 12 July 2018

Bosnia and Herzegovina: The SAA Justice and Home Affairs sub-committee took place on

28-29 November 2018

Kosovo: SAA Justice and Home Affairs sub-committee took place on 12-13 June 2018

The Republic of North Macedonia: SAA Justice and Home Affairs sub-committee took

place on 18-19 October 2018

Montenegro: the first 2018 Montenegro Chapter 23/24 monitoring report was part of the

2018 Country report. The second 2018 Montenegro Chapter 23/24 monitoring report was

prepared, and presented to the Council in November 2018.

40 Due to its complex nature, the collection of data required additional time; the field phase of the evaluation

was concluded in December 2017; dissemination and publication of the final report is planned before the end of Q2 2018.


Serbia: 1st 2018 Serbia Chapter 23/24 monitoring report was part of the 2018 Country

report (SWD/152 of 17/04/18), 2nd 2018 Chapter 23/24 monitoring report was presented

to the Council in November 2018.


Support to the continuous

implementation of the VLAP

benchmarks, notably in the

areas of migration,

organised crime and anti-

corruption.

Post-visa liberalisation

monitoring in Ukraine,

Georgia and Moldova

(VLAP); contribution to

reports on VLAP

implementation

TAIEX technical support

Reports on VLAP

implementation in the

context of the new

regulation (suspension

mechanism).

Implemented TAIEX

activities

Throughout 2018


Georgia: the technical conditions to launch a visa liberalisation dialogue – the satisfactory

implementation of the Visa Facilitation and Readmission Agreements – are considered to be

fulfilled by the Joint Committees set up for the monitoring of the agreements, since their

3rd meetings held in June 2016. Decision to launch a visa liberalisation dialogue requires

the endorsement of the Council. In January 2019, Armenia launched a series of visits to EU

MS to discuss visa liberalisation in the framework of CEPA

Moldova: the Second Report under the Visa Suspension Mechanism of 19.12.2018

concluded that overall the visa liberalisation benchmarks continue to be fulfilled by

Moldova. According to that report, the Commission noted some of the recommended

actions of the First report (i.e. 2017) have not been implemented and that immediate

actions are needed to address the irregular migration challenges, including as regards

unfounded asylum applications by Moldovan nationals, and to ensure the fulfilment of the

anti-corruption benchmark.

Moldova as well benefitted from TAIEX assistance in learning about the Member State

experience regarding international protection and migration

TAIEX has provided support to Montenegro in the drafting and implementation of the Law

on Foreigners, to Serbia on the assessment of the Law on Asylum and Temporary

Protection, while representatives of Bosnia and Herzegovina exchanged views with

Swedish counterparts on return, readmission and integration of their nationals.

Support to the continuous implementation of the VLAP benchmarks, notably in the areas of

migration, organised crime and anti-corruption. Continuously done for Ukraine

Post-visa liberalisation monitoring in Ukraine, completed for Ukraine for the December

2017 Report, as well as the 2018 Report, adopted in December 2018.


Indicator Indicator Target date

Target date Indicator Target date

Implementation of Facility

for Refugees in Turkey

Contract all remaining funds

under NEAR responsibility

All steps taken to mobilise a

second tranche of the

Facility in 2018 pending the

Contracts signed Throughout 2018


necessary political decisions


Implementation of the Facility for refugees is ongoing, with the full EUR 3 billion envelope

of the 1st tranche contracted by end of 2017, through 26 projects under the responsibility

of NEAR.

An agreement among Member States on the financing of the 2nd tranche was finally

reached on 29th June at the Council and it provides for a EUR 3 billion envelope of financial

assistance to refugees and host communities in Turkey made of EUR 2 billion from the

Union budget and EUR 1 billion from Member States’ contributions.

The Common Understanding on the Facility for Refugees was updated and adopted at the

margins of COREPER in mid-July. On 24th July, the Commission also amended its decision

of March 2018 to include provisions on the agreed financial split to the 2nd tranche.

The Steering Committee of 18th June endorsed the updated strategic concept note for

mobilisation of further assistance, confirming the shift from humanitarian to development

aid, also due to the protracted nature of the refugee crisis. The needs assessment was

updated accordingly.

Following the Council’s agreement on the second tranche, the Commission started

programming discussions with the Turkish authorities in October 2018. These discussions

led to an overall agreement with Turkey on the mobilisation of the second tranche,

including the priority areas, objectives, sector allocations, implementation modality and

transition. This allowed the Commission to adopt a Special Measure on education for EUR

500 million in December, and for ECHO to launch its Humanitarian Implementation Plan

2018. Also in December 2018, the EU Delegation signed a EUR 400 million contract to

ensure continued access to education for refugee children.

The comprehensive monitoring system for the Facility became operational in mid-2018.


EU regional Trust Fund in

response to the Syrian

Crisis: implementing

initiatives

Initiatives launched and

implemented

Throughout 2018


Initiatives continue to be launched and implemented


Emergency Trust Fund for

stability and addressing root

causes of irregular migration

and displaced persons in

Africa – North Africa:

implementation of the work

programme

Work programme

implementation

Throughout 2018


Work programme is being implemented


Second Brussels conference

on Syria

(1) Support the political

process under the aegis of

the United Nations in

Geneva to reach an intra-

Syrian framework political

Conference held Spring 2018


agreement on a transition;

(2) Maintain international

engagement in delivering

assistance; (3) Contribute to

post-conflict preparations.


