IPA II Trainer Manual

PRAG guidelines
programming
evaluation
sector approach
country strategy paper
project implementation
European Regional Policy

strategic planning documents
instrument for pre-accession assistance
action documents
IPA II REGULATION
enlargement
procurement procedures
logical framework approach

project proposal
IPA II - The Instrument for

Pre-Accession Assistance 2014-2020
A Practical Manual for Trainers
IPA II - The Instrument for

Pre-Accession Assistance 2014-2020
A Practical Manual for Trainers
Table of Contents
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.3.1
1.4
1.4.1
1.4.2
Before You Start Information for the Trainer .............................................................................................................................. 10

Structure of the Training Manual....................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Objectives of the Training Manual..................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Guiding Principles....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Learning Objectives of Each Chapter................................................................................................................................................................ 11
Tips and Tools for Your Teaching......................................................................................................................................................................... 11
Methodology.................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 11
Feed-back and Evaluation....................................................................................................................................................................................... 12
2
European Regional Policy.................................................................................................................................................................... 14
2.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 14
2.2
History of EU Regional Policy............................................................................................................................................................................... 14
2.3
Reform of Cohesion Policy 2014-2020: Refocusing on Growth and Jobs........................................................................................ 17
2.3.1 Legal Basis for the Period 2014-2020.................................................................................................................................................................. 17
2.3.2 Common Rules, Objectives and Allocation.................................................................................................................................................... 18
2.4
European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds)....................................................................................................................... 19
2.4.1 The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)................................................................................................................................. 19
2.4.2 The European Social Fund (ESF).......................................................................................................................................................................... 20
2.4.3 The Cohesion Fund (CF)............................................................................................................................................................................................ 21
2.5
Notes for the Trainer.................................................................................................................................................................................................. 24
2.6
Suggested Readings .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 24
3
IPA II - The Pre-accession Financial Instrument for 2014-2020................................................................................................. 26
3.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 26
3.2
Political Framework of Pre-accession Funding........................................................................................................................................... 27
3.3
Lessons Learnt from IPA I........................................................................................................................................................................................ 28
3.4
IPA II Key Elements................................................................................................................................................................................................. 30
3.5
The Sector Approach and its Application........................................................................................................................................................ 31
3.5.1 Sector Definition.......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 31
3.5.2 Institutional Setting and Capacity..................................................................................................................................................................... 32
3.5.3 Sector Budget and Mid-term Financial Planning....................................................................................................................................... 32
3.5.4 Sector Performance Monitoring.......................................................................................................................................................................... 32
3.6
Strategic Planning and Programming of IPA II Assistance................................................................................................................... 33
3.6.1 The Strategic Planning and Programming Documents.......................................................................................................................... 33
3.6.2 Programme Options under IPA II....................................................................................................................................................................... 33
3.6.3 The Process of Programming IPA II Assistance........................................................................................................................................... 36
3.7
3.8
Suggested Readings..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 38
4.
From an Idea to a Convincing Project Proposal............................................................................................................................ 40
4.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40
4.2
PCM Guidelines for Project Planning and Management.................................................................................................................... 40
4.2.1 The Stages of Project Cycle Management........................................................................................................................................................ 40
4.2.2 Stage 1: Programming............................................................................................................................................................................................... 41
4.2.3 Stage 2: Identification................................................................................................................................................................................................. 41

4.2.4 Stage 3: Formulation................................................................................................................................................................................................... 41
4.3
The Logical Framework Approach...................................................................................................................................................................... 41
4.3.1 The Analysis Phase Getting to Know Problems and Priorities........................................................................................................ 42
4.3.1.1 Analysing the Stakeholder ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 42
4.3.1.2 Analysing the Problem ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 43
4.3.1.3 Analysing the Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 45
4.3.1.4 Analysing the Strategies .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 45
4.3.2 The Planning Phase.................................................................................................................................................................................................... 47
4.3.2.1 Defining the Project Description (First Column)........................................................................................................................................ 48
4.3.2.2 Defining the Project Assumption (Fourth Column) ................................................................................................................................. 49
4.3.2.3 Defining Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVIs) of Achievements (Second Column)........................................................... 49
4.3.2.4 Defining Sources of Verification (Third Column)....................................................................................................................................... 50
4.3.2.5 Finalizing the Draft Logframe Matrix: The Logic Check....................................................................................................................... 51
4.3.2.6 Activity, Resource and Cost Schedules ............................................................................................................................................................ 51
4.4
4.5
5
From a Convincing Project Proposal to a Successfully Implemented Project......................................................................... 54
5.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................................................................................................54
5.2
How is IPA Assistance Managed?..........................................................................................................................................................................54
5.3
Stage 4: Implementation...........................................................................................................................................................................................55
5.4
PRAG Guidelines for Implementing and Managing IPA Actions........................................................................................................56
5.4.1 General Procurement Principles..........................................................................................................................................................................56
5.4.2 Contract Forms..............................................................................................................................................................................................................57
5.4.3 Procurement Procedures..........................................................................................................................................................................................58
5.5
Stage 5: Evaluation........................................................................................................................................................................................................59
5.6
Notes for the Trainer...................................................................................................................................................................................................61
5.7
Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 62
A1
Sources of Information..............................................................................................................................................................................................64
A2 Abbreviations..................................................................................................................................................................................................................66
A3
Glossary of Terms..........................................................................................................................................................................................................69
Introduction
At the beginning of the 21st century, enlargement policy was considered one of the most important and most
successful foreign policy instruments of the European
Union (EU). The successful expansion from six members
to twenty-eight has extended a zone of security, political
stability, peace and economic well-being to a great portion
of Europe. For the EU, enlargement is a major challenge
and a historic opportunity at the same time.
Even today, the map of the EU is not considered complete: The accession of Croatia in July 2013 is the implementation of the promise made in Thessaloniki in 2003
and renews expectations of the remaining candidate
countries in the Western Balkans to join the European
Union within the next decade.
At present, Albania, Iceland, the Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey are
official candidate countries. Turkey entered into accession
negotiations already in October 2005, whereas the newest addition to the circle of candidate countries is Albania
which was granted candidate country status in June 2014.
In addition, Montenegro and Serbia started their accession
negotiations in June 2012 and January 2014 respectively.
Adding to these six countries, Bosnia and Herzegovina and
Kosovo* are potential candidate countries for EU accession. These countries have clear membership prospects if
the necessary requirements are met in time.
Even before formal accession, all countries of the Western Balkans had been progressively brought closer to the
EU. Thanks to the Stabilisation and Association Process
(SAP), they already benefit from the Unions pre-accession
strategy as well as from free access to the European single
market for almost all their exports. Necessary reforms of
e.g. public administration and the applying domestic legislation are broadly supported by the EU Pre-Accession
Assistance (IPA).
This Training Manual which concentrates on the
remake of IPA from 2014-2020 has been developed by
Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH and the Institut fr Europische Politik
(IEP). The Manual has a twofold objective:
cally concentrates on informing the reader about the

new Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA)
II. Being the key tool of the Commissions pre-accession funding activities for the period 2014-2020, IPA II
supports both candidate countries and potential candidate countries in their efforts to join the EU. They
are led to an alignment on EU standards and prepared
for management of EU rural, cohesion and structural
development funds.
2. The Manual shall provide the trainer with specific
knowledge in the above-mentioned areas as well as
training material for further independent work. For
this purpose, the book presents methods and techniques for the presentation of facts and the transfer
of know-how. Finally, the Manual shall support the
trainers in the preparation of EU-related training of
administrative staff and other multipliers.
Keeping the specific needs of prospective EU trainers in
mind, the Manual combines background information on
IPA II, including its political and financial framework,
with information of practical relevance concerning IPA
programming and management.
We wish you a successful training with sustainable
results and hard-working participants have fun!
1. The focus of the Training Manual lies on the European pre-accession strategy that provides the necessary framework and instruments for preparing applicant countries for membership. The Manual specifi-
This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo Declaration of Independence.
evaluation
sector approach
PRAG guidelines

IPA II REGULATION
action documents
INSTRUMENT FOR PRE-ACCESSION ASSISTANCE
enlargement
programming

project proposal
CHAPTER
01
Before You Start

Information for the Trainer
In this chapter you will find:

an introduction to the structure and content of this Training Manual on the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA II)
material that will help you prepare your courses, such as
a sample lesson plan
10
1 Before You Start Information for the Trainer
1.1
Structure of the Training Manual
The Training Manual on the Instrument for Pre-Accession

Assistance (IPA) II consists of five chapters and is organized as follows:
Chapter 1: For the trainer
Chapter 2: European Regional Policy
Chapter 3: IPA II - The pre-accession financial instrument for 2014-2020
Chapter 4: From an idea to a convincing project proposal
Chapter 5: From a convincing project proposal to a successfully implemented project.
Chapters 2 to 5 cover all essentials that you need for
planning and conducting your seminars. Each chapter is
divided into a number of units which build on each other.
This enables you to quickly consult a specific topic. Each
chapter contains:
Text to serve as the basis of your seminar; you may
choose to photocopy the text and distribute it to the
course participants,
Learning objectives (box at the beginning of each chapter) describing and summarizing what course participants will know after having worked through the chapter,
Exercises, possible activities or case studies (at the end
of each chapter) that you can do with the course participants. These exercises relate to the subject matter of
the chapter and are meant to reinforce newly acquired
knowledge about the EU,
Suggested readings: For course participants who are
interested in further reading, additional literature and
specific internet links are listed at the end of each chapter. In the annex you can find the sources of information
and abbreviations used in the Training Manual. Additionally, a glossary of terms explains the most important terms related to the EU and its pre-accession activities. It serves as a reference for definitions and explanations.
1.2
Objectives of the Training Manual
The pre-accession strategy of the EU is based on a highly

specialized system. To be able to absorb financial support by the EU, an efficient administration is a prerequisite. Administrative resources for planning and program-
ming processes on the local, regional, and national levels

are indispensable. In this sense, not only the implementation of pre-accession funds is important, but also the identification of programmes and projects.
Your target groups are civil servants or other actors
(partners and key stakeholders) included in IPA II programming and/or management who need to know about IPA
II in order to do their jobs. Your task is to give them background information on how IPA II operates and the way it
is planned in order to increase the absorption capacity of
the public administration. Moreover, they will learn how
their idea, project or organisation could be supported by
IPA II funding.
This IPA II Training Manual helps you share your
knowledge with a target group in a way that meets its particular requirements.
1.3
Guiding Principles
The following criteria were adhered to while devising the

training programme:
Diversity: A diverse selection of exercises with hints
on how to use them methodologically and didactically.
This will help you develop the curriculum and duration
of the course in a flexible way as well as meeting the specific requirements of your course.
Modularity: The Training Manual has been devised as a
series of progressive modules. This enables you to adapt
seminars, to suit specific objectives and reach different
target groups. Modules also allow you to choose individual chapters to suit the level of detail required by
different target groups.
Applying knowledge: The Training Manual is divided
into two sections: the transfer of information and the
application of that information. Course participants
learn the curriculum through didactic dialogues and
group discussions. Newly acquired knowledge is then
reinforced through various methods. The exercises will
help course participants to access the complex issues
discussed in the curriculum. This method enhances
the learning experience and the ability of course participants to apply their newly acquired knowledge in a
work setting.
Trainer support: In devising the Training Manual, we
put great importance on your ability as the trainer to
understand the given information quickly and effec-
11
tively. We also want to support you in your teaching

and give you as much scope as possible in how the curriculum is presented.
1.3.1 Learning Objectives of Each Chapter
Chapter 2 is about the Regional Policy of the European
Union and helps course participants to become familiar
with the objectives of the European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds and understand the reform process of EU
Regional Policy for the financing period 2014-2020. Course
participants learn about the different forms of Community
intervention and how it is funded by the EU budget.
Chapter 3 gives an overview of the new Instrument for Preaccession Assistance (IPA II), particularly with regard to its
objectives, political and financial framework. The chapter exclusively deals with the programming phase of IPA
within the beneficiary country.
Chapter 4 explains how to develop a project from an idea to
a convincing project proposal by means of using the Project Cycle Management (PCM) and tools such as the Logical Framework (LogFrame) approach. Course participants
will learn how to analyse responsible actors and problems
on the ground as well as to visualize them in the LogFrame
matrix.
Chapter 5 covers the different management types and management structure requirements under IPA II. It provides
general information on the steps in the implementation of
a project and on principles of project evaluation.
1.4
Tips and Tools for Your Teaching
1.4.1 Methodology
Seminars should endeavour to link theory and practice
through an engaging combination of teaching methodologies. Methods used in a training should be diverse and
adapted to the training objective as well as to the target
group (e.g. not all senior civil servants will feel comfortable
doing a role play, while desk-officers usually are grateful for
any kind of practical exercise). Keep in mind that you never
use presentation more than two times in a row as a method
for your training. Active listening should be encouraged
and practiced with your trainees but cannot be exercised
for longer than 45 minutes. Afterwards you should insert
some method of active participation; a short list of possibilities is given below:
Didactic dialogues: You can use didactic dialogues to
convey and present the necessary curriculum to the
course participants quickly and comprehensively. The
idea of a dialogue between teacher and student is
important. Do not assume that course participants have
any previous knowledge of the curriculum. For these
dialogues, you might need a blackboard, a flipchart or
a power point presentation. Note: To successfully estab-
lish dialogue between trainer or presenter and trainees

the participants should be familiar with active listening techniques.
Discussions: Use discussions to process or present information. You may even ask open questions to present
new content. In doing so you may visualize the answers
you receive on a flip-chart and group them according
to the main message you want to pass. Asking questions is a very powerful tool which demands a high
degree of proficiency from the trainer. You should know
your content by heart and be flexible enough to reach
your message by the detour of the trainees answers.
Announce a fix timeframe for your discussion and limit
participants` statements to a certain length. If you happen to face difficulties with trainees who only show
off and dont contribute anything new make sure you
address them in a friendly way and remind the commonly agreed time restrictions.
The downside of discussions is that you never reach or
include all participants, especially shy people will prefer
to just sit and listen. To avoid this you may use the next
suggested method:
Role plays and simulations: Role plays can be used
to make course participants put forward different
views and opinions during the discussions. This type
of activity enables them to become familiar with different points of view. Understanding and identifying
oneself with the given roles helps course participants to
appreciate other views. Simulations also require different roles which the participants adapt and in addition
set a problem and certain preconditions which simulate
the reality outside the training. When on-the-job training is not part of training activities a simulation might
be a good alternative to practice skills and knowledge.
Both role plays and simulation require careful preparation
by the trainer. You need to present your participants role
descriptions (three to four different roles have been proven
reasonable while you as a trainer of course stay outside as
an observer) as well as a detailed problem description and
instructions. If you plan to conduct a whole day simulation
the material should be given to your participants at least
one evening in advance. Instructions might be given on the
spot. Please note that you need at least two sessions and a
total of three hours for this kind of activity.
Group and individual work: Group work exercises are
suitable for almost every type of training. Knowledge
can be processed, new ideas can be developed. Groups
should not be too big, the free-rider aspect would just
be too difficult to handle. Make sure each group has
the possibility to clarify instructions and ask questions to trainer or expert present. Presentation of group
12
work results is obligatory. You also might announce in

advance if and how these results will be used for the further training which rises participants motivation. Individual work can be useful for reading exercises and also
as individual learning assignment during two training sessions.
Course length: A course on IPA II covers a wide variety
of topics. The detailed structure enables course participants to get familiar with the topic. Depending on the
previous knowledge of the target group as well as the
main objective of your training specific IPA II related
knowledge can be transferred and trained within a one
to four-day intensive training. The following course
plan presents the training sessions which were developed and practiced during the 2014 Training of Trainers programme on IPA II in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The plan focusses on beginners with no or only little
knowledge on IPA related issues. This single training
day can of course be extended into a much broader format, including a larger practical involvement of the
trainees. However, we suggest you to start with oneday training and to increase your training level step by
step.
Although this lesson plan can support you in your preparation process, feel free to modify it as necessary:
You decide what information to stress and what exercises to do.
You can determine the length of the course by the number of exercises you choose to use.
Of course, you may choose to single out parts of the curriculum.
1.4.2 Feed-back and Evaluation

An important part of your role as a trainer is to provide
your participants with feed-back and to encourage feedback of the trainees on the performance and results that
were achieved during the training session. Please remember
that feed-back should always be constructive and encouraging and positively formulated. You can ask your trainees
to answer the following questions before commenting or
giving feed-back:
Is there anything that could have been done different
to better attract participants attention?
What exactly did the presenter do to attract your attention?
What did the presenter do to make you feel he/she is
addressing particularly to you?
The evaluation of your course is an essential part of your
work as a trainer. The main purpose of an evaluation is to
assess the efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability of your
course. The evaluation and recommendations of the course
participants can help you improve your work in the future.
Note: Always reserve enough time (minimum 30 minutes)
for evaluation and feed-back exercises. If you wish to visualize your results (e.g. on flipchart paper put on the wall with
different categories that were part of the training) make
sure you can refer to the results in the following training
sessions or any follow-up activity.
COURSE PLAN ON IPA II BASICS FOR BEGINNERS WITH BASIC KNOWLEDGE ON PROGRAMMING
Training objective
After this training session the participants are

able to explain the broad IPA II approach including changes with regard to the previous IPA.
Key learning points
Methods
Welcome and introduction

Overview and IPA II
key elements and changes
Active listening, active participation

(e.g. brainstorming)
IPA II legal and strategic framework

(e.g. group work on hierarchy of docs)
Sector approach and the

Sector Planning Document

(e.g. group work on SPD template
comparison and drafting)
Action Document writing

