This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Amman – 23 April 2012...

This project is funded by the EU And implemented by a consortium led by MWH

Amman – 23 April 2012

RCBI ‘handover’ meetingJordan

RCBI ‘handover’ meetingJordan


Meeting outlineMeeting outline

• Expectations

• Review of the involvement of Jordan and of what the programme and authorities in Jordan plan to do to facilitate involvement

• Identify what RCBI tools/materials may be needed to help with this including a presentation on some of these, e.g. e-modules + support needed to the end of the project

• Situation at the start of the project (2007) and situation at end. How has it changed

• Review of support from RCBI - what was useful and what could be improved and what might be needed in the future programming phase

• Evaluation and wrap up


BasisBasis

• Quantitative analysis based on statistics on calls provided by the programme

• Qualitative analysis based on questionnaires:– Jordan: NCP, CSE, applicants, beneficiaries and partners

– Programme: JMA/JTS

• Input from - RCBI Experts


No. of applicants by country - standard callNo. of applicants by country - standard call


No. of applicants by country - strategic projects No. of applicants by country - strategic projects


No. of partners by country - standard callNo. of partners by country - standard call


No. of partners by country - strategic projects No. of partners by country - strategic projects


No. of applicants and partners by country - standard call

No. of applicants and partners by country - standard call


No. of applicants and partners by country - strategic projects

No. of applicants and partners by country - strategic projects


Success rate of applicants by country - standard callSuccess rate of applicants by country - standard call


Budget share overall by country - standard call Budget share overall by country - standard call


Involvement of MPC organisations in applications-1Involvement of MPC organisations in applications-1

As Applicants:

• Not very well represented (2), low level of representation (2)

Reasons:

NCP/CSE:

• No or moderate experience in managing EU funded projects

• Europeans were usually looking for partners as most of them were interested in being the leader

• The need to work with partners from Europe and the region

Programme:• Lack of experience (incl. in project management)

• Institutional barriers related to procedures and job responsibilities

• Complicated administrative procedures

• High level of bureaucracy of organizations in the MPC


Involvement of MPC organisations in applications-2Involvement of MPC organisations in applications-2

As Partners:

• Very well represented (3), well represented (1)

Reasons:

NCP/CSE:

• Amongst the first countries to sign the financing agreement with EU - allows applicants from EU to involve partners from Jordan

• Organisations were approached by other applicants from other countries

• Many active organizations and entities

• Entities have offered many ideas on projects for building partnerships

Programme:

• Interest in the Programme

• Existing good cooperation with other organisations from EU countries

• Literacy and financial improvement

• Professionalism


Involvement of MPC organisations in awarded projects - 1Involvement of MPC organisations in awarded projects - 1

As Beneficiaries:

• Not very well represented (1), low level of representation (2)

Reasons:

NCP/CSE:

• Lack of experience with big projects with many partners

• Exclusion of the capital Amman from eligible regions

Programme:

• Only one MPC has been awarded due to its longer experience in managing projects


Involvement of MPC organisations in awarded projects - 2Involvement of MPC organisations in awarded projects - 2

As Partners:

• Very well represented (1), well represented (3)

Reasons:

NCP/CSE:

• Excellent cooperation between applicants and partners

• The commitment towards finalizing all project documents

• It is easier to be a partner of a project which other organisation is managing

Programme:

• There is an overall participation of all MPC involved in the Programme at project level

• The number of partners from MPC is very well balanced

• The rule of 50% of activities to be implemented in MPC could have definitely contributed to achieve this equal participation


Main challenges - 1Main challenges - 1

As Applicants:

NCP/CSE:

• Knowledge of EU procedures

• Proven previous experience in managing external funds

• To have the right financial systems in place

• Exclusion of Amman

Programme:

• Enhance knowledge of the Programme rules

• Lack of experience

• Legislation

• To manage funds - that seems to be complicated for some MPC countries


Main challenges - 2Main challenges - 2

As Partners:

NCP/CSE:

• Lack of better understanding about the programme documents (including

documents required in the application form)

• Need for further information sessions and partnership search forums

• Long procedures of the evaluation

• Exclusion of Amman

Programme:

• Many organisations are not familiar with working in partnership

• To achieve common objectives in a coordinated way

• To improve knowledge of the management rules

• Low level of initiatives


Success factors - Jo applicants, beneficiaries and partners - 1 Success factors - Jo applicants, beneficiaries and partners - 1

Reasons for success:

• Cooperation and working as a team where every partner has a certain role

Main Challenges to be overcome

• Long distance between partners

• Miscommunication;

• Strict deadlines

How they were overcome

• Good follow-up skills and cooperation with partners


Reasons for not applying/not being successful – Jo applicants, beneficiaries and partners

Reasons for not applying/not being successful – Jo applicants, beneficiaries and partners • Lack of partners from the European countries

• Long proposal preparation and evaluation process

• Project activities not much related to the EU policy and objectives

• Lack of coordination between partners


Level of involvement in applications – Jo applicants, beneficiaries and partners

Level of involvement in applications – Jo applicants, beneficiaries and partners

• Active involvement that is also equal to the involvement of other Partners (1)

• Member State partners have higher involvement than Partner Country partners (2)

• The Lead Partner has been doing almost all of the work, partners being passive (1)

• The level of our involvement is in line with what was planned (2)

• We expected to be more involved in the project (1)

• So far, we have had very little or no involvement in the project (1)


Are MPC at a disadvantageAre MPC at a disadvantage

Yes (3) – No (1)

Reasons:

NCP/CSE:

• Lack of experience in participating in such programme as a lead partner

Programme:

• Less experience and resources to compete

• Financial and legislative barriers


Balanced participationBalanced participation

• As long as the PC are represented in some way in all projects, this will be enough (1)

• A balanced distribution of funds among participating countries is very important (2)

• Balanced participation is very important but there is not much that

can be done about this (2)

• Balanced participation is extremely important for programme success (4)

Explanation:

• Balanced participation underlines a true and real co-ownership of the Programme


What are you doing to facilitate involvement? What are you doing to facilitate involvement?

NCP/CSE:

• Motivates to build partnerships

• Facilitation of the programme implementation

• Nothing, except some attempts to expand the database of organisations who receive info on calls and updates

Programme:

• Providing rules that boost MPCs participation in the call (50% rule for instance)

• Awareness-raising and technical events

• Any kind of communication actions

• Programmes are not the main player to stimulate involvement


What can/should you do in the future What can/should you do in the future

NCP/CSE:

• Allocate the right team of human resources for the international cooperation programmes

• Simplify the programme documents, requirements and the guidelines

• Training and support to the team

• Awareness and partnership search forums

• Engage applicants and partners together in creative information sessions

• Government and local authorities, universities are all qualified but they have not been assisted to be more involved in projects

Programme:

• Provide for technical assistance funds to National Contact Points

• Reconduct a similar RCBI experience

• Programmes are not the main player to stimulate involvement


RCBI materials/tools - 1RCBI materials/tools - 1

• Database of partners and contacts in MPC

• E support for project identification and development and project implementation

• Identifying, developing and implemention ENPI CBC projects: Tips from RCBI practice of supporting potential applicants and partners

• RCBI Project Implementation Manual (PIM)

• Guides to national requirements for implementing ENPI CBC projects


RCBI materials/tools - 2RCBI materials/tools - 2

• The clock is ticking: Steps for preparing ENPI CBC project proposals

• ‘Who does What When’ Wheel - Responsibilities and tasks for each programme management structure

• Power point presentations from events – Project Preparation workshops, Partner search Forums, Project Management and Implementation training

• Reports on PC involvement

• Other support?


RCBI support to Jordan 2007-2011RCBI support to Jordan 2007-2011

• Support for programming – contributions from expert from Jordan and other programming experts

• Training on programme management - JMC (1)

• Events to support calls for proposals - info seminars (4), project preparation workshops (3), Partner Search Forum in Jordan (1) and contribution for participation at Partner Search Forums outside Jordan (3)

• Training in project management & implementation - NCP (1), beneficiaries and partners (3)

• Support to participate in programme events (5)

• Guides to National Requirements for implementing ENPI CBC projects - steps to take when awarded a project

Date post:	01-Apr-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	cassie-deagle
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Amman – 23 April 2012...

Documents