Second Brussels conference on Syria held in April 2018


Implementation of the

Lebanon and Jordan

'Compacts' and of output

papers of Brussels

Conference on Supporting

the Future of Syria and the

Region

% of EU implemented

commitments made in both

compacts (to be found in the

Implementation Report

jointly drafted by the partner

country and the EU

Q1/2018, in preparation of

the second Brussels

Conference for Syria


The stock-taking of the implementation of the compacts and of the output papers of

Brussels I has been done and constitutes the first part of the output papers of Brussels II.

There is no quantitative result but it includes the delivery of the financial assistance (which

exceeded EU pledge) and the main policy developments for both countries. The latter

shows a partial implementation of the compacts. Engagement with both countries continues

as displayed in the second part of the Brussels II output papers.

Close monitoring of former Brussels conferences mutual commitments is currently being

carried out to inform the Brussels III Conference foreseen in March 2019.


Support migration

management in Ukraine:

implementation of EUR 28

million programme "Support

for Migration Management

and Asylum Management in

Ukraine"

Continued implementation Throughout 2018


Support migration management in Ukraine: the €28 million programme "Support for

Migration Management and Asylum Management in Ukraine" has been implemented

continuously during 2018


General objective 3 – A Resilient Energy Union with a Forward

Looking Climate Change Policy

Specific objective: 6 Increased energy security and more effective climate policies

in the Enlargement and Neighbourhood countries as well as increased energy

connectivity between the EU and these countries


Result indicator: Number of sector dialogues on gas, renewable energy and energy

Efficiency at regional level.

Definition:

Eastern Partnership (EaP):

At regional level, meetings of the regional EaP Platform 3 on Energy Security, which

supports dialogue in developing electricity, gas and oil interconnections, as well as

improving energy efficiency and renewable energy sources.

Neighbourhood South:

The progressive integration of the energy markets in the Mediterranean is a key aspect of

the ENP Review and one of its objectives. Such integration could only be achieved through

the establishment and functioning of dedicated international fora where the policy priorities

and the actions to implement them are discussed and adopted. In the Mediterranean

region, this is currently done through the sector policy dialogues under the UfM umbrella

(i.e.: the UfM Energy Platforms in the field of Gas; Regional Electricity Markets; Renewable

Energies and Energy Efficiency). The level of activity and relevance of these policy

dialogues is measured through the frequency of their meetings and the quantity and quality

of the results that are produced therein. Therefore the number of meetings held in the

framework of each policy dialogue can be considered as an appropriate indicator to be

employed.

Together with DG ENER, DG NEAR is leading the policy dialogues that are being shaped in

the framework of the three UfM Energy Platforms. More specifically, NEAR regularly

provides technical input regarding the following aspects: definition of the platforms' work

programmes and activities; identification and formulation of policy priorities in the energy

sector; logistical aspects that are linked to the organisation of the platforms' meetings. This

work is essential to achieve the desired frequency of policy dialogue meeting and the

quality of their results. In addition, DG NEAR provides a more political contribution, by

regularly cooperating with DG ENER in view of the UfM Energy Ministerial meetings. Finally,

DG NEAR manages two contracts with the key technical partners of the UfM Regional

Electricity Markets Platform: MEDREG and MED-TSO.

Source of data:

- EaP: Platform 3 meetings funded by regional EaP events facility.

- Neighbourhood South: DG NEAR and DG ENER internal reporting. UfMS activity report

and minutes of meetings.


EaP: 2 per year

UfM: 1 meeting of the

Regional Electricity Platform

(REM) and 1 meeting for the

Gas Platform

EaP: 2 meetings per year

UfM :The target is 2

meetings per year for each

UfM Platform until 2020

UfM :30 meetings in total


EaP : The Platform Three focused on Energy met in May 2018, bringing together EU and


EaP representatives. Energy Panels took place throughout 2018.

A successful energy dialogue between Egypt and the EU was conducted in July 2017 and a

new EU - Egypt Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for Strategic Partnership on Energy

was finalised. An informal UfM ministerial meeting on energy efficiency took place in Malta

in May 2017. The preparation of Energy Platforms was completed.

Since 2014, 39.6% of the NIP funds have been committed to Renewable Energy and

Energy Efficiency projects

Result indicator: Neighbourhood East - Number of investments from the Neighbourhood

Investment Facility (NIF) adopted on Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency

Definition: Strategic investment projects on Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency

funded by the NIF – Neighbourhood East

Source of data: NIF Board decisions


0 2 per year 2 per year

(based on desk evaluation)


NIP Board In 2018, NIP board has adopted 3 investments in the sector of energy (i)

Support of Integration of the Ukrainian Power Grid into the Synchronous Area Continental

Europe, (ii) Georgian Energy Sector reform, and (iii) Armenia Masrik-1 Solar Power Plan.

The target set by result indicator is therefore achieved.

Result indicator: Neighbourhood South - At least 30% of the Neighbourhood Investment

Facility (NIF) grant investments in the Southern Neighbourhood will be devoted by 2020 to

facilitate investments in the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Sectors

Definition: Facilitating investments to establishing better and more sustainable energy

interconnections (between the EU and neighbouring countries and between the

neighbouring countries themselves), improving energy efficiency and demand

management, promoting the use of renewable energy sources, strengthening energy

security through diversification of energy supplies and energy market integration are part

of the NIF strategic orientations and priority objectives adopted by the Commission

with the agreement of partner countries for the period 2014-2020.

The NIF is a blending designed to combine EU grants with other public and private

financing. By reducing, through co-financing, the overall cost or risk of the project or by

subsidising interest rates and/or financing technical assistance, the Facility will encourage

the beneficiary governments, private sector and/or public institutions to carry out essential

investments in sectors which would otherwise be postponed due to lack of resources.