Evaluation and conclusion
Active listening, active participation (short simulation on AD quality

review)
Coffee break
II
After this training session the participants are

able to understand and explain the systematic
approach of IPA II focusing on the underlying
documents.
Lunch break
III
After this training session the participants are able

to participate in the process of SPD development.
Coffee break
IV
After this training session the participants are able

to participate in the process of AD development.
PRAG guidelines
enlargement
evaluation
sector approach
IPA II Regulations
action documents
EUROPEAN REGIONAL POLICY
programming
13

project proposal
CHAPTER
02

an overview of the European Regional Policy, particularly with regard to its evolution and its present shape.
The focus will be on the main objectives of the European Regional Policy and the instruments used to
implement it.
useful links to original documents and guidelines on
14
2 European Regional Policy
2.1
Introduction
Why do we need a European Regional Policy? Today

the European Union is one of the most prosperous economic zones in the world. The 28 member states of the
EU form a community and an internal market of 505.74
million citizens. There are, however, great economic and
social disparities between these countries and their more
than 350 regions that weaken the Communitys dynamic.
Today, every fifth region (68 regions) has an average Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) per inhabitant that is more than
25% below the EU-27 average, and 22 of these regions have
an average GDP per inhabitant less than 50% of the EU-27
average.
With the accession of twelve new member states in 2004
and 2007, the development gap between the regions doubled. As a result, today most beneficiaries of the Regional
Policy are located in Central and Eastern Europe.
European Regional Policy puts into practice the solidarity between the peoples of Europe mentioned in the
preamble of the Lisbon Treaty (TEU). It helps to achieve
one of the fundamental objectives laid down in the Treaty:
the strengthening of the EUs economic and social cohesion (Art. 158-162 TFEU) by reducing disparities between
the levels of development of the various regions and the
backwardness of the least favoured regions in the Union
(Art. 174-178 TFEU).
The ongoing financial and economic crisis in the EU
exposed fundamental problems of macro-economic imbalances and redirected attention to the need to tackle these
disparities to overcome the crisis, generate growth and
competitiveness and to prevent the undermining of key
European projects such as the European Single Market and
the common currency, the euro.
European Regional Policy has a significant impact on
the competitiveness of the regions and the living conditions of their inhabitants, mainly by co-financing multiannual development programmes. As an investment policy
it supports job creation and economic growth and therefore plays an important role in responding to the current
economic crisis and the delivery of the EUs new high-level
strategy, Europe 2020.
Apart from these broad policy objectives another factor highlights the importance of European Regional Policy:
More than one third (34 percent) of the actual budget of the
European Union is spent on regional development and economic and social cohesion. Amounting to 325 billion, it
is the second largest budget item for the period 2014-2020.
2.2
History of EU Regional Policy
In 1957, the authors of the Treaty of Rome defined the

main tasks of the European Community as promoting
unity and harmonious development of economic activities as well as the accelerated rise of the living standard in all member states (Art. 2, Treaty of Rome). These
objectives were to be reached by establishing a large market based on the free movement of goods, people, capital and services. To reduce the economic and social disparities within the Community and its member states,
two sector-based funds, the European Social Fund (ESF)
and the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee
Fund (EAGGF), were set up in 1958. After the creation of
the Directorate General for Regional Policy in 1968, the
Heads of State and Government adopted conclusions in
1972 stating that Regional Policy was an essential factor in strengthening the Community. To stimulate the
endogenous development in the less developed regions
in the Community the European Regional Development
Fund (ERDF) was set up in 1975 for a three-year period. In
1986, the Single European Act paved the way for an integrated Cohesion Policy designed to counterbalance the
burden of the single market for the less-favoured regions
of the Community.
Since the Single European Act and with the background of the second southern enlargement (accession
of Spain and Portugal), the task of reinforcing European economic and social cohesion has become the corollary of a Europe without borders. A key objective for
social and economic cohesion remained the diminution
of regional disparities (Art. 158 TEC). In 1988, the member states decided to double the funds allocated to structural expenditure and concentrate the action of various
structural funds. The first fundamental reform regarding the structural funds adopted by the Council in June
1988 introduced key principles such as focusing on lessfavoured regions, multi-annual programming, strategic orientation of investments and the involvement of
regional and local partners.
15
The Treaty of Maastricht (Treaty on European Union) of

1993 designated cohesion as one of the main objectives of
the Union alongside the Economic and Monetary Union
and the Single Market. The preamble of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) also inserted the principle of solidarity,
another reason for engaging a European Regional Policy.
The European Regional Policy therefore embodies the solidarity of the European Community. The Treaties specify that the European Union should act to strengthen its
economic and social cohesion (Art. 2 TEC) and specifically
work to reduce the gaps among the levels of development
in the different regions of the member states (Art. 158 TEC).
The Maastricht Treaty also established the creation of the
Cohesion Fund (Art. 161, TEC) to support projects in the
fields of environment and transport in the least prosperous member states of the European Union.
The period of 2000 to 2006 was mainly determined
by two topics: the simplification of the design and procedures of Cohesion Policy as well as the preparation for
enlargement of the European Union. A significant reform
of structural policy came along with the Berlin summit
in March 1999, when Heads of State and Government
reached agreement on the Agenda 2000. The resulting
reformed regulations on structural policy have been in
force since 2000. The Cohesion Fund was adjusted at the
same time.
In preparation for the EUs forthcoming eastern
enlargement, Agenda 2000 also provided the introduction of two pre-accession instruments for the period
2000-2006: the Instrument for Structural Policies and
Pre-accession (ISPA) which provided assistance along
the lines of the Cohesion Fund and the Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development
(SAPARD). The SAPARD assisted candidate countries to
prepare for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). These
two instruments complemented the PHARE1 programme,
in 1989 initially created to support reforms and economic
and political transition in Poland and Hungary and later
extended to back institution and capacity-building as well
as investment financing in the applicant countries of the
Western Balkans.
In 2002, the EU set up a European Union Solidarity
Fund (EUSF) to help European regions hit by a major natural disaster. Major catalyst for its creation was to help
rebuild the infrastructure and strengthen the economies
of regions affected by the flooding in Eastern Europe in
summer 2002. Ever since, the EUSF has helped in more
than 55 catastrophic events in 23 different European
countries amounting to more than 3.5 billion Euros.
The 2004 enlargement (from EU-15 to EU-25) was a
historic step for the European Union. Yet, while the EU
population increased by 20 percent, the EUs GDP only
Poland and Hungary: Aid for Restructuring of the Economies
increased by 5 percent. The disparities in terms of income

and employment between old and new member states
were substantial and demanded enhanced efforts for
cohesion. With a national average GDP per head of less
than 50 percent of the EU average, the new member states
became eligible for the highest possible level of support
from the structural and cohesion funds.
Agreed upon by the European Council in Lisbon in
March 2000, the Lisbon Strategy focused on growth,
employment and innovation. With its re-launch at the
end of 2005, Cohesion Policy has been recognized as a
key instrument at the Community level contributing to
the implementation of the growth strategy and the creation of jobs not only because it represents around one
third of the Community budget, but also because strategies designed at local and regional levels must form an
integral part of the effort to promote growth and jobs.
Anticipating the strong differences between the
regions levels of national and regional economic
and social development following the enlargements
2004/2007, the Heads of State and Government adopted
a much higher budget for the period 2007-2013 in December 2003. Approximately 347 billion were allocated to
the structural and cohesion funds. Compared to the previous period (2000-2006), the financial assistance granted
to new member states (on average by year) was 166 percent higher during the 2007-2013 period. As foreseen, the
gap in economic and social development has grown significantly since the enlargements in 2004 and 2007 and
was aggravated by the economic crisis. For example, by
2010 the richest region was Inner London with 290 percent of the EUs per-capita income whereas the northeast
of Romania was the poorest region with only 23 percent
of the EU average.
Overview of the period of 2007-2013

In the period 2007-2013, Cohesion Policy represented 35.7
percent of the total EU budget expenditure (347.41 billion). For this period, the activities of the structural funds
and instruments focused on three objectives of European
Regional Policy:
Objective 1 Convergence
Objective 1 became the priority of the EUs Cohesion Policy.
In accordance with the Nice Treaty, the Union worked to
promote harmonious development and aimed particularly to narrow the gap between the development levels of
the various regions. This is why 81.54 percent of the appropriations of the structural funds were allocated helping
areas lagging behind in their development. In these areas,
16
Figure 1: Regional disparities across EU28 GDP/head (PPS), 2011
Source: Eurostat
the gross domestic product (GDP) was below 75 percent of

the Community average.
Objective 2 - Regional Competitiveness and Employment
Objective 2 addressed areas facing structural difficulties,
including industrial, rural, urban areas or areas dependent on fisheries. Though located in regions whose development level was close to the Community average, such
areas were faced with different types of socio-economic
difficulties that are often a source of high unemployment.
These include the devolution of industrial or service sectors, a decline in traditional activities in rural areas or a
crisis situation in urban areas.
The aim of strengthening competitiveness as well as
employment was pursued through a twofold approach:
First, development programmes helped regions to foster
economic change through innovation and the promotion of knowledge, entrepreneurship, the protection of
the environment, and the improvement of their accessibility. Secondly, the creation of more and better jobs was
supported by adapting the workforce to the new circumstances as well as investing into human resources.
In the EU-27, this objective concerned - within 19
member states - a total of 168 regions with a population
of 314 million inhabitants. Within these, 13 regions with
a total of 19 million inhabitants represent so-called phasing-in areas and received special financial allocations due
to their former status as Objective 1 regions. The amount
of 55 billion of which 11.4 billion were assigned to the
phasing-in regions represented just below 16 percent
of the total amount allocated to European Regional Policy.
17
Objective 3 - European Territorial Cooperation

The European Territorial Cooperation objective was
financed by the European Regional Development Fund
(ERDF) and supported cross-border, transnational and
interregional cooperation programmes. The budget available for this objective (8.7 billion) represented 2.5 percent
of the total allocation for Cohesion Policy during the period
2007-2013, including the allocation for member states participation in EU external border cooperation programmes
supported by other instruments (such as the Instrument
for Pre-accession Assistance or the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument).
The figure below shows how the structural funds and
instruments were attributed to the respective objectives:
Objectives, structural funds and instruments 2007-2013
Objectives
Structural Funds and Instruments
Convergence
ERDF
ESF
Regional Competitiveness and Employment
ERDF
ESF
European Territorial
Cooperation
Cohesion
Fund
ERDF
Source: European Commission, Directorate General Regional Policy
In order to reduce regional disparities between future EU

member states, a new financial pre-accession instrument
was created for the period 2007-2013. Superseding ISPA,
SAPARD and PHARE, the Instrument for Pre-accession
Assistance (IPA) inter alia supported candidate and potential candidate countries in their preparation for the implementation and management of the ERDF, the ESF and the
Cohesion Fund (see chapter 3).
Moreover, since 2013, in addition to social and economic cohesion, territorial cohesion has become an integral part of Cohesion Policy.
Although the 2007-2013 period and its programmes
were fairly effective in reaching the intended aims, the
structure and the procedures were criticized for being
complicated and not sufficiently performance-oriented.
Hence, to simplify the process and the structure, to be better able to monitor the projects based on their performance
and strengthen the responsibility and initiative of the beneficiary states, Cohesion Policy went through a reform process for the period 2014-2020.
2.3

Reform of Cohesion Policy 2014-2020:

Refocusing on Growth and Jobs
EU Cohesion Policy for the current period (2014-2020) has

undergone a substantial reform process, particularly before
the backdrop of the financial and economic crisis. Regional
Policy plays a major role in the response to the crisis and
has been recognized as the main investment policy to
achieve the goals of the Europe 2020 strategy namely to
foster job creation and growth. Moreover, it is set to tackle
climate change, energy dependence and social exclusion.
2.3.1 Legal Basis for the Period 2014-2020
Treaty Articles
TEU Preamble
TEU Art. 3
TEU Art. 174 & 176: Objectives of the European
Community
TFEU Art. 162-164: The European Social Fund
TFEU Art. 174-178: Economic, Social and Territorial Cohesion
The Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and the Council of 17 December 2013 lays down common provisions on the European Regional Development
Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and
the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and sets down
general provisions on the European Regional Development
Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and
the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing
Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, providing the basis
for European Regional Policy for the period 2014-2020. This
regulation is based on TFEU Art. 177, which stipulates that
the Council is to coordinate the structural funds and to
make them more effective with the purpose of meeting
the objectives set out in TEU Art. 174 and 176.
In addition to this general regulation, there are fundspecific regulations such as:
Regulation (EC) No 1301/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the
European Regional Development Fund and on specific
provisions concerning the investment for growth and
jobs goal and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006,
Official Journal of the European Union L 374/289 (20
December 2013).
Regulation (EC) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the
European Social Fund and repealing Council Regula-
18
tion (EC) No 1081/2006, Official Journal of the European Union L 347/470 (20 December 2013).
Regulation (EU) No 1299/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on
specific provisions for the support from the European
Regional Development Fund to the European territorial cooperation goal, Official Journal of the European
Union L 347/259 (20 December 2013).
Regulation (EC) No 1302/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 amending Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 on a European
grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC) as regards
the clarification, simplification and improvement of
the establishment and functioning of such groupings,
December 2013).
Council Regulation (EC) No 1300/2013 of 17 December 2013 on the Cohesion Fund and repealing Council
Regulation (EC) No 1084/2006, Official Journal of the
European Union L 347/281 (20 December 2013).
Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on
support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and
repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005
December 2013).
2.3.2 Common Rules, Objectives and Allocation

34 percent of the EU 2014-2020 budget have been allocated
to Cohesion Policy amounting to 325 billion.
Taking into account the national contributions
through co-financing by member states and the leverage effects of financial instruments, the overall impact of
Cohesion Policy has been calculated to be more than 500
billion. In contrast to the last period, the three objectives
are no longer explicitly mentioned, but the focus rests on
two major goals: investment in growths and jobs and European territorial cooperation.
By investing in all European regions and targeting
resources at key growth sectors, the reform of the Cohesion Policy aims at maximizing the funding impact. Four
key areas of investment have been defined as a framework
in order to achieve the goals of economic growth and job
creation. These are:
Research and innovation
Information and communication technologies
Enhancing the competitiveness of small and mediumsized enterprises
Supporting the shift towards a low-carbon economy
European territorial cooperation remains the second goal
of Cohesion Policy and works as a framework in which
national, regional and local actors from different member states can exchange their experience and develop joint
actions to approach common problems. The goal has gained
increasing importance particularly due to the fact that the
challenges faced by member states increasingly cut across
regional borders and therefore require joint actions.
These investment strategies are stipulated in the Partnership Agreements and Operational Programmes, concluded between the member states and the European Commission. In contrast to the 2007-2013 programming period,
the rules proposed for the 2014-2020 period set the financial instruments up to be non-prescriptive in regards to
sectors, beneficiaries, types of projects and activities that
are supported. Hence, the scope for financial instruments
is widened and member states may use financial instruments in relation to all thematic objectives covered by
Operational Programmes.
A major change to the 2007-2013 period is that the common provision regulation acts as a single programme planning instrument for the European Regional Development
Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF), the Cohesion Fund (CF), the European Agricultural Fund for Rural
Development (EAFRD) and the European Maritime and
Fisheries Fund (EMFF). Under a Common Strategic Framework (CSF) joint rules for capital expenditure allow for better coordination, complementation and less overlap while
at the same time reducing the administrative burden.
Within the CSF, establishing national and regional
objectives and a strategy for its achievement is ultimately
the member countries responsibility.
By setting clear, transparent and measurable aims
and targets for accounting and results, Cohesion Policy
has become more result-oriented and can be easier monitored. Moreover, a regular debate about the use of financial resources is enabled. The performance-measuring
framework also implies the creation of a performance
reserve allowing additional funding for well performing
programmes, which will be reviewed in 2019. In contrast,
failure to achieve milestones or a serious underachievement may even result in the suspension or cancellation of
funds. The fact that the disbursement of funds will only
take place after certain conditions have been established
(ex ante conditions) as well as the releases of additional
funding is made contingent on performance (ex post conditions) underlines the focus on increased performance
and conditionality.
Geographical distribution according to the Cohesion Policy (2014 - 2020)
The reformed Cohesion Policy stipulates that all regions in
Europe benefit from the ESI funds. The level of investment
as well as the national contribution is adapted to the level
19
COHESION POLICY ARCHITECTURE

2007-2013
Objectives
Convergence
ERDF
ESF
2014-2020
Goals
Category of regions
Funds
Investment in growth
and jobs
Less developed
regions
ERDF
ESF
Convergence
phasing out
Transition regions
Regional competitiveness and employment

phasing in
Cohesion Fund
Regional competitiveness and employment
ERDF
ESF
Cooperation
ERDF
Cohesion Fund
More developed
regions
Cooperation
ERDF
ESF
ERDF
Source: European Commission, Directorate General for Regional Policy
of regional development in order to ensure the concentration of the funds according to the GDP. Therefore, three
categories of regions have been determined:
Less developed regions (GDP < 75% of EU-27 average)
Transitional regions (GDP 75% to 90% of EU-27 average)
More developed regions (GDP > 90% of EU-27 average)
2.4 European Structural and Investment Funds

(ESI Funds)
Within the financial framework for 2014-2020, the main
instruments of the European Regional Policy are:
the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
the European Social Fund (ESF)
the Cohesion Fund (CF)
the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)
the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF).
The ERDF, the ESF and the Cohesion Funds are the three
funds under Cohesion Policy. Every region may benefit
from the ESF and the ERDF. However, only the least developed regions are eligible for support from the Cohesion
Fund.
Through the Common Provisions Regulation all three
funds are now subject to the same rules of programming,
management and monitoring.
2.4.1 The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)

The ERDF was created in 1975 and is managed by the
Regional Policy Directorate General. It works to achieve
economic, social and territorial cohesion by correcting
imbalances between regions. For the 2014-2020 period, the
resources of the ERDF are concentrated on four key priorities for economic growth and job creation:
research and innovation;
information and communication technologies (ICT)
implying the investment in ICT infrastructure, access
to high-speed broadband in remote regions, development and upgrade of ICT tools;
competitiveness of SMEs; and
supporting the shift towards a low-carbon economy.
To ensure that EU investments are concentrated on these
priority areas, minimum allocations are set depending on
the category of the region. For example, in more developed
regions at least 80 percent of the funds must focus on at
least two of these priorities, while in transition regions this
focus is for 60 percent of the funds. Less developed regions
have a wider scope of investment priorities to choose from,
reflecting their wider development needs. Nevertheless, 50
percent of the ERDF resources still have to be devoted to
the four priorities mentioned above.
Around 100 billion are dedicated to the priorities
for the period of 2014-2020, of which at least 23 billion
support the shift to a low-carbon economy. This implies
themes such as renewable energy, energy efficiency and
clean urban transport.
20
Moreover, the urban dimension of Cohesion Policy has

been enhanced and a minimum amount of ERDF resources
has to be spent on integrated projects in cities.
2.4.2 The European Social Fund (ESF)
The European Social Fund was created in 1957. Over time
it has become the main financial tool through which the
European Union aims to improve employment by investing in human capital. In the current economic crisis, the
ESF is playing an important role in mitigating its consequences most importantly the rise of unemployment and
poverty. The ESF investments target all EU regions and are
ensured through a minimum guaranteed share of the ESF
within the Cohesion Policy in each member state. For the
period between 2014 and 2020, more than 80 billon have
been allocated to the investment in human capital including 3 billion for the Youth Employment Initiative.
The ESF covers four thematic objectives throughout
the Union:
1. Promoting employment and supporting labour mobility;
2. Promoting social inclusion and combating poverty;

3. Investing in education, skills and lifelong learning;
4. Enhancing institutional capacity and an efficient public administration.
In line with the EUs commitment for inclusive growth,
in each member state at least 20 percent of the EFS should
target to promote social inclusion and combat poverty. In
order to increase the impact of funding, the current period
the ESF concentrates its interventions on the following
limited number of priorities:
to boost the adaptability of workers with new skills and
enterprises with new ways of working;
to improve the access to employment, in particular facilitating the transition from school to work for
young people, or by training less skilled job-seekers
to improve their job prospects. This also implies an
increased emphasize on vocational training and lifelong learning opportunities; and
to help disadvantaged people form groups to get jobs.
Figure 4: Structural Fund (ERDF and ESF) eligibility 2014-2020
21
2.4.3 The Cohesion Fund (CF)

