1 / 28

RCBI ‘handover’ meeting Egypt

RCBI ‘handover’ meeting Egypt. Cairo – 22 April 2012. Meeting outline. Expectations Review of the involvement of Egypt and of what the programme and authorities in Egypt plan to do to facilitate involvement

oleg
Download Presentation

RCBI ‘handover’ meeting Egypt

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. RCBI ‘handover’ meetingEgypt Cairo – 22 April 2012

  2. Meeting outline • Expectations • Review of the involvement of Egypt and of what the programme and authorities in Egypt 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

  3. Basis • Quantitative analysis based on statistics on calls provided by the programme • Qualitative analysis based on questionnaires: • Egypt: NCP, CSE, applicants, beneficiaries and partners • Programme: JMA/JTS • Input from - RCBI Experts

  4. No. of applicants by country - standard call

  5. No. of applicants by country - strategic projects

  6. No. of partners by country - standard call

  7. No. of partners by country - strategic projects

  8. No. of applicants and partners by country -standard call

  9. No. of applicants and partners by country -strategic projects

  10. Success rate of beneficiaries by country -standard call

  11. Budget share overall by country -standard call

  12. Involvement of Eg organisations in applications - 1 As Applicants: • Not very well represented (2), low level of representation (2) Reasons: NCP/CSE: • Due to the recent political changes in Egypt, not enough time to formulate new project proposals compatible with the new priorities of the Egyptian people • Lack of knowledge about project management and partner management 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

  13. Involvement of Eg organisations in applications - 2 As Partners: • Very well represented (2), well represented (1), not very well represented (1) Reasons: NCP/CSE: • Due to the recent political changes in Egypt, not enough time to formulate new project proposals compatible with the new priorities of the Egyptian people • Restricted availability of partner resources and partner search tools Programme: • Interest in the Programme • Existing good cooperation with other organisations from EU countries • Literacy and financial improvement • Professionalism

  14. Involvement of Eg organisations in awarded projects - 1 As Beneficiaries: • Not very well represented (1), low level of representation (3) Reasons: NCP/CSE: • Lack of full knowledge about the programme • Insufficient experience in developing proposals • High level of complexity of the rules and procedures • Need for more calls that are development-oriented Programme: • Only one MPC has been awarded due to its longer experience in managing projects

  15. Involvement of Eg organisations in awarded projects - 2 As Partners: • Very well represented (1), well represented (1), not very well represented (2) Reasons: NCP/CSE: • Lack of full knowledge about the program • High level of complexity of the rules and procedures • Need for more calls that are development-oriented 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

  16. Main challenges - 1 As Applicants: NCP/CSE: • Getting acquainted with the program • Acquiring skills for proposal formulation • Remove the partner search limitations • Increase the support provided in developing the proposals Programme: • Enhance knowledge of the Programme rules • Lack of experience • Legislation • To manage funds - that seems to be complicated for some MPC countries

  17. Main challenges - 2 As Partners: NCP/CSE: • Getting acquainted with the programme • Acquiring skills for proposals formulation • Remove the partner search limitations • Free the partnership decision from irrelevant constraints 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

  18. Success factors - Eg applicants, beneficiaries and partners - 1 Reasons for success: • Focusing on the main problem • Help from a more experienced partner • Forming a steering commitee • Our own knowledge and experiences Main challenges to be overcome • Weak points in Egypt current situation • Differentiation of responsibilities between ministries • Coordination and submitting the application at the same time with partners; • Justifying the budget How they were overcome • Constant and systematical cooperation between Spain and Egypt • tudying the call carefuSlly and concentrating on preparing the documents.

  19. Reasons for not applying – Eg applicants, beneficiaries and partners • Bad advertising • Workshops were in some cases conducted only in Cairo and Alexandria • The program and the European Union are working only with specific organizations and not open for all • Call wasn’t as interesting • Lack of time

  20. Reasons for not being successful – Eg applicants, beneficiaries and partners • Our own limited knowledge of how EU fundings works (2) • Weak consortium • Leader is not interested • Lack of consultation firms for applying to EU funds in Egypt • Shortage of workshops that introduce the project and the program • Language barrier • No communication between organizations in Egypt and the programme format

  21. Level of involvement in applications – Eg applicants, beneficiaries and partners • Active involvement that is also equal to the involvement of other Partners (3) • Member State partners have higher involvement than Partner Country partners (1) • The Lead Partner has been doing almost all of the work, partners being passive (0) • The level of our involvement is in line with what was planned (1) • We expected to be more involved in the project (1) • So far, we have had very little or no involvement in the project (1)

  22. Are MPC at a disadvantage Yes (4) Reasons: NCP/CSE: • Organisations are not mature enough to participate in strategic projects • Constraints and limitations in searching and decision making from the CP Programme: • Less experience and resources to compete • Financial and legislative barriers

  23. Balanced participation • As long as the PC are represented in some way in all projects, this will be enough (1) • Equal treatment of all applicants is more important than balanced participation (2) • A balanced distribution of funds among participating countries is very important (2) • Balanced participation is extremely important for programme success (2) Explanation: • Balanced participation underlines a true and real co-ownership of the Programme

  24. What are you doing to facilitate involvement? NCP/CSE: • Organising meetings and workshops • Permanent contact with all organisations to coordinate between them and other foreign organisations working on the same theme 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

  25. What can/should you do in the future NCP/CSE: • Seek technical assistance to be provided for these organizations • Encourage the participation in all stages and open the floor to the participants to go and develop the qualified proposals • Give more support to develop the capacities of the local participants Programme: • Provide for technical assistance funds to National Contact Points • Reconduct a similar RCBI experience • Programmes are not the main player to stimulate involvement

  26. RCBI materials/tools - 1 • Database of partners and contacts in MPC • E support for project identification and development and project implementation • Identifying, developing 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

  27. RCBI 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?

  28. RCBI support to Egypt 2007-2011 • Support for programming – contributions from expert from Egypt and other programming experts • Training on programme management - JMC (1) • Support to participate in programme events (6) • Events to support calls for proposals - info seminars (3), project preparation workshops (2) and contribution for participation at Partner Search Forums (5) • Training in project management & implementation - NCP (1), beneficiaries and partners (3) • Guide to National Requirements for implementing ENPI CBC projects - steps to takewhenawarded a project

More Related