The role of DG NEAR is to discuss and promote with the European Financial Institutions,

in close association with the concerned EU Delegations, the identification and

submission to the NIF of investment projects in the targeted sector.

Source of data: NIF Secretariat and NIF Annual Reports


The base line was 20% to

25% of NIF grants for the

Energy sector

NA At least 30% of the NIF

grant investments in the

Southern Neighbourhood will

be devoted by 2020 to

facilitate investments in the

Renewable Energy and

Energy Efficiency Sectors


As much as 41% of the NIF annual envelope 2016 (contracted in 2017) has been used for


climate-related operations in Neighbourhood South and since 2014 39,6 % of the NIP funds

have been committed to Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency projects

NIF projects ongoing, contributing to the 20% target in Neighbourhood East

Result indicator: Progress in implementing the Projects of Energy Community Interest

See description of this indicator under Specific objective 4



Participate and support

Energy Community Treaty

Level of enforcement of

existing Energy Community

Acquis (in particular through

Berlin Process connectivity

reform measures)

Application of the 2016

Winter Package, through the

Energy Community

Once these texts are

approved, this will be

transposed in the EnC

countries, allowing them to

apply to those countries as

well as between the EU and

EnC Contracting Parties.

July 2018. By the time of the

Summit in the United

Kingdom,

December 2018.


In gas sector most advanced are Albania and North Macedonia, then Ukraine.

In energy efficiency most advanced are Moldova and Serbia.

Twinning projects supporting Energy sector, Implemented by Delegations throughout

2018:

- Improvement of Nuclear Safety Regulatory Infrastructure in Turkey

- Support to the reinforcement of Energy sector in Morocco

- Strengthening the capacity of the State Agency on Energy Efficiency and Energy

Saving of Ukraine on the development of energy production from renewable energy

sources, production and use of alternative fuels.

Progress in implementing and enforcing the Energy Community acquis is mixed, despite the

Secretariat’s work. Some countries (Montenegro, the Republic of North Macedonia in

particular) have made important progress in 2018.

In the gas sector most advanced are Albania and the Republic of North Macedonia, then

Ukraine.

In energy efficiency, continued financing is provided to the Energy Community Secretariat.

The Winter Package is in the process of being transposed to the Energy Community


Contribute to the alignment

with "acquis" by candidate

countries

High Level Energy Dialogue

with Turkey, in Turkey.

Outputs related to

negotiations and alignment

by candidate countries to EU

February and December

2018.

Throughout 2018

Serbia and Montenegro, in


standards, acquis on related

chapters (Energy etc.) and

Energy Community Treaty

obligations.

particular, should make

further progress to full

alignment


One energy dialogue at technical level held with Turkey in February 2018 – the High level

energy dialogue planned for December 2018, was cancelled at the last moment and the

Commission is expecting to agree on a new date early 2019.

The Republic of North Macedonia: a new Energy Law was adopted, which entered into

force in June 2018.

Montenegro: Chapter 27 was opened at the 12th EU-Montenegro Intergovernmental

Conference in December 2018. As regards, alignment with the EU acquis in energy and

trans-european networks, progress was made particularly on further reforming the

electricity market and on adopting secondary legislation for renewable energy.

Serbia: Progress on the energy chapter in 2018 continued to remain very low. In

particular, no progress can be reported regarding the second of Serbia’s two opening

benchmarks, a legally binding Action Plan on the unbundling of Srbijagas. Although Serbia

has fulfilled the other benchmark– drafting an Action Plan on emergency oil stocks –

already in 2016, the chapter cannot be opened until fulfilment of both benchmarks.

Regarding infringement procedures related to Serbia’s Energy Community Treaty

obligations, some progress was made such as the removal of the destination clause from

the intergovernmental agreement on gas supply between Serbia and Russia in line with EU

legislation.


Contribute to the alignment

with "acquis" by Ukraine as

member of the energy

community

Outputs related to

negotiations and alignment

by Ukraine to EU standards,

and Energy Community

Treaty obligations.

Ministerial meeting with

Ukraine under the

Memorandum of

Understanding for a

Strategic Energy

Partnership, in Kyiv.

Throughout 2018


Laws On Environmental Impact Assessment and on Strategic Environmental Assessment

entered into force in spring 2018

Ministerial meeting took place on 6 April 2018 in Kyiv, MoU work programme for 2018 has

been adopted and is being implemented.


Contribute to the ENP review

roll-out – Priority actions on

Energy and climate change

policy: strengthened energy

dialogue with Neighbourhood

partners

Strengthened energy

dialogue with

Neighbourhood partners.

Action Plan developed as

follow-up to the first EaP

Ministerial on

Environment and Climate

Change

Throughout 2018


Euronest Parliamentary

Assembly (Committee on

Energy Security) kept

regularly informed of

technical assistance and

policy dialogue

Regional and sub-

regional measures

further developed

Calendar of meetings of

the UfM Energy Platform

is implemented with all

partners’ participation.


The annual meeting of the 3 UfM Energy Platforms (gathering UfM Members States) took

place in Barcelona in January 2018.

A Regional Conference on Energy and Climate Action in the Southern Neighborhood took

place in March 2018 in Brussels.

The UfM Climate Change Experts Group met in April 2018 in Barcelona.

In 2018, 31% of the NIP contribution for the Neighbourhood South was devoted to projects

in the domain of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency, thus meeting the target set.