The Cohesion Fund was established in 1994 as part of the
implementation of the Maastricht Treaty. It was mainly
created to assist the least prosperous countries of the Union
in meeting the Convergence Criteria of the Economic and
Monetary Union (EMU). Cohesion Fund aid is made available to member states where the Gross National Product (GNP) is less than 90 percent of the Community average. Thus, the fund is not linked to wealth at the regional
level but at the national level measured in GDP per capita.
Therefore, only the poorest countries but not compara-
tively wealthy countries like the UK or Germany with poor

regions benefit from this catching-up fund.
With the EU enlargement on 1 May 2004, all new
member states qualified for the CF and became its main
recipients: one third of the funding was reserved for them
between 2004 and 2006. When Croatia acceded to the EU
in 2013, it became directly eligible for support from the
Cohesion Fund. For the period of 2014-2020 the following
member states receive Cohesion Fund assistance: Bulgaria,
Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania,
Slovakia and Slovenia.
Figure 5: Cohesion Fund eligibility 2014-2020
22
Figure 6: Total allocations of Cohesion Policy 2014-2020* (million , 2011 prices)
ERDF and ESF
ERDF
Special
Cohesion
Fund
Less
developed
regions
allocation for
Transition
outermost
regions
and sparsely
populated
More
developed
regions
Territorial
Cooperation
Total
regions
BE
962
868
231
2.061
BG
2.384
4.623
145
7.153
CZ
6.562
13.646
79
298
20.585
DK
64
230
199
494
DE
8.750
7.609
847
17.207
EE
1.123
2.198
49
3.369
IE
869
148
1.017
EL
3.407
6.420
2.105
2.307
203
14.443
ES
1.858
12.201
432
10.084
542
25.116
FR
3.147
3.927
395
5.862
956
14.288
HR
2.676
5.225
128
8.029
IT
20.333
1.004
7.006
998
29.341
CY
286
388
29
703
LV
1.412
2.742
82
4.236
LT
2.145
4.189
100
6.434
LU
39
18
57
HU
6.313
13.452
416
318
20.498
MT
228
441
15
684
NL
908
342
1.250
AT
66
823
226
1.114
PL
24.274
45.917
2.017
615
72.823
PT
3.000
15.008
232
103
1.148
108
19.599
RO
7.251
13.773
405
397
21.826
SI
939
1.134
763
55
2.891
SK
4.361
8.489
40
196
13.086
FI
272
911
142
1.325
SE
184
1.355
300
1.840
UK
2.126
2.335
5.144
760
10.364
500
500
interregional
cooperation
Total
66.362
164.279
32.085
1.387
49.271
8.948
322.332
23
The CF supports two types of actions:
Investments in the field of environment to support the
shift towards a low-carbon economy in all sectors, to
promote climate change adaption and to preserve and
protect the environment and promote resource efficiency.
Support to infrastructure projects related to the European transport (TEN-T) networks, notably to priority
projects of European interest that are supported by
the member states. In addition, the Fund contributes
to investments in low-carbon transport systems and
urban transport.
The current applicant countries cannot take part in the

Cohesion Policy and they do not have access to structural
funds and instruments before accession. The promotion
of economic and social development and environmental
protection is, however, one of the objectives of pre-accession aid for applicant countries. The Instrument for Preaccession Assistance (IPA) directly prepares candidate and
potential candidate countries for the successful management of structural instruments. In this respect, structural
instruments can be considered as a direct continuation of
assistance granted under IPA a topic that will be discussed in the following chapter.
The CF may also be used to finance studies and measures

related to technical assistance in connection with these
two types of actions.
NUTS a three-level hierarchical classification

The whole European Union is covered by one or several objectives of the Cohesion Policy. To determine eligibility for
aid from the respective funds, the Commission bases its decision on statistical data. Europe is divided into various
groups of regions corresponding to the classification known by the acronym NUTS (common nomenclature of territorial units for statistics).
Since this is a hierarchical classification, the NUTS subdivides each member state into a whole number of NUTS 1
regions, each of which is in turn subdivided into a whole number of NUTS 2 regions and so on. At the regional level
(without taking municipalities into account), the administrative structure of the member states generally comprises
two main regional levels (Lnder and Kreise in Germany, rgions and dpartements in France, Comunidades autonomas and provincias in Spain, regioni and provincie in Italy, etc.).
The grouping of comparable units at each NUTS level involves for each member state establishing an additional regional
level to the two main levels referred to above. This additional level therefore corresponds to a less important or even
non-existent administrative structure, and its classification level varies within the first 3 levels of the NUTS depending
entirely on the member state: NUTS 1 for France, Italy, Greece, and Spain, NUTS 2 for Germany, NUTS 3 for Belgium, etc.
The NUTS Regulation lays down the following minimum and maximum thresholds for the average size of the NUTS
regions:

Minimum
Maximum
NUTS 1
NUTS 2
NUTS 3
3 million
800 000
150 000
7 million
3 million
800 000.
The current NUTS classification is valid from 1 January 2012 until 31 December 2014. It determines 97 regions at NUTS
1, 270 regions at NUTS 2 and 1294 regions at NUTS 3 level.
24
2.5
Notes for the Trainer
Possible activities
Distribute prepared cards with the objectives of Cohesion
Policy and ask the groups to put them in some sort of hierarchical order. Each group can then justify the order they
chose and open this to a general discussion.
Discuss the following questions in class:
What is the purpose and what are the main objectives
of EU Regional Policy?
What measures aim at achieving these objectives?
What are the priorities of EU Cohesion Policy for the
financing period of 2014-2020?
2.6
Suggested Readings
For those who are interested in further reading, literature

and specific internet links are listed below:
Treaty law
The basic legal texts on which regional policy is based (regulations, delegated acts, implementing acts, guidance, etc.)
are available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/legislation/regulations/ and
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/chapter/regional_policy.html?root_default=SUM_1_CODED=26
Other documents
European Commission: Strategic report 2013 on programme implementation 2007-2013 http://ec.europa.eu/
regional_policy/how/policy/doc/strategic_report/2013/
strat_report_2013_en.pdf
Internet
To receive overall information on EU Regional Policy:
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/index_en.htm
You can get detailed information on the programming
period 2014-2020 under: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/how/priorities
The European Commissions Directorate General for
Regional Policy has developed a Policy Learning Database
with case studies, ex-post evaluation reports and summaries of RegioStars. You can search by sector and subsector, member states and project contacts under: http://
ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/projects/best-practices/
The European Commissions Directorate General for

Regional Policy has a free mailing list you can join at:
www.inforegiodoc.eu/mailinglist/faces/welcome.jsp
You then receive information leaflets, learn about new
developments and are sent the monthly newsletter Inforegio News.
Literature
Allen, David (2005): Cohesion and Structural Funds, in:
Wallace, H., Wallace W., Pollack, M. (eds.) Policy-Making
in the European Union, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bache, Ian; Andreou, George; Atanasova, Gorica & Tomsic, Danijel (2011): Europeanization and multi-level governance in south-east Europe: the domestic impact of EU
cohesion policy and pre-accession aid. Journal of European
Public Policy, Volume 18, Issue 1, p.122-141.
Bache, Ian (2011): Europeanization and Multi-level governance, in Bache, I. and Andreou, G. (eds). Cohesion Policy
and Multi-level Governance in South East Europe, Oxford:
Routledge.
Baldwin, Richard (2012): Chapter 10 - Location effects, economic geography and regional policy. In: Economics of
European Integration. Fourth edition, New York: McgrawHill Publ.Comp.
McCann, Philip and Ortega-Argils, Raquel (2014): Transforming European regional policy: a result-driven agenda
and smart specialization. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 29, Issue 2, pp.405-431.
McCann, Philip and Ortega-Argils, Raquel (2013): Redesigning and Reforming European Regional policy: The Reasons, the logic and the outcomes. International Regional
Science Review, Volume 36, Issue 3, pp. 424-445.
evaluation
sector approach
PRAG guidelines

action documents
IPA II REGULATION
enlargement
programming
25

project proposal
CHAPTER
03
IPA II - The Pre-accession Financial

Instrument for 2014-2020

a detailed overview of the Instrument for Pre-accession
Assistance (IPA II) particularly with regard to its objectives, its political and financial framework and the programming process;
useful links to original documents, further information
on IPA II
26
3 IPA II - The Pre-accession Financial Instrument

for 2014-2020
3.1
Introduction
On 1 January 2014, the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) II was introduced as the new EU financial tool
for the Communitys activities to support candidate and
potential candidate countries in their preparation for
accession in the period 2014-2020. IPA II constitutes the
continuation of IPA I from 2007-2013 which was conceived
to bring these countries closer to the EU in economic, political and legal terms. Under IPA, a broad range of financial
support for various types of projects in the fields of institution building, human rights, civil society, agriculture,
etc. was made possible in order to back their path towards
EU membership and eventually prepare them for acceding to the Union.
Financial assistance under IPA is provided to two types
of beneficiary countries: potential candidate countries and
candidate countries. Candidate country status is granted
on the day the European Council accepts a countrys application for membership in the European Union. Potential
candidate countries find themselves at an earlier stage in
the accession process as they may apply for EU membership in the future. At present, Albania, Turkey, the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), Serbia, Montenegro and Iceland are candidate countries; Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo* are potential candidate countries.
All in all, these 8 beneficiary countries are eligible for EU
pre-accession funding in the period 2014-2020.
The overall policy objective of IPA II is to support candidate countries and potential candidate countries in their
preparation for EU membership and the progressive alignment of their institutions and economies with the standards and policies of the European Union. This support is
always related to the needs of the individual beneficiary
countries and adapted to their specific EU approximation
agendas. Through IPA, the EU assists the beneficiary countries in aligning themselves to the standards and policies
of the European Union in the perspective of a future membership. In other words, the general aim of IPA is to help
beneficiary countries in their efforts to meet the accession
criteria.
Besides this general objective, IPA II aims at supporting political reforms in the beneficiary countries as well
as their economic, social and territorial development in
the light of inclusive growth. In addition, another specific
objective of pre-accession funding is to bolster regional

integration and territorial cooperation among the beneficiary countries so as to prepare them for joining the European Union as the ultimate goal of their individual accession paths.
Furthermore, candidate countries and potential candidate countries are expected to be able to meet the set
of common rules, standards and policies of the European
Union. These are embodied in the term acquis communautaire or Community acquis (French for that which
has been acquired).
The acquis is constantly evolving and includes:
the content, principles and political objectives of the
treaties on which the Union is founded;
legislation and decisions adopted in application of the
treaties, and the case law of the Court of Justice;
other acts, legally binding or not (e.g. declarations, resolutions), adopted by the European Union;
measures relating to the Common Foreign and Security
Policy;
measures relating to Justice and Home Affairs;
international agreements concluded by the Community, the Community jointly with it`s member states,
the Union, and those concluded by the member states
among themselves with regard to Union activities.
In order to become a member state, applicant countries
must accept the acquis, transpose it into their national legislation and implement it upon accession. Specific arrangements in limited scope may be agreed on only in exceptional circumstances.
IPA helps beneficiary countries to meet all these criteria. With IPA funding, candidate countries are prepared
to fully adopt and implement the acquis communautaire.
Furthermore, these countries are supported in preparing
themselves to effectively implement and manage the structural and cohesion funds (see chapter 2: European Regional
Policy) which will be available for them once they join the
EU. Hence, IPA constitutes a link between pre-accession
preparation and post-accession challenges.
27
What exactly are the accession criteria?

Meeting the accession criteria is a prerequisite for all candidate countries to become a member state of the European Union. As they were decided at the Copenhagen
European Council in 1993, they are also known as Copenhagen Criteria. To join the EU, an applicant country must
meet three criteria:
1. Political criterion: stability of institutions to guarantee democracy, the rule of law and respect for human
rights including the rights of minorities;
2. Economic criterion: the existence of a functioning
market economy as well as the capacity to cope with
competition and market forces;
3. acquis-related criterion: the adoption of common
rules, standards and policies that form the so-called
Community acquis.
IPA assistance for potential candidate countries especially

promotes their alignment to the Community acquis. Thus,
IPA funding focuses on social, economic and territorial
development as well as the creation of necessary financial
accounting and audit systems.
3.2 Political Framework of Pre-accession

Funding
Pre-accession funding operates within a framework of
agreements devised for the EU approximation of the applicant countries for European membership. The EUs policy towards the Western Balkan countries is governed by
the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP). Initiated
in 1999, the SAP aims at delivering stabilisation and providing a swift transition to a market economy. It also promotes regional cooperation and the prospect of EU accession. The SAP process makes the perspective of a future
membership conditional on the introduction of basic elements of good governance and societal, legal or economic
reforms.
The main element of the process is the conclusion of a
Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA). The SAA
provides a framework of mutual commitments on a wide
range of political, trade and economic issues between the
EU and each Western Balkan country. The SAAs embody a
choice for Europe by the Western Balkan countries and the
membership perspective offered to them by the EU. Such
agreements have been concluded with each of these countries and represent a far-reaching contractual relationship
with the EU including mutual rights and obligations.
The concrete policy and programming framework
for the Communitys pre-accession activities channelled
through IPA is constituted by the European Partnerships
(for potential candidate countries) and the Accession Partnerships (for candidate countries). The European Partnerships and the Accession Partnerships together with annual
Progress Reports and the Commissions annual strategy
document form the enlargement package adopted each
year by the Commission and presented to the Council and
the European Parliament.
Accession Partnerships are an instrument of the Communitys pre-accession strategy. They are designed to guide
and assist the candidate countries in their efforts to achieve
the accession criteria, in particular to implement the Community acquis. In one document per country, they determine specific priorities in order to facilitate the preparation
for EU accession. Thus, they constitute the framework for
pre-accession assistance from Community funds.
European Partnerships have been set up for the potential candidate countries within the framework of the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP). Following the
logic of the Accession Partnerships, they define priority
actions for potential candidate countries and the financial structure needed to improve stability and prosperity
in the Western Balkans and to approach the EU. Furthermore, they outline the financial and technical assistance
the EU provides for the potential candidate countries in
the course of alignment with the EU acquis.
The strategy document highlights the Commissions
policy on EU enlargement. This annually published document reviews the progress made by the candidate and
potential candidate countries over the last year. It defines
priorities as well as recommendations for further development of each country to be met in the following year. Published together with the strategy document, the Progress
Reports of the European Commission contain information
about the progress achieved by candidate and potential
candidate countries in their preparation for EU membership over the last twelve months.
Being conceived as a flexible instrument within the
context of pre-accession, IPA assistance depends on the
evolution and needs of the beneficiary countries as well as
their individual progress towards EU accession. Taking into
account the strategy document and the annual progress
reports of the European Commission, IPA II thus allows
to detect new priorities and make necessary adjustments.
A central document of the financial framework of each
country is the Framework Agreement. In this agreement
concluded between the European Commission and the
beneficiary country for the entire programming period,
provisions regarding management, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of financial assistance are stipulated.
For each beneficiary country, it also specifies the provisions of the legal and regulatory framework. The Framework Agreement applies to all financial assistance from the
EU in the beneficiary country and IPA cannot be granted
if the Agreement has not entered into force.
28
3.3
Lessons Learnt from IPA I
During the implementation phase of IPA I from 20072013 (see box below for information on its programme
structure), the European Commission initiated a series of
interim and mid-term evaluations of pre-accession funding in order to successfully assess the IPA approach and
prepare the next phase of funding which was scheduled
to start in 2014.
Stakeholder consultations and structured dialogues
with beneficiaries brought about several results which
were used to reshape assistance to applicant countries
from 2014-2020. The overall aim of these evaluations
was to offer a more tailor-made approach for beneficiary countries in order to accomplish planned goals and
impacts. The most important findings of the stakeholder
consultation and ex-ante evaluation of IPA I were the
following:
Institutional ownership: most IPA I projects were prepared by a small group of specialists in government
institutions instead of involving a broader community of experts. This hindered the relevance of these
projects on national policy agendas.
Annual programming: projects were programmed
for one year in which a wide range of objectives in a
given policy area was targeted. In successive years, follow-up projects rarely addressed these objectives but
rather defined new ones. Therefore, projects lacked
continuity and were poorly sequenced to meet overarching policy objectives.
Project indicators and targets: project targets were set
too broad with unsuitable indicators. Following this,
it was seldom possible to assess the impact and results
of projects by means of evidence-based indicators.
Key findings of the Progress Report 2013 for Bosnia and Herzegovina
Political criteria
Bosnia and Herzegovina has made very limited progress in addressing the political criteria for membership in the EU. The
EU has engaged in intensive facilitation efforts to help the countrys political representatives to find common ground
for implementing the Sejdi-Finci judgement. This issue has also been the focus of discussions of the EU-BiH High Level
Dialogue on the Accession Process. This judgement needs to be implemented as a matter of urgency in order to have
the amendments of the constitution and election law in place by April 2014 at the latest, in time for the next general
elections. An EU coordination mechanism between the State, the Entities and the Brko District for the transposition,
implementation and enforcement of EU laws remains to be established as a matter of urgency to enable the country to
speak to the EU with one voice and to make effective use of EU funds under the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance.
Economic criteria
Bosnia and Herzegovina has made little further progress towards a functioning market economy. Considerable further
reform efforts need to be pursued to enable the country to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within
the Union over the long-term. The authorities need to improve the quality of public finances as well as fiscal reporting.
The authorities furthermore need to develop a pension reform in the Federation and implement it with a clear timetable. Reinvigorated privatisation would have the potential to improve the fiscal situation and bring about more competition in the economy. The private sector needs to be supported by a sound business environment, most notably by
improving contract enforcement and establishing a single economic space in the country. The informal sector remains
an important challenge.
EU legislation
There is very limited progress as regards approximation to EU law and standards. This concerns in particular the fields
of veterinary and food safety, competition, public procurement, energy, environment, climate change and transport. In
other areas such as rural development or regional policy there is little progress due to the lack of agreement on the relevant country-wide strategies. In some cases appointments for important bodies are not made, what is hampering legislative progress. Other institutions, such as the State Aid Council, have been suffering from a lack of financial resources
and couldnt function properly. One of the few positive exceptions is the area of intellectual, industrial and commercial
property rights where preparations to align with EU standards are advanced. Bosnia and Herzegovina is the only country
in the region which has not aligned its legislation to the 2004 EU directives on public procurement. It is now expected
to do so as a matter of urgency.
Source: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-889_de.htm
29
Differentiation between beneficiary countries: While

candidate countries have entered a more advanced
stage in the accession process than potential candidate countries, the fact that the latter were kept from
accessing funds from components III, IV and V was
not conducive to their EU approximation process. IPA
I lacked the possibility of a tailor-made approach to
pre-accession funding.
Project-based assistance: projects often lacked strategic

focus in attaining overarching goals of policy areas and
whole sectors. Rather, a number of different projects
were set-up in one policy area but did not interrelate to
achieve a common aim in this specific policy area and
the general advancement of the beneficiary countrys
EU approximation process.
Key elements of IPA 2007 - 2013