Enlargement and ENP –

High Level Energy Efficiency

initiative

Implementation of new

regional programme

supporting renewable energy

and energy efficiency in the

Western Balkans.

Implementation of measures

agreed for Tunisia, Georgia

and Ukraine.

December 2018


In Tunisia, the Government is expected to adopt a roadmap to accelerate investment in

energy efficiency, subsequent to the national conference held in April 2018. Several

financial instruments have been mobilized to roll-out investments in Tunisia in the energy

efficiency area, including bilateral and regional support, blending and Delegation

Agreements associating EFIs (for instance, a significant part of the new 2018 bilateral

programme on energy is dedicated to energy efficiency of buildings through the support to

the national energy transition fund).

Furthermore, the AAP 2018 includes a provision of EUR 20 million earmarked for the

transposition of the EIB-implemented ELENA programme in Tunisia, to be funded by the

NIP mechanism. The subsequent application of the EIB on this topic is however pending.

Georgia: In the framework of the AAP 2018, a substantial package of assistance under

EU4Energy (EUR 27 million) is being secured to support the roll-out of energy efficiency in

public buildings. The focus is to help Georgia implement energy efficiency standards in a

number of fields; to develop a calculation methodology for building energy performance to

certification and inspection aspects; to provide trainings for the construction sector; and

ensure awareness-raising.

A prerequisite for these investments is that Georgia further advances on key areas of


legislation in the area of energy efficiency.

On 18 April 2018 and 13 December 2018, two financing agreements between the EU and

Ukraine entered into force for a programme to support energy efficiency in Ukraine,

including a significant contribution to a dedicated Energy Efficiency Fund for residential

buildings.

On-going implementation of the Regional Energy Efficiency Programme for the Western

Balkans (REEP and REEP Plus), as well as the Green for Growth Fund (GGF), and additional

funding in discussion for the next programming exercise.


Identify and manage the

Neighbourhood Investment

Platform (NIP) projects on

climate.

Progress towards the 20%

target of climate-related

funding in investment

projects

Throughout 2018


Regional AAP has been adopted on 14/11/2018 C(2018)7631.

Discussions on pipelines ongoing with financial institutions

Preparation of decision making process for individual programmes and contracting.

Increasing number of climate related proposals in the NIP pipeline: 65% of the NIP

contribution for the Neighbourhood South was devoted to climate-related projects.


Contribute to ENP review

roll-out: actions related to

climate policy

New regional programmes

on climate action and green

economy formulated

December 2018


Regional South AAP part I has been adopted on 14/11/2018 C(2018)7631.

The regional project Clima MED started in June 2018.


Implement ENP priorities on

environment including

support to green economy,

implementing the Barcelona

Convention on the

Depollution of the

Mediterranean

Successful experiences in

green economy promotion

are scaled up and extended

to new countries (Algeria);

number of green businesses

increase. A set of indicators

to measure the

Mediterranean pollution has

been agreed between the

Southern Neighbourhood

countries.

December 2018


Regional South AAP part I has been adopted on 14/11/2018 C(2018)7631, including

measures promoting resource efficiency and sustainable consumption and production, with

a view to decoupling economic growth from environmental degradation and enabling the

transition to a circular economy.

A set of indicators to measure the Mediterranean pollution has been agreed between the

Southern Neighborhood countries. The project SWITCHMED II started end 2018.


Implement Energy Efficiency

initiatives, including specific

Adoption of Annual Action

Programme

2018


programme on Energy

Efficiency for Ukraine,

subject to Ukraine fulfilling

the conditionalities


Implementation of the two decisions (2017 and 2018) on "Energy Support Programme for

Ukraine" started in 2018.


Contribute to the

implementation of the high-

level energy efficiency

initiative, including

Establishment of Energy

Efficiency Fund in Ukraine

Bilateral Energy Efficiency

programme in Georgia

defined

Dedicated national

workshops held in at

least two other countries

(in addition to GE & UA)

and priorities decided

Strategic investment

projects on Energy

Efficiency funded by the

NIF

Throughout 2018


As agreed in the Washington spring 2018 meetings between Commissioner Hahn and

participating IFIs, the initiative has proved to be a successful joint push for EE reforms and

investments in pilot countries. Next steps should focus on implementation of the initiative

through joint EU-IFIs actions and programmes. Initiative further expected to expand to

Armenia, with initial technical preparations underway for a joint EU-IFIs mission to Yerevan

in March 2019 and EU funding earmarked for EE under AAP 2019 (EUR 20m provisionally).

Strategic investment projects require further coordination with IFIs, in particular for

regional programmes.

Georgia: In the framework of the AAP 2018, a substantial package of assistance under

EU4Energy (EUR 27 million) is being secured to support the roll-out of energy efficiency in

public buildings. The first phase of a NIP funded project has been approved following the

adoption of the construction code by the Parliament of Georgia, which had been established

as pre-condition to release the funding.

Implementation of the two decisions (2017 and 2018) on "Energy Support Programme for

Ukraine" (2017) started in 2018 and the Energy Efficiency fund was established.


Implement TAIEX and

Twinning events to align to

and implement EU standards

and legislation/acquis.

Enhanced cooperation with

DG CLIMA (ECRAN

programme)

TAIEX events implemented Throughout 2018


The TAIEX Regional Workshop on Circular Economy took place in October in Casablanca.

This was the first TAIEX strategic workshop opening the cycle of 3 high-level regional

workshops on circular economy that have been implemented with joint efforts of DG NEAR

and DG ENVIRONMENT. The aim of the Regional Workshop on Circular Economy in

Casablanca was to provide updates on the developments of circular economy in the EU and

in the Southern Neighbourhood countries. Public and private sector stakeholders have to

work together to identify and implement a common “circular” vision for transforming

production, manufacturing and consumption patterns, through a process of continuous


experimentation, learning, adapting and scaling of efforts. The workshop aimed at

identifying possible areas of further cooperation with a view of promoting circular economy

in the context of the EU regional cooperation with the Southern Neighbourhood. The

workshop was followed by a workshop in Kiev targeting the 6 partner countries of the

Eastern Partnership, and by the final workshop in Tirana engaging the countries of DG

NEAR’s Enlargement Policy.

A similar workshop organised for the Western Balkans took place in Tirana in July 2018.

Similarly, a circular economy workshop was organised back-to-back with the COP14 in

Egypt in November 2018.

TAIEX cooperation with DG CLIMA has continued through the follow up programme to

ECRAN, which is entitled Regional Implementation of the Paris Agreement Project (RIPAP).

The project supports IPA beneficiaries in the development of resource-efficient, low-

emissions and climate-resilient economies. This support provides capacity building in

understanding and implementing climate mitigation actions, their impacts and benefits. The

project is designed to help beneficiaries understand and work towards meeting the Paris

Agreement goals and acts as a regional focal point, enhancing cooperation through the

exchange of information, best practice and relevant experience. During the reporting period

6 TAIEX RIPAP events were undertaken four of which were multi-beneficiary workshops

Related Twinning projects:

- Chemicals and hazardous substances monitoring improvement and integration of

Seveso database into Croatian Environmental Information System (CEIS) as the

unique Central Seveso Information System” (CRO SEVESO)

- Strengthening the administrative capacities for implementation of Waste Framework

Directive (WFD) and Special Waste Streams Directives (WEEED, WBAD and WPD) in

North Macedonia

- Support to Waste Management Policy in Serbia

- Strengthening the capacities for effective implementation of the acquis in the field of

nature protection in North Macedonia

- Appui institutionnel en matière de maîtrise des risques sanitaires et

environnementaux en Tunisie

- Upgrading the National Environmental Monitoring System (NEMS) of Azerbaijan on

the base of EU best practices

- Institutional Strengthening of Environmental Health System of Georgia

- Strengthening the administrative capacities of the Ministry of Environment and

Natural Resources Protection of Georgia for approximation and implementation of

the EU environmental 'acquis' in the fields of industrial pollution and industrial

hazards

- Support to development of an effective internal control and audit environment in

public sector in Moldova"

- Strengthening the capacities for effective implementation of the acquis in the field of

water quality in North Macedonia


ENP review roll-out – Priority

actions on Energy

Development of enhanced

collaboration with IFIs on-

energy efficiency

EU4Energy national work

plans are developed for

the newly established

programme.

Contracting and

implementation of

Energy Efficiency /

Renewable Energy

instruments in Western

Balkans

Implementation of new

December 2018

Throughout 2018


regional actions for the


on energy security and

climate change,

mitigation and

adaptation (EUR 19

million) are launched

Actions are in place in

MENA countries,

SEAPC/SECAPS are

adopted and

implemented

December 2018


Regional South AAP is has been adopted on 14/11/2018 C(2018)7631. New regional

projects for the Southern Neighbourhood on energy security and climate change, mitigation

and adaptation (EUR 14 million) were launched since early January 2018.

Meetings with EIB took place in March and May on potentials for new collaboration on

energy, including energy efficiency.

A regional study was launched in May 2018 on the state of play of energy efficiency for

buildings and products in the Southern Neighbourhood, where IFIs where consulted.

In relation to the contracting and implementation of Energy Efficiency / Renewable Energy

instruments in Western Balkans: there is on-going implementation of the Regional Energy

Efficiency Programme for the Western Balkans (REEP and REEP Plus), as well as the Green

for Growth Fund (GGF), and additional funding in discussion for the next programming

exercise.

General objective 4 – A New Boost for Jobs, Growth and Investment

General objective 4 : A New Boost for Jobs, Growth and Investment

Impact indicator: Europe 2020 target - Employment rate population aged 20-64

Source of the data: EUROSTAT

Baseline (2014) Interim Milestone Target 2020

69.2% at least 75%


DG NEAR will contribute to the specific objective through a variety of policy-related actions.

These include completing preparations for the negotiations of modernised Customs Union

with Turkey, monitoring the Stabilisation and Association Agreements with the countries of

the Western Balkans as well as ensuring financial assistance to Morocco and Tunisia to

accompany them in the DCFTA negotiations.

Albania

The employment rate (persons aged 20-64) in 2016 was 62.1% (EUROSTAT)



Kosovo





Montenegro


Serbia


Specific objective 7: Increased prosperity in the Enlargement and Neighbourhood

countries and in the EU through increased economic and trade opportunities

between the EU and these countries


Result indicator: Initiative on the enhancement of EU-Turkey bilateral trade relations and

modernisation of the EU-Turkey Customs Union (CU).

Definition: The main policy objective of this initiative is to enhance the bilateral

preferential trade framework by extending the CU to other areas (agriculture,

services and public procurement) and improving the functioning of current mechanisms.

This indicator will measure the progress of the negotiation between Turkey and the EU with

a view to modernising the EU-Turkey Customs Union.

This indicator is particularly relevant to this specific objective since Turkey is the EU's 6th

biggest trading partner and accounts for nearly 4% of its total trade. Three fourths of

FDI inflows to Turkey originate in the EU, mainly greenfield and services investments.