In 2007, IPA was developed by the European Commission as the central pre-accession tool of financial support to the candidate countries and potential candidate countries for EU accession. It replaced all previously existing instruments such as
PHARE, ISPA, SAPARD, CARDS and the Turkish pre-accession aid and aimed at unifying all financing instruments under
only one programme. Beneficiary countries were supported in five components, each covering one or more policy areas:
Component I: Transition Assistance and Institution-Building (TAIB) focused on capacity and institution-building
measures and was the principal IPA component. Within this component, the alignment with the acquis communautaire
was promoted, with the aim to support administrative and judicial capacity, democratic institutions and the transition
towards a functioning market economy.
Component II: Cross-border Cooperation (CBC) addressed the improvement of cooperation at borders between member states and beneficiary countries as well as among beneficiary countries, especially at the borders of (potential) candidate countries in the Western Balkans. It aimed at advancing good neighbourly relations, tackling common challenges
and strengthening security, prosperity and stability.
Within Component III: Regional Development, the beneficiary countries were prepared for the implementation and
management of the European Regional Fund and the Cohesion Fund. It offered investments and technical assistance in
the areas of transport, environment and economic development.
Component IV: Human Resources Development supported the preparations for the Communitys social Cohesion Policy and in particular the European Social Fund (ESF). The development of human capital and the battle against exclusion were key aspects of this component.
Component V: Rural Development built upon the Special Accession Programme for Agricultural and Rural Development (SAPARD) and was designed to support the beneficiaries preparation of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)
and related policies.
IPA differentiated between two types of beneficiary countries, namely candidate countries and potential candidate
countries. Candidate country status is granted the day the European Council officially accepts a countrys application
for membership in the European Union. Potential candidate countries are countries that may apply for EU membership
at a later stage. Two main differences between the two types of beneficiary countries were identified which made the
differentiation plausible: First, differences exist regarding the administrative, programming and management capacity of the countries as candidate countries have already demonstrated their ability to manage EU accession funds under
decentralized management systems. Second, candidate countries urgently needed to prepare the management of the EU
Structural and Cohesion Funds. Therefore, under IPA all beneficiary countries were eligible for support under the first
two components (TAIB and CBC), whereas only candidate countries received funding from components III, IV and V.
IPA funding between 2007-2013 amounted to 11,5 billion or roughly 1.3 percent of the EU financial framework for
this period. The beneficiary countries of IPA were: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), Croatia, the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), Iceland, Kosovo*, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey.
30
From 2010 onwards, these findings were incorporated in

the process of drafting the new IPA II regulation in order
to improve the EUs pre-accession funding and make the
IPA instrument more adaptable to stakeholders interests
while maintaining the steering function of the European
Commission.
3.4
IPA II Key Elements
For the period 2014-2020, approximately 14.1 billion

(2011 prices) have been earmarked for the implementation of pre-accession funding. This represents roughly 1.4
percent of the entire EU budget for the current financial
framework and constitutes a slight increase in funding
and percentage of the whole budget compared to the previous financial framework from 2007-2013. In addition,
less beneficiary countries have to share this amount as
Croatia joined the EU in July 2013 and therefore does not
belong to the pre-accession financing framework anymore.
The new IPA II can be seen as a continuation of the former instrument with similar resources, with the aim to
maintain the scope but adjust implementation arrangements. These adjustments are largely the result of the consultation process with stakeholders as well as the internal
mid-term evaluation. In effect, IPA II is designed to ensure
continuity and transition from IPA I, to operate under simplified and harmonised rules and to facilitate the access to
funding for beneficiaries. Some novelties were introduced
to ensure this simplification and harmonisation, the most
important of which will be explained in the following.
The Commission initiated the possibility of multi-annual

programming in the framework of IPA II. This change is
planned to bring about a more strategic and long-term
planning in pre-accession funding. As mentioned above,
one of the main deficiencies of IPA I was that it only allowed
for annual programming. This resulted in the problem that
projects implemented in the same policy area but in different years were poorly sequenced and not strategically
intertwined. In the context of IPA II, it is now possible to
plan both annual and multiannual projects to address this
problem.
Another central aspect of IPA II is the dissolution of the
five components which existed in IPA I. These components
are changed into the following policy areas:
Reforms in preparation for Union membership and
related institution and capacity-building
Socio-economic and regional development
Employment, social policies, education, promotion of
gender equality, and human resources development
Agriculture and rural development
Regional and territorial cooperation
Another central change is that in IPA II, there is no longer a
differentiation between beneficiary countries with regard
to the funding in certain components or policy areas. This
aims at making pre-accession more tailor-made to the
needs and capacities of each beneficiary country independently of its status as candidate country or potential
candidate country.
Generally, pre-accession assistance under IPA II is more
result-oriented than preceding programmes and frameworks. A lasting impact in the several policy areas of the
The regulatory framework of IPA II

The Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance in the financing period from 2014 to 2020 has been established by the
following three central legal documents:
1. The IPA II Regulation 231/2014 constitutes the main legislative framework for pre-accession assistance in this period.
It sets the overall framework as well as general principles of assistance. Thereby, it lays down the general and specific objectives of IPA II and defines policy areas eligible for funding as well as the most important strategic planning processes. The Council Regulation 231/2014 is available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/
PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R0231&qid=1395920279290&from=EN
2. The Common Implementing Rules for External Action (236/2014) are not only relevant for IPA II, but also for any
other financing instrument of EU external relations. This document includes harmonised rules of implementation
for these financing instruments, including IPA II. It specifies the format of programmes and the types of financing.
The Common Implementing Rules for External Action 236/2014 are available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R0236&rid=8
3. The Financial Regulation and its Rules of Application are the main point of reference for the principles and procedures governing the establishment and implementation of the EU budget and the control of the European Communitys finances. In the context of IPA II, it is relevant as it defines the essential elements of a Financing Decision and
Actions. The Financial Regulation is available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:201
2:298:0001:0096:EN:PDF
31
beneficiary countries and their EU approximation agendas is foreseen by means of stipulating meaningful and
realistic indicators and achievable project goals. In addition, IPA II also includes a performance element which
rewards beneficiary countries for good performance and
allows for more flexibility in the allocation and distribution of pre-accession funding. Furthermore, the ownership
of projects is to be increased by broadening the relevance
of projects within the policy areas and strengthening their
inclusiveness.
Incrementally, the project-based character of IPA I is
progressively changed towards a sector-based approach of
IPA II. The sector approach constitutes the guiding principle of pre-accession funding from 2014-2020 and will be
presented in-depth in the following section.
3.5
The Sector Approach and its Application
Over the programming period 2014-2020, the European

Commission expects the beneficiary countries to augment their potentials of funding in national sector policies and strategies. Therefore, it is inevitable to build up
the administrative capacities and arrangements for the
implementation of sector-based instead of mere projectbased financial assistance. Yet, the project-based approach
will not be entirely abolished. This is due to the fact that
the sector approach is not feasible and appropriate with
regard to each and every part of the enlargement agendas, e.g. with regard to the very specialized and technical
parts of the acquis.
As a result, it aims at increasing the coherence between
sector policy, government spending and the achievement
of measurable results and impacts. Before programming
actions in a given sector in a beneficiary country, it first
needs to be assessed whether this sector is suitable for the
sector approach in IPA II. This assessment is based on the
evaluation of the following five criteria.
However, these criteria can already be quite difficult to
Key criteria to asses the possibility of

adopting the sector approach
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Sector identification
Institutional setting and capacity
Sector coordination
Sector budget and mid-term financial planning
Sector performance monitoring system
In addition, two criteria can be of importance when

Budget Support applies:
6. Public financial management
7. Macro-economic framework
fulfil. Due to the different financial and political situations in the beneficiary countries, the Commission
decided that there cannot be a one-size-fits-all approach
in pre-accession funding. Therefore, the following three
criteria are essential and must be in place in a beneficiary
country in order to assess whether its on the way for the
application of the sector approach:
1. The existence of a national sector policy and strategy
and a medium-term budget or a commitment by the
government to either elaborate or refine these.
2. A lead institution/ministry responsible for the sector/
sub-sector.
3. The existence of a functional sector coordination
framework or a commitment by the government that
steps are going to be taken towards its development.
Nonetheless, an increasing proportion of pre-accession
assistance is delivered to sector-approach-based rather
than to stand-alone projects. The sector approach is
defined as a process which broadens government and
national ownership over public sector policy and decisions on resource allocation within the defined sector.
3.5.1 Sector Definition
As a first criterion, a sector needs to be clearly defined
and identified for the sector approach. A sector can be
defined as a delimited area of public policy addressing a
fairly homogenous set of challenges by using dedicated
resources (staff and budget) under the authority of a competent member of the government.
Governance &
rule of law
Competitiveness &
growth
1 Democracy and governance (focus on

public administration
reform, public finance
management, economic governance, protection of minorities,
incl. Roma, freedom of
the media, fight against
corruption and organised crime, etc.)
2 Rule of Law and fundamental rights
3 Environment and
climate action
4 Transport
5 Energy
6 Competitiveness and
innovation
7 Education, employment and social policies
8 Agriculture and rural
development
9 Regional cooperation
and territorial cooperation
32
As funding in IPA II will be structured along the five policy areas mentioned above, they serve as a starting point
to identify possible sectors. For example, in the first policy area Transition Assistance and Capacity Building,
the sectors of Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights could
be identified, whereas the second policy area Regional
Development could incorporate the Transport or Environment sectors. However, this example has to be seen as
indicative as the definition and identification of sectors
lies within the responsibility of the beneficiary countries.
Some characteristics for the identification of suitable sectors are
A sector is specifically defined by the government as
well as relevant for the EU accession agenda of the
beneficiary country
A sector should be wide enough to make a contribution to this agenda and at the same time narrow
enough to ensure a focus for funding
A clearly established institutional framework exists
within the sector, e.g. one lead national institution is
in charge
Link to national budget of beneficiary country
An additional element of the sector definition is that a
sector policy and strategy is in place. This is the crucial
aspect to decide whether a sector is suitable for the sector
approach in pre-accession funding. Such a sector policy
should lay down government objectives and goals for a
mid-term (3-4 years) and long-term (5+ years) perspective.
A sector strategy indicates the governments implementation of these objectives, i.e. the sector policy. The readiness of a country to implement the sector approach should
be decided on in a sector-level dialogue between the lead
national institution and the European Commission.
3.5.2 Institutional Setting and Capacity
As second relevant criterion, the capacity to implement
the sector approach is central for its adoption. Therefore, the identification of the institutional setting and the
administrative capacity within the sector are essential.
Mainly but not exclusively, this relates to the analysis of
the capacities of the leading national institution within
a sector, most notably the responsible national ministry.
The existence of a lead ministry is considered to be one of
the key criteria for the successful introduction of the sector approach. The leading institution should coordinate
the donors and relevant stakeholders within the sector
the preparation of the national Sector Support Programme
the implementation of IPA-funded support
the collection and analysis of monitoring data (indicators)
3.5.3 Sector Budget and Mid-term Financial Planning

As a fourth element, a comprehensive and transparent
sector budget as well as mid-term financial planning is
essential for the application of the sector approach in IPA
II. This budget should contain both internal (i.e. national)
as well as external (i.e. international donors) resources
within the given sector. The sector budget has to be identified in the national state budget. The financial planning
is to be made available on an annual as well as mid-term
(3-5 years) basis which ideally should take the form of
a Medium-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF). Especially the mid-term perspective of financial planning is
of importance as the ensuing Sector Action Programmes
are predominantly multi-annual in scope. This ensures
continuity in financial planning as well as the logical
sequencing of actions within a sector and contributes to
the Commissions goal of improving the strategic scope
of pre-accession funding.
3.5.4 Sector Performance Monitoring
As the last essential element of identifying a sector suitable for the sector approach, a performance monitoring
system should be in place in the given sector. Performance
monitoring contains the testing of the achievement of
policy objectives and targets by means of indicators
describing the implementation on four levels:
inputs: financial and human resources provided
outputs: resource utilization (activities carried out)
results: benefits for direct beneficiaries
impacts: wider benefits beyond direct beneficiaries.
In contrast to sector-based assistance, project-based
assistance focuses on the first two levels while the wider
impacts and the achievement of policy objectives are
not its focal points. Therefore, by introducing the sector
approach, the European Commission plans to emphasize
the measurement on the levels of results and impacts, to
make pre-accession assistance more result and impactoriented.
Besides these five essential elements of adopting the sector approach, two additional criteria can be important as
well: First, sound public financial management as a key
factor in determining the allocation of financial resources
in a sector. Second, the macroeconomic framework can be
analysed to identify the potentials of funding in a country and to assess the stability of financial inputs against
outputs. However, these two criteria are only essential in
situations where the Budget Support will be the chosen
financial modality.
33
3.6 Strategic Planning and Programming of IPA

II Assistance
The strategic and coherent approach of IPA II is structured along different levels in the process of drafting
actions for pre-accession funding. At the top of this process ranks the development of the key strategic planning
document, the Country or Multi-Country Strategy Paper
(CSP) which is the prerequisite in the programming process of IPA II in each beneficiary country. In the following,
the different stages of this process and the corresponding
planning documents will be briefly introduced.
3.6.1 The Strategic Planning and Programming
Documents
The Country Strategy Paper (CSP) is a multi-annual
document defining the scope and use of pre-accession
assistance under IPA II for each beneficiary country. In
these papers, the general guidelines, principles, criteria and indicators of pre-accession assistance, stipulated
in Annex II or the IPA II Regulation, are broken down
and applied to the individual situation of the beneficiary
countries. They lay down the priorities for funding in
each sector while including an allocation of pre-accession
assistance per year and policy area. The Country Strategy Papers are the key element in strengthening a more
result-oriented approach of IPA II by setting targets to
be reached by EU funding in each policy area including
the approach to reach these targets and the indicators to
evaluate performance and achievements. The CSP covers the whole financing period and contains a mid-term
review. It is prepared by DG NEAR as well as the EU Delegation in the beneficiary country in close collaboration
with the national IPA coordinator (NIPAC).
As the sector approach presented in the preceding
section constitutes the guiding principle of pre-accession assistance, a national Sector Programme or an IPAspecific Sector Planning Document (SPD) serves, next to
the CSP, as a starting point for the programming of IPA
II assistance. If a sector is already mature in the sense of
the sector assessment and a national sector strategy is in
place, this national Sector Programme can be used to plan
concrete actions under IPA assistance.
In case this national strategy is not existent, the Sector Planning Document can be used. The Sector Planning
Document is a multi annual document which assesses the
sector maturity of a given sector in a beneficiary country and specifies the actions planned within this sector. It
includes an overview of the sector and the sector assessment as well as a sequencing of IPA actions with a mid-
term and long-term perspective. Based on these actions,

the SPD is updated on a regular basis; therefore, it is a living document which will gradually address the missing
elements of the sector approach which ideally have been
identified to requiring further development. The SPD is
prepared by beneficiary authorities in close collaboration
with DG NEAR.
The Action Document (AD) serves as the underlying
document for the preparation of the national IPA Action
Programme. The AD is of an operational nature and incorporates all actions planned in a beneficiary country as well
as their rationale. The AD is the main basis for extensive
stakeholder consultation regarding financial assistance
within a sector. Therefore, it is based on the overarching
existing sector-specific documents and will summarise
planned interventions in one or more sectors. During IPA I,
the Logical Framework Matrix (see chapter 4.3) merely had
to be an annex of the Sector or Project Fiche (the former
versions of the Action Document). In contrast, the Action
Document will now be entirely based on the LogFrame as
its centrepiece and main source of information. Following this, an intervention logic needs to be formulated for
each planned action including objectives, results and performance indicators.
3.6.2 Programme Options under IPA II
The principles and priorities of pre-accession funding as
well the financial allocation per sector and policy area,
stipulated in each countrys strategy paper, can be translated into specific Action Programmes under IPA II. Action
Programmes (AP) are a set of Actions for EU financial assistance defined by clearly identified objectives and expected
results, as well as implementation arrangements. These
can be both national and multi-country, either annual or
multiannual. Essentially, there are three options for the
length of Action Programmes. First, Action Programmes
can be annual so that Actions are programmed for one
budgetary year. Second, beneficiary countries can issue
combined annual programmes for up to three years. In
this case, the size of the budget allocation is proportionally
larger so that the AP becomes the sum of separate annual
programmes. Still, these programmes will have an individual annual budget allocation and a separate financing decision by the European Commission. The third option entails
multi annual programmes for the whole financing period
from 2014 to 2020. Even though these are adopted for the
whole period of seven years, the budget allocations must
be split to annual instalments, the so-called split commitments. However, the first option will be most common
while the other two will only be applied in special cases.
34
SPD Template and Instructions

1.
1.1

1.2

Sector Description
National Sector Policy & Strategy
This section defines the scope of the sector and states sector policies including the strategies to implement these.
In addition, this sector is also concerned with priorities for the sector derived from the strategic planning documents.
Sector Institutional Framework, Coordination, Capacity
Section 1.2 comprehensively lists all involved institutions in the sector. Furthermore, it identifies the lead institution as well as the coordination of the NIPAC with the involved institutions. Coordination mechanisms between
government and non-governmental institutions should also be explained.
1.3

Performance Assessment Framework (PAF)

The PAF is a monitoring system to assess the progress made towards achieving sector policies. This section should
therefore state which indicators are used to measure the achievement of sector-wide targets.
1.4.