Enhancing economic integration by improving market access in agricultural and public

procurement markets, and fostering investments in the services sectors through better

opening and regulatory alignment would increase further market integration to the benefits

of both parties.

DG NEAR will work jointly with DG TRADE on this initiative, in a supportive and

complementary role.

Source of data: European Commission (TRADE and NEAR)


Existing Customs Union

Agreement EU-Turkey (in

force since 1996)

Conduct negotiations for

modernising Customs Union

with Turkey

Upgraded/extended CU in

force or provisionally

applied, including new

mechanisms


The Commission adopted its Recommendation on 21 December 2016 for a Council Decision

authorising the opening of negotiations with Turkey on an Agreement on the extension of

the scope of the bilateral preferential trade relationship and on the modernisation of the

Customs Union. In the first half of 2017, the proposal was intensively discussed in the

Council. Although a lot of progress has been made, further discussions will be needed in

the Council on a number of issues before work can be concluded. Indeed, in the course of

2017, some Member States have expressed reservations about the need for a swift

agreement on the mandate.

It is now up to the Council to continue its deliberations on the Customs Union

modernisation and to make a decision on the authorisation of starting the negotiations with

Turkey.

No progress. GAC conclusions of June 2018: "no further work towards the modernisation of

the EU-Turkey Customs Union is foreseen"


Result indicator: DCFTA Facility for Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine

Definition: DG NEAR, jointly with European Financial Institutions (EFIs) – the European

Investment Bank (EIB) and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

(EBRD) in the first place – has put in place the DCFTA Facility for SMEs to help SMEs to

seize new trade opportunities opened thanks to the DCFTA and to comply with the DCFTA

provisions.

Source of data: European Commission (TRADE and NEAR)


The two DCFTA Facilitation

programmes with the EIB

and the EBRD will generate

approximately 13,750 sub-

loans to companies. Other

objectives include to:

improve technical and

SPS standards leading to

enhance the

competitiveness of SMEs

in the DCFTA signatory

countries

transfer knowledge on

how to use the

opportunities and

address the challenges

resulting from the DCFTA

implementation.


DCFTA facility contracts supporting access to finance in Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine and

adaptation to the DCFTA regulation is on-going, with new initiatives signed in 2018

targeting in particular local currency finance. A DCFTA facility coordination meeting was

organized in 2018 to take stock of the progress and challenges and improve targeting of

SMEs and their requirements to adapted DCFTA regulation.

Planned evaluations:

Economic governance, 2016 – thematic: The evaluation, including open public

consultation has been completed. However, the relevant Staff Working Paper is planned to be

completed in 201841.

Competitiveness, 2016 – thematic: completed in 201742

41 Link: https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-

enlargement/sites/near/files/170818_thematic_ev_of_economic_governance_-_final_report.pdf, also see Annex 9 of DG NEAR AAR 2017

42 Link: https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/tenders/monitoring-and-evaluation_en, also see

Annex 9 of DG NEAR AAR 2017

https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/170818_thematic_ev_of_economic_governance_-_final_report.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/170818_thematic_ev_of_economic_governance_-_final_report.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/tenders/monitoring-and-evaluation_en




Turkey Customs Union:

Support DG TRADE in

following discussions by MS

on the mandate and

perspective of initiating

negotiations when political

conditions are ripe.

Negotiations initiated

Decide planning reference:

2015/TRADE+/035

Once political conditions

permit


No progress in absence of right political conditions following General Affairs Council

conclusions of June 2018 stating that "no further work towards the modernization of the

EU-Turkey Customs Union is foreseen"

Supporting Twinning project prepared:

- Improving the Detection Capacity of Turkish Customs Enforcement


Support to the development

of a Regional Economic Area

in the Western Balkans

Implementation of measures

in the agreed Roadmap of

the Regional Economic Area.

Continuous, but monitoring

of state of play at the UK

summit in July 2018


The Commission, with the help of the Regional Co-operation Council (RCC) is monitoring

the implementation of the REA. Commissioner Hahn has written to each of the countries

identifying concrete steps, and a number of meetings with advisors to Prime Ministers have

been organised to examine that implementation. Notable milestones were the adoption of a

Digital Agenda for the Balkans (at the Sofia summit), adoption of a Regional Investment

and Reform Programme, and opening negotiations on Mutual Recognition Agreements on

professional and academic qualifications.

Several elements of the REA made important breakthroughs in the course of 2018. The

implementation of the action plan was discussed at a meeting of the region's Economy

Ministers in Vienna, on 4 July 2018. Leaders of the Western Balkans recalled its importance

at the London Summit on 10 July 2018. A Digital Agenda for the Western Balkans was

adopted in May at the EU-Western Balkans Summit in Sofia (following a digital summit in

Skopje in April). Countries also adopted a Regional Investment and Reform agenda. In the

Autumn, negotiations on the mobility pillar were opened and further progress has been

made on the negotiations regarding a roaming agreement. The European Commission

continues to support the RCC as the body responsible for driving the REA.


External Investment Plan

(EIP) - Secretariat and web

portal set-up (following

adoption of the EIP by the

co-legislator).

Set-up of the Secretariat and

web portal By Q4/2018


EIP secretariat fully functional. All investment proposals for the South have been assessed,

a number of which are finalised



Monitoring the Stabilisation

and association agreements

(SAA) with Western Balkans

countries

Reports on SAA/AA Council,

Committee, Sub-Committee

and Special group meetings.