Mid-Term Perspectives of National Budget and Development Assistance

In this section, the sector budget and its mid-term development should be briefly described.
2.
2.1

Sector Programme Rationale

Sector Status and Problem Analysis
Section 2.1 serves as the justification for IPA assistance it provides for the analysis of the problems in the sector and why IPA II assistance is needed. It also explains to what extent IPA funding can contribute to solving the
identified problems within the sector.
SWOT Analysis
The SWOT analysis serves as the summary of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats within the sector.
In doing so, it identifies the programme objectives and measures.
Links with National Documents, Sector Strategies and Country Strategy Paper
In this section, a link should be established with all relevant strategic planning documents on national and donor
level, e.g.: Country Strategy Paper, Progress Report, Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA), National Plan
for the Adoption of the Acquis (NPAA).
Cross-Cutting Issues
Cross-cutting issues are most prominent: Equal opportunities and non-discrimination, regional and local development, civil society and stakeholder involvement.
Links with other sectors
List how the SPD will support or be supported by programmes in other sectors.
2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

3.
3.1

Sector Programme Description

Overall & Specific Objectives
The SPD follows the logic of project cycle management (PCM, see forthcoming chapter) as it requires an intervention logic in which overall objectives in each sector are addressed by specific objectives. These, in turn, are implemented by means of measures. In this section, overall and specific objectives are listed and can be derived from
the comprehensive sector analysis.
In any case, all these forms of APs are implemented over

several years irrespective of whether they are financed
annually or multi annually.
In accordance with the decision on length and focus
of Action Programmes, in comparison to IPA I beneficiary
countries have a broader and more flexible choice in terms
of the number and types of programmes under IPA II, for

example:
One programme per country
Several programmes cutting across different policy
areas
One (or more) programme(s) per policy area
35
3.2

Impact Indicators
Impact indicators measure the extent to which a programme objective has been reached or is on track to be
achieved. Most commonly, these are identified in the CSP and national strategic planning documents.
3.3 Results

In this section, the anticipated results of the Sector Programme are to be listed.
3.4

Measures & Operations

Measures are programming mechanisms and address the achievement of a limited number of results and objectives of the SPD. Operations are specific contract forms (twinning, supplies, technical assistance) and form part
of measures.
3.5

Past and On-going Experience, Lessons Learned

Section 3.5 provides for an overview of on-going and past assistance by international donors as well as the
government.
3.6 Sustainability

Describes how the results of the SPD will be sustainable in the long-term.
3.7

Assumptions & Pre-conditions

List the preconditions that need to be fulfilled prior to the implementation of measures and operations as well as
the external factors that must be taken into consideration.
3.8

Institutional Arrangements for Implementation

Describe the operating structure for the implementation of the SPD as well as the monitoring structure and methodology.
4. Budget
4.1

Summary of Indicative Budget

Provides a budget allocation for all measures and operations
4.2
Budget breakdown per year
5. Annexes

Logframe Matrix for the SPD (see chapter 4.3), implementation structure and schedule
Source: http://www.ppf5.rs/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Template_ for_IPA_Sector_Planning _Document.pdf
These Action Programmes are designed to contribute to

the achievement of the sector-specific goals and priorities stipulated in the Country Strategy Papers (CSP) and
other strategic documents. The main bulk of assistance
will be given for these types of APs while it is also possible
to address funding to Cross-Border Cooperation (CBC) Pro-
grammes or Rural Development Programmes (RDP). The

former are multi-country in scope and aim at promoting
good neighbourly relations among IPA beneficiary countries or between IPA countries and beneficiaries of the
European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI). The latter is
the most common form of funding in the policy area of
36
rural development and will be administered by DG Agriculture and Rural Development.

As regards the Actions within a beneficiary country
programme, there is also a certain degree of flexibility. An
Action is a coherent set of coordinated activities undertaken to meet a defined objective of a geographic and/
or sectorial scope, which have an estimated total cost to
which the EU approves a maximum contribution, as well
as implementation schedule and performance parameters.
In principle, all types of Actions, either sector-focused or
stand-alone, may coexist within one single Action Programme. Due to the sector approach administered in IPA
II, the European Commission prioritizes Sector Support
Actions which can take two possible forms.
In case a defined sector completely fulfils the sector
assessment criteria, a fully-fledged Sector Support Action
can be developed. This supports the sector development
on the basis of an already existing national Sector Programme and Strategy. Nonetheless, in some cases a sector can be identified as not ready for the sector approach
following the assessment. In these situations, Sector Support- oriented Actions can be devised. These Actions are
based on the Sector Planning Document (SPD) and aim at
developing the advancement of the sector until it fulfils all
the assessment criteria. Ultimately, the objective is to pro-
gressively move from the second towards the first option of

Actions so that every sector reaches maturity and can be
supported by fully-fledged Sector Support Actions.
Nonetheless, applying the sector approach may not
always be appropriate in some cases. Therefore, the European Commission also allows for the possibility of standalone Actions in cases where the Sector Approach is not
necessary in the context of preparation of accession (e.g.
technical support on some parts of the Acquis) or where
a horizontal or ad hoc intervention is concerned. This is
largely in accordance with former projects under IPA I.
Following this, stand-alone Actions and sector support
Actions can co-exist, although pre-accession funding is
deemed to progressively move towards more sector-based
assistance and less project-based assistance. This approach
aims at prioritizing strategically coordinated pre-accession
assistance in beneficiary countries and gradually reducing stand-alone Actions. Still, an Action Programme can
consist of multiple combinations of these three types of
Actions.
3.6.3 The Process of Programming IPA II Assistance
The programming of IPA II assistance is a complex process
and requires the participation of national authorities, the
European Commission and stakeholders. Programming
Table 1: The IPA II programming framework
Country Strategy Paper (CSP)

7 years with mid-term review stipulating funding priorities per country and policy area
National Sector Programme / Sector Planning Document (SPD)

Multi annual planning document, including assessment of sector maturity
Action Documents (AD)

Operational nature, consisting of planned Actions and their rationale
Annual and Multi annual Action Programmes (AP)

5 policy areas grouped by sector
Policy
Area I
Policy
Area II
Supervision by DG NEAR & EU Delegation
Policy
Area III
Policy
Area IV
Supervision by
DG AGRI
Policy
Area V
Supervision by
DG NEAR
Table 1 illustrates the IPA II programming process from the strategic documents to the formulation of operational Action Programmes implemented under pre-accession assistance from 2014-2020.
37
is intended to create a link between the strategic planning

documents and the implementation of Actions in the beneficiary countries. Therefore, it is required that the principles and objectives of IPA II, stipulated in the CSP and other
relevant strategic documents, are translated into concrete
actions to be carried out. It is essential that these Actions
are consistent with the strategic background of EU financial assistance. Programming can be defined as a phase
aiming at designing the delivery of financial assistance
for a given Action or a set of Actions. The overall objective
is to finish this process with a Commission Implementing
Decision which adopts the Action Programme for one or
more years. Basically, programming is divided into the following two broad phases.
Phase 1: Preparation of Programming
This phase starts with the identification of funding objectives and priorities as stated in the Country Strategy Paper
and other strategic planning documents. Based on whether
a sector in which interventions are planned is already ready
for the sector approach, further information about development goals can also be found in a national Sector Programme (or Strategy) or needs to be worked out by means
of using the Sector Planning Document (SPD). For the
preparation of national Action Programmes, the beneficiary authorities under the supervision of the responsible DG NEAR country unit as well as the EC Delegation
conduct an extensive identification phase: Identification
implies to carry out a sector and problem analysis as well
as to identify priorities for funding within each sector2 .
At the end of this process, an intervention plan is formulated which includes a tentative budget and a description
of implementation arrangements. At the end of this step,
the beneficiary authorities compile a draft Action Document (AD) which incorporates all these aspects gathered
during identification and formulation. In the case of multicountry programmes, the procedure slightly differs as the
ADs are prepared by DG NEAR directly with support of the
beneficiary countries.
After completion, the draft ADs are subject to a quality
review by DG NEAR. In this quality review, it is checked
whether the draft Action Documents are in line with the
proposed priorities and objectives of IPA II funding within
the beneficiary country as well as the wider enlargement
agenda. DG NEAR will provide comments and recommendations how to proceed with the programming the
so-called formulation phase. The formulation phase consists of finalising the Action Documents so that they are
arranged in the form of a draft Action Programme. For
each Action, the Action Programme should indicate the
objectives pursued, the expected results and main activities, the methods of implementation, the budget as well
as an indicative timetable. The draft Action Programme

will be an annex to the draft Commission Implementing
Decision (CiD).
Phase 2: Approval of Action Programme
In the second phase of programming IPA II assistance, the
meeting of the IPA Evaluation Committee is the central
event. Before the Evaluation Committee decides about the
approval of the beneficiary country Action Programme,
DG NEAR conducts several legality and regularity checks.
In this process, it will be tested to what extent the Action
Programme and its budget are in conformity with the main
legal documents of IPA II and EU external action funding,
most prominently the Financial Regulation and the Common Implementing Rules for EU External Action as well as
the IPA II regulation. In case these checks are passed, the
draft Action Programme will be forwarded to the IPA Evaluation Committee. The IPA Evaluation Committee is made
up of representatives of the EU member states which provide an opinion on the CiD and the AP drafted by the beneficiary and the Commission. After approval by the Evaluation Committee, the Commission implementing Decision and the Action Programme are internally circulated
until its adoption.
Concluding the programming process, a Financing
Agreement representing the legal basis for the implementation of the Action Programme is signed between the
Commission and the beneficiary country. The Financing
Agreement includes a description of the particular programme to be funded and represents the formal commitment of the European Union and the partner country to
finance the measures described. After the signing of the
Financing Agreement, the process of concluding individual contracts for the implementation of the projects with
relevant beneficiaries can start (see chapter 5 for further
information on implementation).
Both identification and formulation (see below) form part of project cycle management (PCM) which is the primary tool for project design and management
advocated by the EU (see chapter 4.2.1).
38
3.7
Possible activities
Course participants can discuss the following questions
in small groups:
What is the purpose of IPA II, and what are its main
priorities and objectives of funding for the period from
2014-2020?
Which aspects of IPA were changed and improved in
order to make pre-accession funding more tailor-made
to the needs of beneficiary countries?
What are the main IPA II strategic planning and programming documents and what is their respective purpose?
In addition, you can organize an assessment simulation
for a given sector in a beneficiary country. To do so, assign
your participants with the role of relevant stakeholders
within a policy area eligible for IPA II funding. In order to
prepare the programming of IPA II funding, ask participants to apply the sector assessment criteria in discussion
so as to analyse if a given sector in the beneficiary country
is ready for the sector approach. In a second step, discuss
funding priorities for the given sector in groups. These priorities should be in line with those indicated in the respective Country Strategy Paper.
3.8 Suggested Readings

Internet
Website of the Directorate General of the European Commission on IPA II:
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/instruments/overview/
index_en.htm
All strategy papers and progress reports are available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/countries/strategy-andprogress-report/index_en.htm
IPA II Regulation: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/
financial_assistance/ipa/2014/231-2014_ipa-2-reg.pdf
The Enlargement Strategy of the European Commission for
2014-2015 is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/
pdf/key_documents/2014/20141008-strategy-paper_en.pdf
Information about multi-country financial assistance

under IPA II are available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/instruments/multi-beneficiary-programme/index_
en.htm
Literature
European Commission: Instrument for Pre-Accession
Assistance (IPA II) 2014-2020. A Quick Guide to IPA programming.
Bushati, Ditmir (2008): Albania and IPA, in: Center for
EU Enlargement Studies: Using IPA and other EU funds
to accelerate convergence and integration in the Western
Balkans, Budapest, pp. 33-35, available at:
http://web.ceu.hu/cens/assets/files/IPA.pdf
(last accessed: 22 May 2014).
Elbasani, Arolda (2013): European integration and transformation in the Western Balkans: Europeanization or
business as usual?. Routledge: Abingdon.
Gjorgjievski, Mate (2008): EU Instrument for Pre-accession assistance: The path to a successful start, in: Center
for EU Enlargement Studies: Using IPA and other EU funds
Balkans, Budapest, pp. 69-88, available at: http://web.ceu.
hu/cens/assets/files/IPA.pdf (last accessed: 22 May 2014).
evaluation
sector approach
PRAG guidelines

action documents
PROJECT PROPOSAL
enlargement
programming
39
IPA II regulation
CHAPTER
04
From an Idea to a Convincing

Project Proposal
In this chapter you will learn:

about the basic elements and purpose of project cycle
management (PCM)
how to recognize needs and problems and present them
in a project proposal using a logical framework matrix
40
4 From an Idea to a Convincing Project Proposal

4.1
Introduction
The following two chapters will take you through the process of developing a project from an idea to a convincing
project proposal and then to a functioning project. For this
purpose, in this chapter the first three stages of Project
Cycle Management (PCM) will be presented describing central aspects and guidance for each stage3 . After this, special
emphasis is put on the Logical Framework Approach (LFA)
(also called Logframe Approach), an analytical process
and set of tools used to support project planning and management. The remaining two stages of the project cycle will
be presented in the next chapter.
4.2 PCM Guidelines for Project Planning and

Management
The term Project Cycle Management (PCM) describes management activities and decision-making procedures used
during the life-cycle of a project including key tasks, roles
and responsibilities, key documents and decision options.
In 1992, the European Commission adopted PCM as its primary set of project design and management tools. The candidate and potential candidate countries are also required
to use PCM in order to allocate and prepare the use of IPA
funding.
PCM pursues the following objectives:
Projects should support overarching policy objectives
of the EU and of its development partners.
Projects should be relevant to an agreed strategy and
to the real problems of target groups.
Projects should be feasible, meaning that the project is
well designed and that objectives can be realistically
achieved.
Projects should provide sustainable benefit to target
groups.
In order to achieve these aims, PCM:
requires the active participation of key stakeholders
and aims at promoting local ownership,
uses different tools, inter alia the Logical Framework
Approach, to support a number of key assessments
and analyses, e.g. of stakeholders, problems, objectives and strategies,
incorporates key quality assessment criteria into each

phase of the project cycle,
requires the production of good-quality key
document(s) in each stage of the project cycle (with
commonly understood concepts and definitions) to
support well-informed decision-making.
4.2.1 The Stages of Project Cycle Management
This cycle emphasizes three main principles:
1. Decision-making criteria and procedures are defined
at each phase of the cycle (including key information
requirements and quality assessment).
2. The phases in the cycle are progressive each phase
should be completed before the next phase can be
tackled successfully.
3. New programming and project identification draws
on the results of monitoring and evaluation as part
of a structured process of feedback and institutional
learning.
Programming
Evaluation &
Audit
Implementation
Identification
Formulation
In practice, the concrete design of each phase of the cycle

is not determined. Depending on scale, scope and specific operating modalities of the project, the duration and
importance of each stage can vary. A large and complex
engineering project may for example take many years
to pass from identification to the implementation phase,
whereas a project that aims at providing emergency assistance in a post-conflict context may only take a few weeks
to start implementing operations on the ground.
The chapter is partially based on the PCM Guidelines by the European Commission (2004).
41
The fact that the activities described in the preceding chapter under IPA II programming process may lead to the
impression that they are carried out in the phase of the
project cycle called programming. In fact, the programming process of IPA II assistance encompasses the following three first stages of the project management cycle.
4.2.2 Stage 1: Programming
The project cycle starts with the Programming phase
which is intended to identify and agree upon the main
objectives, obstacles and priorities for cooperation in each
sector. Therefore, it should result in a relevant and feasible
programming framework within which programmes and
projects can be prepared. The basis for programming is the
Country Strategy Paper as the single most important strategic planning document laying down objectives and priorities of financial assistance in each country. In addition,
the process of programming should be consistent with the
principles of the Logical Framework Approach (see below).
The key question to be answered at this stage is: What
are the partners development priorities and what is the
Communitys focus for assistance?
4.2.3 Stage 2: Identification
During the Identification phase, beneficiary countries are
required to formulate project ideas that conform to the
Commissions priorities of funding. Moreover, the relevance and likely feasibility of these project ideas is assessed.
In this regard, local ownership is a crucial aspect of potential projects to be identified at this stage. In order to ensure
ownership and commitment by partners, the leading role
in the identification phase is taken by local stakeholders
and potential implementing partners led by line ministries
in the beneficiary country. The outcome of this phase is the
identification of project proposals.
The key question in this phase is the following: Is the
project concept relevant to local needs and consistent with
the Communitys policy priorities?
4.2.4 Stage 3: Formulation
The purpose of the Formulation stage is to confirm the
relevance and feasibility of the project ideas. This results
in the formulation of a detailed project fiche that has to be
prepared in this phase of the cycle. This project fiche should
include management and coordination arrangements as
well as a financial plan and a cost-benefit analysis. During
this phase, the implementing partners in the beneficiary
country fulfil the leading role, most commonly the Ministry of Finance, in order to meet the consistency between
co-funding requirements set by the Commission and cofinancing possibilities by the beneficiary country. In this
process, they are supported by technical assistance from

the donors, in the case of IPA II by the European Commission and its Delegation to the country.
In the Formulation phase, the following question
should be asked: Is the project feasible and will it deliver
sustainable benefits?
In the following, the process of developing a project
proposal will be illustrated by means of showing in greater
details what activities are to be carried out in the Identification and the Formulation stages. The Logical Framework Approach serves as the main support tool to execute
these two phases.
4.3
The Logical Framework Approach
Developed in the late 1960s to assist the US Agency of International Development in improving its project planning
and evaluation system, the Logical Framework Approach
(or Logframe Approach) nowadays is used (in one form or
another) by most multilateral and bilateral aid agencies,
international NGOs and by many partner governments.
Indeed, the European Commission has generally asked for
the use of LFA as an element of its project cycle management system since 1993.
Logframe analysis is a very effective analytical and
management tool when understood and intelligently
applied. However, it is not a substitute for experience and
professional judgment and must also be complemented by
the application of other specific tools (such as Economic
and Financial Analysis and Environmental Impact Assessment) and through the application of working techniques
which promote the effective participation of stakeholders.
The two main phases of the LFA are Analysis and Planning carried out progressively during the Identification
and Formulation phases of the project cycle. The recognition of problems and needs on the ground, their structuring in a cause-effect relationship and the choice of strategy
for the future project are the main elements of the analysis phase. In the planning phase, the results of the analysis
phase are transcribed into an operational plan ready to be
developed further in the project application form. Upon
completion of the planning phase, you should be able to
set out your projects objectives in a systematic and logical
way. Thus, your presentation should:
42
The Logframe Approach during the project cycle

The Logical Framework Approach is an essential management tool in each phase of the project cycle. It should be used
for the preparation, implementation and evaluation of a project.
During the Identification stage of the project cycle, the Logical Framework Approach helps analyse the existing situation,
investigate the relevance of the proposed project and identify potential objectives and strategies.
In the Formulation phase, the Logframe matrix helps those responsible for appraising the scope and logic or proposed
investments by providing a summary of key project elements in a standard format. The objectives identified in the Logframe, together with the activity, resource and cost schedules, provide information to support a cost-benefit analysis.
During Project Implementation the Logframe lays the basis for the preparation of contracts clearly stating anticipated
objectives, and also the level of responsibility and accountability of project managers and other stakeholders.
In addition, on the basis of the Logframe and associated schedules, more detailed operational work plans can be formulated. The indicators and Means of Verification provide the framework for the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan to be
designed and implemented by project managers.
In the Evaluation and Audit phase, the Logframe provides a basis for evaluation, given that it clearly specifies what was to
be achieved, how these achievements were to be verified (indicators and means of verification) and what the key assumptions were.
Finally, the Logframe provides a structure for preparing Terms of Reference (TOR) for evaluation studies and for performance audits.
reflect the causal relationship between the different

levels of your projects objectives,
indicate how to check whether these objectives have
been achieved, and
establish what assumptions outside the control of the
project may influence its success.
For the pre-accession funding of the European Union, you
are expected to summarise these features in the form of
a matrix which shows the logical framework of your project. This is the Logical Framework Matrix or Logframe
Matrix.
4.3.1 The Analysis Phase Getting to Know Problems
and Priorities
Before starting the analytical work with stakeholder
groups, you should become aware of the situation on the
ground. Current statistical data such as surveys, police
reports or census data as well as discussions with members of the community or key informants on the major
challenges of the community will help you identify the
problems of the community (such as poverty, environmental pollution or unemployment).
Knowing and understanding the problems you are facing

is one essential prerequisite of project planning. Knowing the national and EU policy priorities is another one.
In this respect, key preparatory activities also include an
analysis of the strategic framework and the institutional
context in which the project will take place. The analysis
of strategy documents at the national, regional and local
level will help to ensure that the project idea takes account
of its operating environment.
4.3.1.1 Analysing the Stakeholder
Different individuals, societal groups and institutions
that may have a specific interest in the success or failure
of the project are defined as stakeholders. As they will
influence the project in different ways (as part of the problem or as part of the solution, as allies or opponents of
the project) it is important for those involved in the project planning to understand and recognise the stakeholders concerns, capacities and interests. If the stakeholders
themselves have analysed the existing situation, information on the relevant study results should be collected
and disseminated. At a minimum, study results should
be discussed with all stakeholders.
43
Stakeholder analysis is the process of identifying those

affected by a project. It intends to collect their views on
the situation and problems in order to address them in the
project design. The stakeholder analysis ultimately aims at
maximizing the social, economic and institutional benefits
of the project to target groups and ultimate beneficiaries.
At the same time, it helps to minimise the potential negative impacts of the project for all concerned stakeholders.
The findings of a stakeholder analysis are to be used for a
project design so as to ensure that:
resources are well targeted to meet distributional
objectives and the needs of priority groups;
management arrangements are appropriate to promote stakeholder participation and ownership;
conflicts of stakeholder interests are recognized and
addressed in the project design.
Findings of a stakeholder analysis can be summarized in
a matrix like the one presented below, which concerns
the preparation of a project aimed at reducing the river
pollution, advocated by the European commission in its
PCM guidelines.
Apart from the stakeholder analysis matrix which is

shown in the figure, the following tools can be used to
conduct a stakeholder analysis:
A SWOT analysis depicting Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities and Threats;
Venn diagrams illustrating the relationship between
key stakeholder groups; or
Spider diagrams helping to provide a visual summary of institutional capacity.
4.3.1.2 Analysing the Problem
Problem analysis helps to identify the factors at the root
of a problem a project seeks to solve. This process will help
you to acknowledge different reasons that influence the
problem and to establish a cause and effect relationship
between the different aspects of the problem. The visualisation of the analysis in a diagram (called a problem
tree or hierarchy of problems) will be helpful to get a
detailed, causative problem and to clarify the cause-effect
relationship. The following illustration shows the problem analysis for the example of river pollution.
Figure I: Stakeholder analysis matrix

Stakeholder and basic
characteristics
Interests and how they are

affected by the problem(s)
Capacity and motivation to

bring about change
Possible actions to address

stakeholder interests
Fishing families:
ca. 20,000 families, low income
earners, small scale family businesses, organised into informal
cooperatives, women actively
involved in fish processing and
marketing
maintain and improve their

means of livelihood
pollution is affecting volume
and quality of catch
family health is suffering,
particularly children and
mothers
keen interest in pollution

control measures
limited political influence
given weak organisational
structure
support capacity to organise

and lobby
implement industry pollution control measures
identify/develop alternative
income sources for women
and men
Industry X:
Large scale industrial operation,
poorly regulated and no-unions,
influential lobby group, poor
environmental record
maintain/increase profits
some concern about public
image
concern about costs if
environmental regulations
enforced
have financial and technical resources to employ new

cleaner technologies
limited current motivation to
change
raise their awareness of

social and environmental
impact
mobilise political pressure to
influence industry behaviour
strengthen and enforce environmental laws
Households:
ca. 150,000 households discharge waste and waste water
into river, also source some
drinking water and eat fish from
the river
aware of industrial pollution

and impact on water quality
want to dispose of own
waste away from the household
want access to clean water
limited understanding of the

health impact of their own
waste/waste water disposal
Potential to lobby government bodies more effectively
appear willing to pay for
improved waste management services
raise awareness of households of implications of their

own waste disposal practices
work with communities
and local government on
addressing water and sanitation issues
Environmental protection
agency:
Etc.
etc.
etc.
etc.
Source: European Commission (2004). PCM Guidelines, p. 63.
44
Figure II: Problem Tree
Problem analysis - river pollution

Catch and income of
fishing families in decline
High incidence of waterborne diseases and

illnesses, particularely
among poor families
and under 5s
Riverine ecosystem under

serious threat including
declining fish stocks
River water quality

is deteriorating
High level of solid

waste dumped
into river
Polluters are
not controlled
Population not
aware of the danger
of waste dumping
Environment
Protection Agency
ineffective and
closely aligned with
industry interests
No public
information/
education programs
available
Most households and

factories discharge
wastewater directly into
the river
Existing legal
regulations are
inadequate to prevent
direct discharge of
wastewater
Pollution has been
a low political
priority
Wastewater treated
in plants does not
meet environmental
standards
40% of households
and 20% of businesses
not connected to
sewerage network
Inadequate level of capital investment

and poor business planning within
Local Government
As the process is as important as the product, the creation of a problem tree should ideally be a team effort and
treated as a learning exercise. Involving stakeholder representatives is essential and determines the quality of the
output. The creation of a problem tree requires the use of
individual pieces of paper on which the problem statements are written.
A good problem tree can provide a clear and convincing analysis of complex situations. It can show that even
complicated issues can be divided into smaller problems

which are easier to tackle.
Taking one step after the other, discussing possible
solutions to one sub-problem after the other will help you
define the solution of the overall problem. That is how
a number of small projects aimed at the same problem
can contribute to the achievement of an overall development goal.
45
Practical Session Problem Analysis

Stakeholder analysis and problem analysis are closely intertwined. Therefore, when drawing up a problem tree, it is
advisable to proceed as follows:
1. Organise a workshop with the core stakeholders. Start with a brainstorming exercise to decide the central aspects
of the overall problem. Ask the workshop participants to write down their individual problems on individual pieces
of paper these can then be aligned to identify cause-effect relationships.
2. From the problems identified in the brainstorming exercise, select an individual starter problem. Look for related
problems and establish a hierarchy of causes and effects.
3. All other problems are then sorted in the same way the guiding question should be: what causes this problem?
4. If there are two or more causes combining to produce an effect, place them at the same level.
5. Connect the problems with cause-effect arrows.
6. Review the structure and verify its validity and completeness. Are there important problems that have not been
mentioned yet?
7. Copy the structure onto a sheet to illustrate the problem tree.
4.3.1.3 Analysing the Objectives

The problem tree provides a summary of the existing negative situation. Good projects, however will not only define
problems, but also show a practical way out. Thus, the next
step in the project development process will be to convert
this negative situation into a positive one. In other words,
the problem tree will be transformed into an objective tree
by reformulating all negative statements of the problem
analysis into positive objectives that are desirable and realistically achievable. Thus, the objective tree is the visualisation of the desired future situation including the indicative
means by which ends can be achieved.
As with the problem tree, it is important to check the logic

of the means-end relationships in the objective tree and
add, change or delete objectives when necessary. If the problem tree included problems outside the scope of the project, there will also be statements of objectives, which are
beyond the reach of those who will carry out the project.
As no project is isolated from its environment, factors
outside the control of the project are to be expected. In a
good project plan, they must be systematically treated as
well. In IPA Logframe methodology, factors outside the
control of the projects are called risks and assumptions.
Risks are factors, whose occurrence will have a negative
effect on the project. Assumptions are factors that must
materialise if the project is to succeed.
Practical Session Objective Tree

At a planning workshop, the recommended approach
is to take the problem statements one after the other,
turn around the sheet, and write on the other side of
the paper the opposite of the problem statement formulated as an action or as the desired result of the
action. Reading the tree from the top to the bottom,
complex development objectives can be broken into
immediate goals and results that are to be achieved
by specific activities. Read in the opposite direction, it
becomes visible what must be accomplished to reach
the overall goal.
Perhaps, this is the point where bad project plans
are easiest to identify. In a badly prepared project
plan, problems, objectives, means and activities are
confused. The rationale behind the individual solutions and the connection between the problems and
the proposed solutions will be difficult to understand.
4.3.1.4 Analysing the Strategies

After having defined the stakeholders, the main problems
and the objectives, strategies that help best to achieve your
desired project goals have to be set.
The following guiding questions might need to be asked
and answered at this stage:
Should all identified problems and objectives be tackled, or is it better to select only a few?
What combination of interventions will bring the
desired results and promote sustainable benefits?
What resources are required for the implementation
of the project?
What strategy will have the most positive impact in
addressing the needs of the beneficiary groups?
Answers to these questions will be determined by an
agreed set of criteria (such as benefits to target groups,
expected contribution to key policy objectives, reciprocity with other ongoing or planned programmes or projects,
46
financial and economic cost-benefit, technical feasibility or

environmental impact). Using these key criteria will help
you to decide what should be included in the scope of the
project and what, in contrast, cannot be included.
Although the use of key criteria facilitates the task, this
analytical stage is related to the most difficult and challenging work as it includes synthesizing large amounts of
data and information and making judgments about the
best implementation strategies to pursue. Those involved
in this work will realise that in practice compromises often
have to be made in order to strike a balance between the
stakeholders interests and needs, political demands and
practical constraints.
The selected strategy will finally be used to help formulate the first column of the Logical Framework, particularly
in identifying the project`s objective, purpose and potential
results. With choosing the preferred strategy, the analytical phase is concluded and the planning phase can start.
Four main elements of the analysis phase

1 Stakeholder Analysis - identifying and characterizing potential major stakeholders; assessing their
capacity
2 Problem Analysis - identifying key problems, constraints and opportunities; determining cause and
effect relationships
3 Objective Analysis - developing solutions from
the identified problems; identifying means-to-end
relationships
4 Strategy Analysis - identifying different strategies
to achieve solutions; selecting most appropriate
strategy
Figure III: Objective Tree
Objective Tree - river pollution

Catch and income of
fishing families is stabilised
or increased
Threat to the riverine ecosystem is reduced, and fish
stocks are increased
Incidence of water-borne
diseases and
illnesses is reduced, particularly among poor families and under 5s
River water quality

is improved
No. of households and

factories discharging
wastewater directly into
the river is reduced
The quantity of solid

waste dumped into the
river is reduced
Polluters are
effectively controlled
Population more
aware of the danger
of waste dumping
Environment Protection
Agency is effective and
more responsive to a
broad range of stakeholder
interests
Public information/
education programs
established
New legal regulations

are established which
are effective in preventing direct discharge of
wastewater
Pollution management
is given a higher political priority
Wastewater
treatment meets
environmental
standards
Increased % of households and businesses

connected to
sewerage network
Increased
capital
investment
Improved business planning

within Local Government is
established, including cost
recovery mechanisms
Source: European Commission, PCM Guidelines, p. 70.
47
The basic matrix consists of four columns and four rows

where the key elements of the project are inserted. The
table below shows the typical structure of a Logframe
matrix and the information to be written into the respective cells 4 . When drafting the matrix, it is advisable to
start with the first column. The project description must
be inserted top-down, followed by the assumptions (bottom-up). After this, the objectively verifiable indicators and
the sources of verification (working across) are added. The
numbers in the cells indicate the recommended sequence
for inserting the information. If it is properly filled with
information, the matrix should fit on one A4 page. Take
care that the text in the matrix remains easily readable.
4.3.2 The Planning Phase

After the preparatory and analytical work is completed,
the results of the analysis are transcribed into a practical, operational plan ready to be implemented: a 16-box
matrix called the Logical Framework matrix (or Logframe).
The purpose of a Logframe matrix is to provide a summary of the project design. It helps you to develop a coherent project with measurable goals that take full account of
assumptions and risks. The process of drawing up a logical
framework matrix is as important as its content. It should
be drawn up early in the process of planning a project and
elaborated, ideally, with the participation of all the interest groups and institutions that will implement the project
or be affected by it.
Project Description
Indicators
Source of Verification
Overall Objective: The broad
Measure the extent to which
Sources of information and
development impact to which
a contribution to the overall
methods used to collect and
the project contributes
objective has been made. Used
report it
Assumptions
during evaluation. However, it

is often not appropriate to the
project itself to try and collect
this information.
2
10
11
Purpose: The development
Help answer the question:
Assumptions (factors outside
outcome at the end of the pro-
How will we know if the pur-
project management control)
ject more specifically the
pose has been achieved?
report it
that may impact on the pur-
expected benefits to the target
Should include appropriate
group(s)
details of quantity, quality and
pose-objective linkage
time
3
12
13
Results: Direct results that the
Help answer the question:
project delivers, and which are
How will we know if the
largely under project manage-
results have been delivered?
report it
that may impact on the result-
ment control
Should include appropriate
purpose linkage
details of quantity, quality and

time.
4
14
15
Activities: Tasks that need to
Means, resources:
Budget:
be carried out to deliver the
What are the means required
What are the action costs?
planned results
to implement these activities
How are they classified?
that may impact on the activ-
(personnel, equipment, studies, etc.)?
Adapted from: European Commission (2004), PCM Guidelines, p. 73.
ity-result linkage
48
4.3.2.1 Defining the Project Description (First Column)

The first column of the Logframe matrix summarises the
overall objective, the specific project purpose, expected
results and project activities. The project activities defined
in the Logframe matrix provide the basis for operational
plans including timetables for implementation and project budgets. All the information you collected during the
analysis phase concerning the problem and the objectives
will now be of great relevance.
The overall objective
Looking more closely at the cells in the left column, the
upper left (1) cell is reserved for the overall objective
towards which the proposed project works. The overall
objective is at the highest hierarchy level describing the
future situation or state that the project strives to accomplish. The overall objective should be consistent with IPA
II objectives and priorities and should identify the target
groups and reflect the desired impact of the project on final
beneficiaries.
In principle, there can only be one overall objective per
project. However, the achievement of the overall objective
requires the impact of several programmes and projects.
Stated differently, a single project cannot achieve the overall objective by itself, it can only complete one part of it.
Therefore, your project will only make one contribution
among others to the overall objective. It is normal for the
overall objective to reappear in the Logframe matrices of
several projects. In order to provide adequate support during the monitoring and evaluation of the implementation,
the overall objective should not be expressed in too general terms.
The overall objective will often reflect the priorities of
the Accession Partnership, the National Plan for Approximation with the Acquis, the European Partnership, the
Stabilisation and Association Agreement, the Country
The European Commission advises that the

project purpose(s) should:
indicate the immediate reason for the project preparation;
identify target groups and reflect their needs. The
quality of the needs assessment should be assessed
by examination of the stakeholder analysis;
significantly contribute to the achievement of the
overall objective of the project. Thus, make sure
that there is a clear and direct linkage between the
project purpose(s) and the overall objective.
be realistic or expected at the time when the
desired outcomes of the project are produced.
Strategy Paper, the IPA II Regulation as well as the sectoral development plans of the beneficiary country. Hence,
it is recommended to consult these documents for selecting a convincing statement of the overall objective of your
project.
A Logframe matrix should not contain more than
three project purposes. If the project is trying to address
too many problems at once, it will be best to split it into two
or several projects. Otherwise, the Logframe will become
too complex to be a useful management tool. In any case,
you have to avoid repetitive purposes and overlaps with
results. To enhance clarity, it is often advisable to number
the immediate objectives (1., 2., 3.).
The results
Clarifying the results of your project (3) is next. Results are
tangible outputs that are delivered as a consequence of carrying out the project. It is the project managers responsibility to achieve the indicated results by the projects completion date. To enhance clarity, it is advisable to number
the project results.
The following aspects may guide you when formulating the project results:
The definition of the project results should clearly
indicate the timeframe for their realisation.
Project results should be realistic in relation to the
duration of the project.
In order to relate the results to Objectively Verifiable
Indicators (OVIs) and their sources of verification, it
is important to give a precise definition of the project
results.
Project results should clearly illustrate the concrete
benefits to be delivered to the beneficiaries. The benefits should mirror the needs identified by the stakeholder analysis.
Activities
Activities are defined in the bottom left corner (4) of the
matrix. They answer the question: How are we going to
achieve the change and reach our objectives? The activities are the actions that have to be implemented in order
to achieve the expected outcomes of the project. Activities
should indicate what the person or organisation should do
and how the projects goods and services will be delivered.
In addition, key project activities should:
directly contribute to the expected results of the project. The linkage between the proposed activities and
the project results should be clearly indicated,
be adequate for the type and dimension of the project,
and
be expressed as a process.
49
Ifthen causality
The project description in the first column follows
a clear if-then causality (also known as intervention
logic). Read from the bottom up, one can say that:
IF the activities are undertaken THEN results can
be produced;
IF results are produced, THEN the purpose(s) will
be achieved; and
IF the purpose(s) is/are achieved, THEN this shall
contribute to the overall objective.
When it is read from the top to the bottom, it can be
expressed in terms of:
IF we want to contribute to the overall objective,
THEN we must achieve the purpose;
IF we want to achieve the purpose, THEN we have
to produce the results; and
IF we wish to produce the results, THEN the specified activities must be implemented.
4.3.2.2 Defining the Project Assumption (Fourth Column)