For all WB: 1 annual SAA

Council

1 annual SA Committee 7

Sub-committees

+ 1-2 PAR Special Group

(and, for Kosovo, a

normalisation Special Group)


Albania: all foreseen SAA subcommittees, Council and Committee took place. The PAR

special group is postponed until early 2019.

Bosnia and Herzegovina: all the foreseen SAA Council and Committee, the seven Sub-

Committees and the PAR Special Group took place.

Kosovo: All foreseen SAA subcommittees, Council and Committee, as well as the PAR and

normalisation special groups, and PFM dialogue took place as planned in 2018.

The Republic of North Macedonia: all the foreseen SAA Council and Committee, the

seven Sub-Committees and the PAR Special Group took place. The EU Council welcomed

the upcoming passage to the second stage of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement.

Montenegro: all foreseen SAA Council and Committee, the seven Sub-Committees and

the PAR Special Group took place.

Serbia: all foreseen SAA subcommittees, Council and Committee, as well as the PAR

special group took place as planned in 2018.


Pursue technical support to

economic and public

institutions' reforms in


countries.

Continued support to

ongoing economic,

business climate and

institutional reforms in

countries like Tunisia,

Morocco and Jordan;

Contribute to economic

diversification in

countries like Algeria and

Libya;

Support economic

diplomacy efforts by DG

GROW in countries like

Tunisia;

Continued support to the

private sector

-Private-public economic

dialogues increase at

regional and country level

-SMEs accessing services or

finance increased

-Number of women

beneficiaries increased

Throughout 2018



A high-level joint mission EU-IFIs to Tunisia was led by Commissioner Hahn on 12 July

2018 to discuss with Tunisian authorities about challenges and measures to implement key

reforms, including on fiscal consolidation, business climate and social protection to mitigate

the effects of the reforms.

Commissioner Hahn visited Rabat on 14 September to start a process towards relaunching

EU-Morocco partnership, to define the focus of co-operation activities for 2019-2020, and

in parallel to start a deeper reflection on the longer term perspective for the partnership.

The process will culminate in 2019, starting with HRVP visit in January to launch the

brainstorming on strategic partnership and Juncker mission foreseen in March.

In Morocco, the EUR 182 million AAP included a EUR 62 million sector budget support to

pursue reforms in economic governance.

The AAP 2018 for Egypt included a EUR 62 million contribution to support reforms in the

water and energy sectors.

Jordan. Further actions worth EUR 30 million in support to private sector development and

innovation were adopted in December 2018. Close engagement ongoing with the DFID, the

World Bank and the Government of Jordan to support the government reform matrix and

prepare the London initiative conference planned on 28/02/2018 to support Jordan

economic reforms.

Lebanon

At the April 2018 CEDRE Conference, the EU committed to support the implementation of

the Lebanon's "Vision for Stabilisation, Growth and Employment ". The Commission

pledged to support the Capital Investment Plan (CIP) through the provision of technical

assistance and blending (EUR 150 million grants over 2018-2020 generating up to EUR 1.5

billion in loans).

Under the ENI annual action programme 2018, a programme of EUR 15 million to support

the economic development of Lebanon has been adopted including support to the follow-up

to the CEDRE conference.

Libya

The Special Measure 2018 has approved a follow-up programme on diversification of the

economy/support to SMEs. Its global objective is to promote the development of a dynamic

and diversified MSME sector in all regions of Libya, capable of creating employment and

livelihoods for Libyans, and in particular for women and youth, through widely accessible

and relevant MSME support services.

The ENI annual action programme 2018 for Algeria included a EUR 20 million programme

in support of green and circular economy, and EUR 10 million additional in support of

democratic participation in local development (CapDel).

Supporting Twinning projects in Tunisia and Morocco:

Appui au développement du travail décent : renforcement des capacités de l'inspection

médicale et de la sécurité au travail en Tunisie.

Amélioration de la performance de la Direction Générale des Impôts et de ses relations

avec les contribuables» au Maroc.

Palestine

The Annual Action Programme 2018 for the PA includes a EUR 29.8 million component in

support to sustainable economic development and enhanced governance.

Tunisia

Under the ENI annual action programme 2018, three new programmes have been adopted

for a total commitment of EUR 120 million to support, respectively, the (i) economic,

political and social, inclusion of youth; (ii) innovation ecosystem and entrepreneurship; and


(iii) diversification of tourism, the development of handicraft, and the promotion of cultural

heritage.


Support economic growth,

private sector development

and investments at regional

level in the Southern

Neighbourhood

Launch regional actions

aimed at boosting trade,

competitiveness and

investment in the Southern

Mediterranean, notably

through blending

Support UfM sector policy

dialogue with Line DGs and

Southern Mediterranean

partner countries on

economic cooperation

through dedicated regional

platforms. In particular,

contribute to the preparation

of two UfM Ministerial

Conferences on Industrial

Cooperation and Trade.

NIF "Trade &

competitiveness"

facilities with EIB and

EBRD to finance value

chains in Tunisia,

Morocco, Egypt and

Jordan for a total of €

50 mio,

The first UfM Trade

and Investment

Ministerial takes place

with all participants

present;

Member countries of

the AGADir

agreement phase IV

increase their support

to the organisation as

a demonstration of

ownership.

June/September 2018

Throughout 2018

Throughout 2018


Policy Dialogue - evaluation finalised, to be contracted by November.

NIP Trade & Competitiveness Facilities with EBRD were launched with first actions in

Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt and Jordan. The EIB facility is delayed for contractual reasons.