The fourth column (5-7) describes the conditions on which,
in addition to the successful completion of the planned
measures, the project depends on for its success. Assumptions are external factors that have the potential to affect or
even determine the success of a project. They lie outside the
direct control of the project managers. Those involved in
the project planning have to show in the Logframe matrix
that they are aware of such factors and have considered
them as important.
Assumptions come with different degrees of risk. Their
analysis tests and refines the vertical logic in the Logframe.
This works as follows:
Once the project results and the related assumptions
are fulfilled, the project purpose will be achieved; and
Once the purpose and the related assumptions are fulfilled, a contribution to the achievement of the overall
objective will be made.
Usually assumptions are identified during the analysis
phase since the analyses of stakeholders, problems, objectives and strategies highlight several issues (e.g. technical,
institutional, social and economic) that will influence the
project but cannot be directly controlled by the project
manager. For example, in the case of the river water pollution example (see section 4.3.1.1. and 4.3.1.2.) the stakeholder analysis as well as the problem, objective and strategy analyses treated the work of the Environmental Protection Agency as an external factor. In order to attain the
project purpose, assumptions need to be made about the
Agencys capacity to regulate solid waste disposal. Other
important assumptions might include the expected introduction of favourable policy initiatives, or decisions at
national, regional and local level, or the additional support
and promotion from other stakeholder groups.
After the identification of assumptions, their probability of
materialisation needs to be analysed to help assess the projects feasibility. The question: Will the assumption hold
true? can have three possible answers:
If the assumption will almost certainly hold true, it
needs not to be included in the Logframe.
If the answer is yes, possibly it will hold true, it is to be
included in the Logframe as an assumption.
If the answer is very unlikely, it should be asked
whether it is possible to redesign the project in order to
reduce the influence of the external factor. If this is not
possible, the project may not be feasible.
Once the analysis and tests of the assumptions have shown
that the project is feasible, the only assumptions that should
remain in the Logframe matrix are those which are likely to
hold true but which nevertheless need to be carefully monitored during project implementation. Then they become
part of the projects monitoring and risk management plan.
4.3.2.3 Defining Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVIs)
of Achievements (Second Column)
In the second column, the performance indicators for
each level of objectives need to be identified and set. These
Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVIs) describe the projects objectives in operationally measurable terms (quantity, quality, time (QTT)) and help to check the feasibility of
objectives. They give an answer to the following questions:
How do we know whether what has been planned has actually happened or not? How do we verify success?
As indicators ultimately provide the basis for designing an appropriate monitoring and evaluation system, they
must be objectively verifiable. This means that observers or
groups of observers applying the same measuring methods
would inevitably come to the same conclusions concerning
your projects achievements.
For defining good indicators, the participants in the
project should develop a common view of the scope of the
project goals and the levels to be achieved. It should be possible for them to define exactly what has to happen. Generally, one should not be satisfied with a generalised declaration concerning a desirable project outcome. Wherever no
precise indicators are set, misunderstandings and conflicts
are likely to occur during project implementation.
Two types of indicators can be distinguished:
Quantitative indicators measure things that can be
counted and are tangible. They are formulated as abso-
50
lute numbers (e.g. number of people involved, number

of jobs created, etc.).
Qualitative indicators are not tangible and cannot be
counted. They can be formulated as a change relative
to a previous level (increase, decrease) or as a change in
the dynamics of a development (acceleration, deceleration). The opinion of target groups is one example for a
qualitative indicator.
Indicators
Good objectively verifiable indicators should be
S.M.A.R.T. That means that each indicator should be:
Specific to the objective it is supposed to measure
Measurable quantitatively or qualitatively
Available at an acceptable cost
Relevant to the information needs of managers
Time-bound so that people involved in the project know when they can expect the objective to
be achieved.
It is recommended to establish more than one indicator for

each objective statement and to use both quantitative and
qualitative indicators in order to measure the real progress
and impact of the project.
Moreover, it is important that indicators are independent of each other and that each indicator relates to only
one objective in the Intervention Logic. In other words,
each indicator should refer to either the project objective,
the project purpose or to one result. For the presentation
of indicators in the Logframe matrix, it is important to
show which indicator belongs to which objective. Again,
the easiest solution is to number each indicator according
to the objective to which it is connected.
Objectively Verifiable Indicators are usually to be
defined in the formulation stage and sometimes in a preliminary way during the identification stage. However,
they often have to be specified during the implementation of the project when the practical information needs
of managers and the practicality of collecting information
becomes more apparent.
Summary
For each objective you will have to define what concrete level of development you would like to achieve.
If any of the objectives selected cannot be paired with
a SMART indicator, the objective must be changed.
Otherwise, there will be no basis for monitoring the
achievement of the objective, no means to control the
efficiency of your work, and no way to ensure that
your funds are spent effectively.
4.3.2.4 Defining Sources of Verification (Third Column)

While the OVIs are formulated, one should consider and
specify the source of verification (SOV) of these indicators.
SOVs describe the sources of information that should be
used to measure the achievement of indicators. All sources
of information are to be inserted in the third matrix column.
The SOV should specify:
what type of data is needed (surveys, reports, special
studies, newspaper articles, official statistics),
who can provide the data (e.g. the project management
team, a public agency), and
when and how regular data should be collected
(monthly, quarterly, annually, etc.).
In many cases, it might be necessary to arrange for project-specific measurements to produce the actual value
of the indicator. For instance, an environmental project
might require physical measurements. For another project, it could be necessary to undertake statistical surveys,
e.g. regional opinion polls. Costs for these activities might
have to be built into the project budget.
More often, it is practical to use the documentation
resulting from the project for defining indicators. For
example, in a staff-training project trainees could take an
exam at the end of their studies. Exam results can be taken
as an indicator for the projects performance. In the case
of a procurement contract the official statement on the
delivery or the acceptance of the products could be utilised. For construction projects, where the indicator is the
completion of a building or facility, one obvious source of
verification is the authorities permit for the facility to go
into service.
There is often a clear interrelation between the cost
and the complexity of the SOV. If OVI data is considered to
be too expensive and/or complicated to collect, it is to be
replaced by a cheaper and simpler one. After the identification of the objective, the project purpose, project results
and activities, assumptions, indicators and sources of verification, the draft Logframe is almost finished. However,
further work will need to be done such as analysing the
indicative activities and assessing the resource and cost
implications.
Summary
There should be an easy answer to the questions
when, how, and by whom the indicators can be measured. It is advisable to define an easily accessible but
slightly less accurate indicator instead of a marvellously complex and accurate one. Otherwise, you will
deprive yourself of the means to follow the implementation of the project, produce clear evidence of your
results, or to realise when you have to intervene, and
turn the fortunes of your ailing project around.
51
4.3.2.5 Finalising the Draft Logframe Matrix: The Logic

Check
As mentioned above, the logical connection between the
different cells of the matrix is twofold as there is a vertical logic and a horizontal logic. The vertical logic tests
the connection of the project description and the project
assumption, whereas the horizontal logic tests the connection of the project description, the set of indicators and
their sources of verification.
In order to design a convincing and consistent Logframe, each level must be directly related to and achieve
the higher level. If higher objectives are too ambitious or if
the links between results and the project purpose are not
realistic, the links between the levels need to be strengthened. Discussion and review can help to gradually improve
the project design.
4.3.2.6 Activity, Resource and Cost Schedules
After having completed the Logframe and checked its
logic, the activity, resource and cost schedules should be
prepared.
The activity plan
Drafting an activity schedule helps to identify the logical
sequence and expected duration of the projects activities
as well as the dependencies existing between those activities. The preparation of such a plan usually includes the
classification of activities into manageable tasks. Moreover,
it allows for a clear allocation of management responsibilities. By means of the activity schedule, further specification of resources (technical and human) and scheduling of
costs can be undertaken.
The activity schedule helps in answering the following
questions:
Who will do what?
When will this happen?
What types of inputs will be needed (besides people)?
As specified in the Logframe matrix, activities should be
clearly linked to the delivery of project results. By carrying forward the project activities from the Logframe to a
detailed activity schedule, the interrelation between activities and results should be maintained.
Resource and cost planning
After the preparation of the activity plan, the resources
necessary to undertake these activities have to be specified
in a budget table. The budget table provides a summary of
the envisaged expenses for all project activities and related
management tasks. In order to make a proper planning of
all necessary resources, a detailed planning per activity
must be established.
Cost estimates should be based on careful and thorough

budgeting as they have significant influence over the
investment decision at project appraisal and subsequently
on the implementation of the project. The preparation of
the budget is based on allocating resources to agreed cost
categories (unit, number of unit, unit rate, costs).
Key message
There are three main elements in the Planning Phase:
Preparation of a Logframe matrix (requiring further
analysis and refinement of ideas),
preparation of an activity plan, and
preparation of a budget.
Both phases of the process of developing a project
should be considered as iterative learning processes
rather than as a simple set of linear steps. For example, it may be necessary to review and revise the stakeholder analysis, carried out early in the process, as new
information is acquired.
52
4.4
Possible activity
You can simulate a project planning workshop with core
stakeholders in a given sector. This could deal with a
practical example of an IPA II project planned in a beneficiary country in a given sector. Each course participant is
assigned a specific role. His/her task will be to analyse the
problems, objectives and strategies together with other relevant stakeholders within the sector.
Your task as a trainer will be to analyse and discuss these
results of the planning workshop together with the participants. The findings can then be illustrated in a Logframe matrix.

Literature
European Commission (2004). Aid Delivery Methods - Project Cycle Management Guidelines, Directorate General
Development and Cooperation; EuropeAid Cooperation
Office, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/sites/
devco/files/methodology-aid-delivery-methods-projectcycle-management-200403_en_2.pdf
Government of the Republic of Serbia, EU Integration
Office (2011): Guide to the Logical Framework Approach, A
Key Tool for Project Cycle Management. 2nd edition, available under: http://www.evropa.gov.rs/Evropa/ShowDocument.aspx?Type=Home&Id=525
European Commission, Directorate General Development and Cooperation (2002): EC Guidelines for the use of
indicators in country performance assessment, available
under: https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/sites/devco/files/
methodology-indicators-in-country-performance-assessment-200212_en_2.pdf
enlargement
programming
53
sector approach
PRAG guidelines

IPA II Regulation
action documents
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
evaluation

project proposal
CHAPTER
05
From a Convincing Project Proposal to

a Successfully Implemented Project
an overview of different management types under IPA II
guidelines for the implementation of IPA II-funded projects
basic public procurement rules for the process of implementing IPA II programmes
principles of project evaluation and links between key
evaluation criteria and Logframe matrix
54
5 From a Convincing Project Proposal to a Successfully

Implemented Project
5.1
Introduction
After the adoption of the Action Programme and the conclusion of the Financing Agreement, the next step is the
implementation and management of actions in the beneficiary country. All activities that have been planned during
the programming, identification and formulation phases
can now commence. In the implementation phase, it is crucial to achieve the results and specific objectives within the
planned timeframe and the allocated budget. Implementation will be monitored, and the results need to be evaluated. In order to do so, this chapter presents guidelines for
the implementation and evaluation phases of the project
cycle including basic rules for the contracting of IPA IIfunded actions. First of all, it will briefly be described in
what ways IPA II assistance can be managed.
5.2
How is IPA Assistance Managed?
There are different management modes for the implementation of the annual and multi annual IPA Action
Programmes. These types differ in the degree of involvement of the EU Commission in the process of managing
EU funds.
Direct management
In direct management mode, all budget implementation
tasks are directly managed by the European Commission
acting for and on behalf of the beneficiarys government.
These tasks include preparation, implementation and finalization of contract procedures and can be done either by
the Commissions headquarters in Brussels, the EC Delegation in the beneficiary country or through EU executive agencies such as the Executive Agency for Small and
Medium-sized enterprises (EASME). Under direct management, the Commission is the Contracting Authority and
takes decisions on behalf of and in account with the beneficiary country fulfilling the necessary requirements of
the Practical Guide to Contract Procedures for EU external action (PRAG).
Indirect management
In the case of indirect management of IPA assistance, the
EU Commission confers budget implementation tasks to
(a) partner countries, (b) international organisations, (c)
development agencies of EU member states or (d) other

bodies. Indirect management is possible with ex-ante or
ex-post controls.
Under indirect management with ex-ante controls,
decisions on procurement are taken by the beneficiary
country acting as the contracting authority while it is
dependent on the prior approval of the European Commission. The Commission needs to verify that in the drafting
of the documents, the rules of the PRAG were adhered to.
After receiving this approval by the Commission, the contracting authority is responsible for conducting the public
procurement procedures with all their elements such as
drawing up shortlists, issuing calls for tenders, receiving
applications et cetera. Before signing contracts, the results
of the evaluations of tenderers are submitted to the European Commission for approval. Again, the Commission
verifies the accordance with PRAG rules before contracts
can be signed. The contracts are also to be sent to the Commission for endorsement.
Under indirect management with ex-post controls, the
beneficiary country takes the decision on procurement
without prior approval by the European Commission. In
this case, contracts are directly concluded by the contracting authority within the beneficiary country. It is responsible for conducting the public procedures in accordance
with PRAG. In this process, the contracting authority of the
beneficiary country can decide on the result of the procedure and the signing of contracts without prior approval
by the Commission. Nonetheless, the contracting authority
needs to submit all relevant notices to the EC in electronic
format for publication.
Shared management
Under shared management, budget implementation tasks
are delegated to EU member states. This management
mode is most common in case of cross-border cooperation programmes. The delegated authority is responsible
for managing assistance and applying the procurement
procedures while the European Commission may verify
the procedures ex-post.
55
5.3
Stage 4: Implementation
In the following two subsections of this chapter, the two

remaining phases of the project cycle will be presented.
After the programming and approval of the Action Programme, the project implementation phase begins. Its
primary objectives are to deliver the results and achieve
the purpose of an action and therefore contribute positively and effectively to the overall programme objective.
In addition, during the implementation phase available
resources are to be managed efficiently and progress of the
actions is monitored and reported on. As planned benefits
are delivered during this stage, the implementation phase
can be considered as the most critical one. The three previous stages in the project cycle (programming, identification and formulation) and their documented outcome - the
Logframe matrix - are therefore essential to stir the actions
and steps during the implementation stage.
The implementation phase can be divided into three
major phases: inception, implementation and phase-out.
During the inception period, contracting arrangements
are to be concluded, resources are to be mobilized, working
relationships with stakeholders are to be established and
the project plan has to be reviewed. One of the first crucial
steps is the set-up of a project team with a competent team
leader. However, it is recommendable to already identify
candidates (for the team leader) well before the Action Programme is approved. The composition of the project team
should represent stakeholder interests, and the team leader
should have the final say about which members to choose
in order to incorporate these interests. The project team
needs to establish good working relationships with stakeholders. Therefore, inception workshops are recommendable to mobilize resources. This period is followed by the
main implementation period.
Key tasks during the main implementation

period:
procurement and deployment of resources including personnel,
implementation of activities and delivery of
results,
monitoring progress,
revision of operational plan (if necessary) in light
of experience, and
report on progress.
Finally, in the phase-out period, responsibilities are handed
over to the local partners and the maintenance plans are
put in place. At the same time, efforts are undertaken to
ensure that relevant skills have been efficiently transferred
and that the cost requirements are met after the completion of the project. Implementation should be understood
as a continuous learning process within which gained

experiences are revised and fed back into the ongoing
implementation process.
The role of the project manager is crucial in this regard.
Most prominently, the project managers role is threefold:
The first task consists of monitoring and regular reviews.
Monitoring is the systematic and continuous collection,
analysis and use of management information to support
decision-making. The project manager must keep an eye
on the progress of the project in terms of expenditure,
resource use, implementation of activities, delivery of
results and management of risks. Regular reviews enable
the project manager to reflect on the progress of the action
and follow-up activities if necessary.
The second task is to plan and re-plan as the project
proceeds. Experiences gained this way often make an
adjustment of the project plan necessary. In any case, project plans can at best only be an estimate of what will happen as the action proceeds. Therefore, new developments
need to be taken into account and may lead to a modification of the whole plan. Important documents such as the
Sector Planning Document (SPD) or the Logframe matrix
must be updated on a regular basis. Sometimes, even the
scope of contractual documents such as the Financing
Agreements needs to be adapted to new developments.
As the third task, reporting on the physical and financial progress keeps the stakeholders informed. This applies
in particular to those stakeholders who are providing
financial resources to the action. In the reports, action progress has to be compared to the initial intentions and plans.
Constraints encountered and any important remedial or
supportive action required should be pointed out. In addition, a report serves as a formal document on the attained
action achievements and facilitates future reviews and
evaluations. By documenting any changes in the forward
plans, a report promotes transparency and accountability.
A good report ultimately provides the basis for evaluation
and audit, the final steps in the project cycle.
Some decisions in the implementation cannot and should
not be taken at the action level by project managers alone.
Therefore, monitoring is supportively carried out at programme level. The European Commission supervises the
implementation of pre-accession programmes through its
services in DG NEAR and DG AGRI (for policy area 4) as well
as the European Commissions Delegations in the beneficiary countries. For this purpose, a monitoring system has
been established including joint monitoring committees
between the Commission and the beneficiary countries. By
means of monitoring and evaluation reports, these committees discuss the implementation of financial assistance
programmes and agree on corrective measures as necessary in order to keep an action on track.
56
As a result of monitoring and review, one of the following options can be taken during the implementation stage:
The implementation of the action can be continued
as planned.
In light of experiences gained through the process
of monitoring and review, plans (resources, activities, budget, etc.) have to be revised.
In extreme cases, the action must be discontinued.
5.4 PRAG Guidelines for Implementing and

Managing IPA Actions
The conclusion of contracting arrangements forms part
of the inception period of the implementation phase. This
section takes a closer look at procurement principles and
procedures which are most important for the implementation of IPA II actions. However, this part only comprises
principles for a specific type of financing under IPA II,
namely procurement (service, works, supply) and grants.
More specified rules regarding procurement principles and
procedures can be found in the Practical Guide to Contract
Procedures for EU external action (PRAG).
5.4.1 General Procurement Principles
The central principles for the participation in procurement
and grants financed under EU external aid (and therefore
also to IPA II) are that applicants are on the one hand eligible and on the other hand not excluded from the aid
scheme. The first notion essentially depends on the rules
of nationality and origin. With regard to IPA II, the rule of
nationality specified in the Common Implementing Regulation stipulates that participation is open to all international organisations, natural persons that are nationals of
or legal persons established in
an EU member state
a beneficiary of IPA II, i.e. a candidate or potential candidate country for EU accession
member states of the European Economic Area (EEA)
partner countries and territories covered by the ENI
instrument
or third countries for which reciprocal access to external assistance is established by the Commission.
This condition is always requested in the Tender Dossier
and the rules for applicants. In case a tenderer is suspected
not to fulfil this condition, the applicant must provide evidence to demonstrate compliance with the nationality
rule. This can be done by proving that the legal personality or the real seat of the tenderer is established under the
law of one of the aforementioned states. However, experts
engaged by eligible tenderers may be of any nationality.
The rule of origin demands that any supply purchased
under a procurement contract or in accordance with a
grant contract shall also originate from an eligible country
as specified in the rule of nationality. Only some exceptions
are valid, for example when the total value of supplies to be
purchased is below 100 000 EUR. It is important to point
out that all supplies delivered fall under the rule of origin;
it is not enough if only a certain percentage of the goods
tendered and supplied or a certain percentage of the total
tender and contract value comply with this requirement.
While applicants need to fulfil these two criteria in order
to apply for IPA II funding, there are also certain exclusion
criteria which hinder applicants from participating in procurement and grants. These are the following :
bankruptcy, affairs being administered by the courts,
arrangement with creditors, suspension of business
activities or subject of proceedings concerning those
matters
conviction of an offence concerning their professional
conduct by a judgment of a competent authority of a
member state
guilt of grave professional misconduct proven by any
means which the contracting authority can justify
non-compliance with obligations relating to the payment of social security contributions or the payment of
taxes in (a) the country of establishment, (b) the country
of the contracting authority or (c) the country where the
contract is to be performed
judgment for fraud, corruption, involvement in a criminal organisation, money laundering or any other illegal
activity
existence of an administrative penalty referred to in
Article 109(1) of the EU Financial Regulation.
In case of an ongoing procurement procedure, three additional criteria apply. The applicants have to provide information that they do not meet the following three criteria.
Otherwise, they will be excluded from the contract award:
existence of a conflict of interest
misrepresentation in supplying the information
required by the contracting authority as a condition of
participation in the contract procedure or failure to supply this information
fulfilment of exclusion situations for this specific procurement or grant award procedure.
57
What is a conflict of interest?