UfM TRADE ministerial took place in Brussels in March 2018. Continued dialogue at the

level of the sector specific working group to implement the work plan agreed by Ministers

and to prepare for a new Ministerial in 2019.

Agadir Member States showed higher involvement at political and technical level in the

implementation of the Agadir Agreement. During 2018 work focused on the accession

process of Lebanon and Palestine which is expected to be ratified in the 1st Quarter 2019.

A new regional programme was launched in November 2018 to promote an enabling

business environment for MSME development and financial inclusion. This comes in support

to the regional policy dialogue platform on industrial cooperation.

Supporting Twinning projects in Jordan, Morocco and Algeria:

Support the preparation for the negotiation of the Agreement on Conformity

Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (ACAA) in Jordan

"Appui au développement de la surveillance du marché" au Maroc

Appui à la Direction Générale des Douanes pour la Mise en place d’une Centrale des

Risques en Algérie.


DCFTA with Morocco and

Tunisia

Continued participation in

EU's awareness raising and

negotiation efforts in relation

to DCFTA with Morocco and

Throughout 2018


Tunisia.

Ensure implementation of

financial assistance to

accompany the DCFTA

negotiations.


A Third round of negotiations with Tunisia took place in November 2018 and a fourth round

has been scheduled in Tunisia in 2019.

In Morocco, the DCFTA issue was acknowledged during Commissioner Hahn's mission in

September as to be further discussed, as part of the relaunching of the cooperation and the

reflexion of the future strategic partnership.


DCFTA Facility for Georgia,

Moldova and Ukraine in the

context of the EU4Business

initiative

The DCFTA Facilitation

programmes with the EIB

and the EBRD will continue

progressing positively in the

provision of sub-loans to

SME's and sustaining jobs.

Improve technical and SPS

standards leading to

enhance the competitiveness

of SMEs in the DCFTA

signatory countries.

Positive conclusions/opinions

reached by the DCFTA

stirring committee.

Second Phase of EIB DCFTA

Facility approved and

launched.

Throughout 2018


Partially completed.

- The DCFTA Coordination Committee was organised end-September.

- The EIB DCFTA Facility was approved in July 2018, but the contracting may take

place in 1Q19.

Related Twinning projects:

- Support to Georgian National Agency for Standards and Metrology for further

implementation of the EU-Georgia DCFTA requirements (legal approximation of

standardisation and metrology)

- Support to the TCSA (Technical Construction and Supervision Agency) and other

relevant institutions to align market surveillance related legislation with the EU

principles and ensure its effective implementation

- EU support for the National Institute for Standardization of the Republic of Moldova

to comply with CEN and CENELEC full membership criteria (ended in March 2018)

- Support to the National Food Safety Agency of the Republic of Moldova


Support to structural

reforms, address gaps in

access to finance and

support the harmonisation of

digital markets (EU4Digital)

in the Eastern Partner

Structural reform facility

established

Throughout 2018


countries

Continued work in particular

with Georgia, Moldova and

Ukraine to support the


reforms.

Roll-out across the Eastern

Partnership region of

additional measures to help

address gaps in access to

finance through support to

local currency lending, as

well as to the harmonisation

of digital markets under the

EU4Digital programme.

EU4Digital programme fully

contracted


Partially completed.

- The Structural Reform Facility was approved, and 3 contracts were signed with

EBRD, the World Bank and with the IMF.

- EU4Digital programme was contracted in December.

Description Indicator Target

Enterprise Development and

Innovation Facility (EDIF)

funding in the Western

Balkans

Deployment of €50 million

SME funding made available

under EDIF for WB

countries; move into

bridging the gap between

research and business

July 2018 – December 2018


Status regarding the IPA 2017 financing (EUR 48 million):

- The Western Balkans Enterprise Development and Innovation Facility Guarantee Facility –

Serbia Window (“WB EDIF GF Serbia”) has started its implementation since January - EUR

20 million) with focus on start-ups and innovative companies. By 31/08/2018 five

intermediaries (banks) have been selected to implement the scheme;

- Competitiveness Programme (EUR 15 m) launched with EBRD in late December

2017;implementation during 2018 continued.

- Venture Capital and Investment Readiness programme (EUR 3 m) with WBG: the

agreement has been signed at the end of 2018;

- Youth Employment Guarantee Facility (EUR 10 m): the Delegation agreement with the

European Investment Fund has been signed in the end of 2018;

Status of the IPA 2018 financing (EUR 2 million):

- The financing decision regarding the EU EUR 2 m contribution for a Proof of Concept grant

scheme to bring research closer to industry was adopted on 31 July 2018 and the

agreement with the JRC will be signed in early 2019.




TAIEX events contributing to

the implementation of

AA/DCFTA and to current or

By end of 2018


instrument - TAIEX future agreements implying

approximation with EU laws

and norms (East and South)

took place


In the reporting period, 21 TAIEX events were implemented on Customs (12for ENI East, 7

for IPA region, 2 for ENI South) and three on Trade policy (2 for ENI South, 1 for ENI East)

among which one multi-beneficiary event dedicated to the Agadir Agreement countries.

19 TAIEX events were implemented in relation to Social policy and Employment (6 for ENI

East, 8 for ENI South and 5 for IPA); 21 on Enterprise and Industrial policy (9 for ENI East,

5 for IPA, 2 for ENI South and 5 multi-country) and 8 on Economic and Monetary policy (‘

for IPA, 2 for ENI East, 2 for ENI South).

Date post:	15-Mar-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times