A conflict of interest occurs when the impartial and
objective exercise of the functions of the Contracting
Authority, or observance of the principles of competition, nondiscrimination against or equality of treatment
of candidates, tenderers, applicants and contractors, is
compromised for reasons involving family, emotional
life, political or national affinity, economic interest
or any other shared interest with a beneficiary of EU
funded programmes.
5.4.2 Contract Forms

The basic rules listed in this section as well as stipulated in
PRAG concern four different types of procurement contracts: services, supplies, works and grants. In the following, each of these will be shortly described.
Service Contracts
Service Contracts generally comprise study and technical assistance contracts. Mostly, these contracts are issued
to receive input from external knowledge. Study contracts are often used to identify and prepare actions, feasibility studies and other studies. During technical assistance contracts, the service provider is asked to play an
advisory role or manage and monitor an ongoing action.
Service contracts can either be of a global-price or feebased nature. When choosing a global-price service con-
tract, the payment will be done on the basis of the delivery of determined outputs. An example for a global-price
contract would be the organization of a conference or a
training event. With fee-based contracts, in contrast, the
workload required to deliver an output is not or cannot
be specified beforehand. Following this, the payment will
be done on the basis of the time worked to achieve the
output. Here, an example would be the supervision of an
action or monitoring of facilitation processes. More
detailed information about the procurement of service
contracts can be found under PRAG section 3.2-3.5.
Supply Contracts cover the purchase, leasing, rental or
hire purchase (with or without option to buy) of products.
This clearly delineates it from other contract forms as a
product cannot be a service or works. Supply contracts
may include after-sales services such as installation, testing or maintenance; an example for a supply contract
would be the purchase of IT equipment, vehicles or office
furniture. More detailed information about the procurement of supply contracts can be found under PRAG section 4.2-4.6.
Works Contracts comprise either the execution or both

execution and design of a work as stipulated in Annex I of
Directive 2004/18/EC or as specified by the contracting
authority of the beneficiary country. Works refers to the
EUR 300 000
< EUR 300 000 but > EUR 20 000
International restricted tender
Framework contract
procedure
or
Competitive negotiated procedure
Supply Contracts
EUR 20 000
EUR 300 000
International open tender pro-
< EUR 300 000 but
< EUR 100 000 but
EUR 100 000
> EUR 20 000
Local open tender procedure
Competitive negotiated proce-
cedure
dure
Single tender
For service and supply
contracts, a payment
may be made against
invoice without prior
acceptance of a tender
Works Contracts
EUR 5 000 000
International open tender procedure

or
International restricted tender
procedure
< EUR 5 000 000 but
< EUR 300 000 but
if the expenditure is
EUR 300 000
> EUR 20 000
EUR 2 500
Local open tender procedure
58
outcome of a building or civil engineering project that on

its own is sufficient to fulfil an economic or technical function. More detailed information about the procurement of
works contracts can be found under PRAG section 5.2-5.7.
The last contract form is grants, which is different to the
previous ones as it is in principle not about buying things,
but giving money for something, e.g. a project. A grant is
defined as a financial donation or non-commercial payment by the contracting authority from the EU budget to a
grant beneficiary in order (a) to finance an action intended
to advance the EUs policy objectives or (b) to cover the
operating costs of an entity that promotes or supports
these policy objectives. In contrast to the procurement of
service, supply or works contracts, the EU finances part
of the costs for grants while the grant beneficiary has to
finance the other part. In addition, grants are strictly nonprofit-oriented. More detailed information on grants can
be retrieved from PRAG section 6.2-6.10.
5.4.3 Procurement Procedures
In the context of public procurement of IPA-funded action,
several different procurement procedures apply. Generally,
the basic means of awarding contracts is competitive tendering. This aims at securing that tenderers comply with
the conditions for awarding contracts and that the contracts will be awarded at the best price possible. The following procurement procedures are most common in the
context of EU external aid and consequently IPA II. They
are applied in accordance with the value of the contract
to be procured.
Open procedure
In the open procedures, any legal or natural person as economic operator is invited to submit a tender. The open procedure may be local or international, and the procurement
notice is published in the Official Journal (OJ) of the European Union in order to secure maximum publicity. The
tenderers have to comply with the conditions specified in
the procurement notice, and their capacity to meet the criteria is checked in the selection process. The contract will
be awarded in accordance with the stipulated criteria.
Restricted procedure
In the restricted procedure, all natural or legal persons
as economic operators are invited to request the tender
information. However, in contrast to the open procedure,
only those who satisfy the selection criteria are allowed
to submit tenders. These criteria are specified in the contract notice, and all eligible tenderers replying to the notice
and complying with the criteria are gathered on a long list.
This list will be cut to a short list containing only the best
tenderers based on their offers. The Evaluation Committee will then, on the basis of the evaluation criteria, award
the contract to the best offer.

Under the competitive negotiated procedure, the Contracting Authority invites selected natural or legal persons as
economic operators to submit tenders. From these, the
offer with best value for money (in the case of service contracts) or the cheapest offer (in the case of supply and works
contracts) will be selected. The evaluation of tenderers follows the restricted procedure.
Framework Contracts
A Framework Contract is an agreement between the Contracting Authority and one (or more) economic operators.
The purpose of this agreement is to set the terms for one (or
more) contracts to be awarded to these economic operators
in a given time period. The Framework Contract specifies
the duration, subject, price, maximum value, implementation rules and the quantities envisaged for these contracts.
The maximum duration for a framework contract is four
years; a longer period needs to be justified on grounds of
the specificity of the framework contract. Due to the fact
that it distorts competition, Contracting Authorities are
advised not to make undue use of Framework Contracts.
The specific contracts are awarded under the principles
specified in the agreement and must respect the principles of transparency, proportionality, equal treatment and
non-discrimination.
Single tender procedure
Under the negotiated / single tender procedure, a tender
will be directly awarded to a single economic operator. In
order to do so, a contract has to have a value of less than
20 000 EUR. Before the selection process, the Contracting
Authority needs to check whether the candidate or one
of its partners is in an exclusion situation. A negotiation
report has to be written in which the selection criteria for
participants as well as the setting of price are explained.
In addition, for service and supply contracts, payments of
less than 2500 EUR may be made against invoice without
prior acceptance or selection of tenders. With regard to all
public procurement procedures, it is forbidden to artificially split contracts in order to circumvent procurement
thresholds. In the table on the following page, you can find
a summary of when to apply which procedure for each contract form.
59
Table 1: Differences between grants and other procurement
Grants
Other procurement contracts
Applicant proposes the project
Contracting Authority proposes the project
Call for proposals
Tendering
Guidelines for Applicants
Terms of Reference / Technical Specifications
Grant beneficiary is responsible for implementation
Contracting Authority closely monitors implementation
Selection 1 step
Selection 2 or 3 steps
Maximum budget
Fixed price
Ownership of results by grant beneficiary
Ownership of results by Contracting Authority
Financial contribution by grant beneficiary
No financial contribution by contractor
Non-profit
Profit (competitive)
Payment of a non-commercial nature
Commercially related payment
Frequent secondary procurement
Unusual secondary procurement
5.5
Stage 5: Evaluation
The main purpose of the last phase of the project cycle,

the evaluation phase, is to assess the efficiency, effectiveness, impact, relevance and sustainability of an on-going
or completed action or programme. An evaluation should
follow four guiding principles:
An evaluation should be impartial and independent
from the programming and implementation stages;
An evaluation should be carried out by appropriately
skilled and independent experts who can ensure the
transparency of the evaluation process including wide
dissemination of results;
An evaluation should take into account different perspectives and views; therefore stakeholders should participate in the evaluation process;
An evaluation should lead to the timely presentation
of relevant, clear and concise information to decisionmakers.
Overall objective
impact
Project purpose
effectiveness
Activities
efficiency
Means
relevance
Problematic situation
Logframe objective hierarchy
Evaluation criteria
Sustainability
Results
60
The Evaluation Committee

The Evaluation Committees task is to prepare and conduct the evaluation process of tenders. It is formally
appointed by the Contracting Authority (depending
on the management mode, approval by the European
Commission is obligatory) and composed of a non-voting chair-person, a non-voting secretary and an odd
number of voting members the evaluators. Except for
works contracts above 5 000 000 EUR, there must be a
minimum of three voting members for all procedures,
and an Evaluation Committee must be established for
all procurement procedures except for the single tender procedure.
The European Commission uses the following set of five

key criteria to evaluate individual actions or whole programmes:
Relevance
The evaluation should determine if the socio-economic
objectives of the action are appropriate to the problems it
was supposed to address and to the wider societal context
within which it operates. Assessing the relevance of an
action should also include an assessment of the quality of
the planning process and the action design.
Efficiency
This addresses the question whether the action results have
been achieved at reasonable cost. One of the guiding questions is: How well have inputs/means been converted into
activities (in terms of quality, quantity and time, and the
quality of the results achieved). In order to see whether an
action maximized its efficiency, comparisons must be made
to alternative approaches striving for the same results.
Effectiveness
The key question here is to what extent the action results
contributed to the achievement of the project purpose.
Another question to be answered here could be: To what
extent have the identified assumptions and risks affected
the achievement of action results?
Impact
The impact assessment should evaluate the effect of the
action on its wider surroundings and its contribution to
the wider policy or sector objectives as summarised in the
actions overall objective. Since the achievement of the
overall objective requires the implementation of multiple
programmes and actions, the impact assessment should
not be done directly after the action has been completed,
but rather after a certain amount of time has passed.
Sustainability
The sustainability assessment focuses on the likelihood that
benefits produced by the action will continue to last after
funding has been completed. Knowing how much the local
community has gained ownership of the action results is
one of the key questions in this context.
There is a common link between the five evaluation
criteria and the Logframes objective hierarchy which is
shown in the figure on page 59. Evaluations can differ in
terms of timing and in terms of focus. The following three
types can be distinguished:
Ex-ante evaluation Will we do the right action?
Mid-term evaluation Are we doing the right action
and are we doing it correctly?
Ex-post evaluation Have we done the right action and
have we achieved planned results, purpose and objective of the action?
The types of evaluation do not only differ in terms of timing but also in terms of focus. Mid-term evaluations focus
on questions of continued relevance, efficiency and preliminary indications of effectiveness. However, this form
of evaluation only offers limited possibilities for an impact
assessment as the actions are not finished. Ex-post evaluations, in contrast, focus on questions of impact and sustainability. Finally, ex-ante evaluations can be considered
helpful to improve the design of actions as well as their
monitoring and evaluation in the future.
Monitoring and Evaluation

Monitoring and Evaluation are key elements of project management. They are both based on the collection, analysis and use of
information to support decision-making. At the same time, they
differ in terms of primary purpose and stage of the project cycle
when they occur.
Monitoring is an analysis of project progress towards achieving planned results with the purpose of improving management
decision-making. Considering any operational changes that need
to be made to the action work plan and deciding remedial actions
are important elements of the monitoring process. Monitoring is
undertaken regularly during the implementation phase.
Evaluation is an assessment of the efficiency, effectiveness,
impact, relevance and sustainability of aid policies and actions.
Evaluation can and should be done after action identification
(ex-ante evaluation), during an on-going action (mid-term evaluation) and most certainly after action implementation (ex-post
evaluation).
Another assessment adding to monitoring and evaluation
is Audit. The purpose of an audit is to provide assurance and
accountability to stakeholders and to provide recommendations
for improvements of current and future actions. Audits are undertaken in the form of systems reviews (ex-ante) or upon the completion of an action.
61
Problem
analysis
Policy
formulation
Ex post evaluation
Ex ante evaluation
Monitoring
Policy
implementation
Mid term evaluation
5.6
Possible activity
Start a discussion about the essential elements of the
implementation and evaluation phase. Create a short
multiple-choice quiz regarding general procurement
principles and procedures after your presentation in
order to test participants knowledge about PRAG.

European Commission: Practical Guide to Contract Procedures for EC external actions (PRAG) 2014, available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/prag/document.do
European Commission (2004): Aid Delivery Methods - Project Cycle Management Guidelines, Directorate General
European Commission: Guidelines of the Framework Contracts Beneficiaries 2009, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/
europeaid/sites/devco/files/1_1_guidelines_benef_2009_
version_10_2014_en.pdf
62
Conclusion
In the course of the 1990s, the EUs financial support to the
Western Balkans has basically been provided in the form
of ad hoc actions and measures responding to urgent needs
during and after war. There was no coherent and structured relationship between the EU and the newly emerging countries in the Western Balkans.
After awarding the EU perspective to all countries participating in the Stabilisation and Association Process at
the Feira European Council in 2000, the EU approach to
the Western Balkans became more structured. Several preaccession programmes such as ISPA, SAPARD or CARDS
were set up in order to initiate the alignment of these countries to the EU. This approach lasted until the launch of the
Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA), which was
conceived for the period 2007-2014.
With the initiation of IPA, the EU further strengthened its pre-accession activities in the Western Balkans.
Not only did it provide more overall funding for the candidate and potential candidate countries, but it also merged
the several existing programmes under one single legal and
political framework. This contributed to the harmonization of implementing procedures and gave pre-accession
assistance a uniform scope and focus.
The new IPA II for the period 2014-2020 can be seen as
both the continuation of this process as well as the adjustment of the pre-accession instrument to attain more efficient funding tailor-made to the needs of each beneficiary
country. IPA II reinforces the positive and well-functioning
aspects of its predecessor and combines it with some novelties aimed at further simplifying and harmonising preaccession assistance.
For example, the differentiation between candidate
countries and potential candidate countries was abandoned. From 2007-2014, this differentiation was seen as
reasonable following the logic that candidate countries
were able to access a larger share of IPA components and
EU assistance than potential candidate countries. However, internal evaluation and intensive dialogue with the
beneficiaries have shown that each country should benefit
from all possible financial support, irrespective of its status and stage in the enlargement process. In addition, the
sector approach as the new key guiding principle of preaccession assistance foresees to strategically approach EU
assistance and promote efficient and effective funding. Following this, pre-accession funding is deemed to progressively move towards more strategic sector-based and less
ad-hoc project-based assistance.
In order to benefit from this strategic IPA assistance, beneficiary countries have to go through great endeavours.
The goals of IPA actions and interventions need to comply
with EU goals of pre-accession assistance, and they have
to advance overall sector development in the beneficiary
countries and their national sector goals.
Planning and programming IPA funding requires the
application of complex proceedings and management
tools, the most important of which were presented in this
Training Manual for IPA II.
In programming IPA assistance, a good understanding of
the basics and principles of IPA as well as a basic knowledge of how the EU operates is of utmost importance.
This requires competent instructors who are familiar
with the EU and its pre-accession strategy and can share
their knowledge with a target group an aim to which this
Training Manual strives to contribute.
We hope that this Training Manual will prove to be useful
in your future training activities and contribute positively
to our common efforts for promoting a united, peaceful
and prosperous Europe.
country sector strategies
IPA II REGULATION
national strategy
national IPA coordinator
NIPAC
sector approach
CHAPTER
Annex

sources of information
abbreviations
glossary of terms
action documents
performance measurement
the instrument for pre-accession assistance II
sector working groups
need assessment document
programming
sector operational programme
DG enlargement
63
national ownership
common strategic
framework
64
A1 Sources of Information
Chapter 2
European Union (2014): The History of the European
Union, available at: http://europa.eu/abc/history/index_
en.htm (last accessed: 12 May 2014).
at: http://www.safu.hr/datastore/filestore/10/European_
Funds_for_Croatian_Projects.pdf (last accessed: 17 June
2014).
Cini, Michelle/Prez-Solorzano, Nieves (2013): European Union Politics, 4th edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Elbasani, Arolda (2013): European integration and

transformation in the Western Balkans: Europeanization
or business as usual?. Routledge: Abingdon.
Nugent, Neil (2010): The government and politics of the

European Union, 7th edition, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
European Commission (2014): Instrument for PreAccession Assistance (IPA II) 2014-2020. A Quick Guide to
IPA programming.
Pinder, John: The European Union. A very short introduction, Oxford 2007.
European Commission (2014): DG Enlargement on IPA

II, available at http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/instruments/overview/index_en.htm
Piris, Jean-Claude (2010): The Lisbon Treaty. A Legal

and Political Analysis, Cambridge: University Press.
Chapter 3
Allen, David (2005): Cohesion and Structural Funds, in:
Wallace, H., Wallace W., Pollack, M. (eds.) Policy-Making
in the European Union, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bache, Ian (2011): Europeanization and Multi-level governance, in Bache, I. and Andreou, G. (eds). Cohesion Policy
and Multi-level Governance in South East Europe, Oxford:
Routledge.
European Commission (2014): Eurostat: Regional Yearbook 2014, available at http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/publications/regional-yearbook.
European Commission (2014): DG Regional Policy.
Regional Policy - Inforegio, available at http://ec.europa.
eu/regional_policy/index_en.cfm (last accessed: 12 May
2014).
European Union (2011): Cohesion Policy 20142020 Investing in Jobs and Growths, available at http://
ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/
regulation/pdf/2014/proposals/regulation2014_leaflet.
pdf (last accessed: 12 May 2014).
Chapter 4
Central Office for Development Strategy and Coordination of EU Funds (2009): European Funds for Croatian
Projects. A Handbook on financial cooperation and European Union supported programmes in Croatia, available
Gjorgjievski, Mate (2008): EU Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance: The path to a successful start, in: Center
for EU Enlargement Studies: Using IPA and other EU funds
Balkans, Budapest, pp. 69-88, available at: http://web.ceu.
hu/cens/assets/files/IPA.pdf (last accessed: 22 May 2014)..
Official Journal of the European Union (2014). Council
Regulation 231/2014 establishing an Instrument for Preaccession Assistance (IPA II). L 77/11-26.
Official Journal of the European Union (2014). Council
Regulation 236/2014 laying down common rules and
procedures for the implementation of the Unions instruments for financing external action. L 77/95-108.
Chapter 5
European Commission (2004): Aid Delivery Methods Project Cycle Management Guidelines, Directorate General
Government of the Republic of Serbia, EU Integration
Office (2011): Guide to the Logical Framework Approach, A
Key Tool for Project Cycle Management. 2nd edition, available under: http://www.evropa.gov.rs/Evropa/ShowDocument.aspx?Type=Home&Id=525
European Commission: Practical Guide to Contract
Procedures for EC external actions (PRAG) 2014, available
at: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/prag/document.do
65
European Commission (2004): Aid Delivery Methods Project Cycle Management Guidelines, Directorate General
Conclusion
Szemlr, Tams (2008): EU Financial Support for the Western Balkans: Well-suited to Real Needs?, in: Center for EU
Enlargement Studies: Using IPA and other EU funds to
accelerate convergence and integration in the Western Balkans, Budapest 2008, pp. 9-22, available at: http://web.ceu.
hu/cens/assets/files/IPA.pdf (last accessed: 18 June 2014).
66
A2 Abbreviations
AD
Action Document
AP
Action Programme
Art.
article
BiH
Bosnia and Herzegovina
CAP
Common Agricultural Policy
CARDS
Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and Stabilisation
CBC
Cross-border Cooperation
CF
Cohesion Fund
CFSP
Common Foreign and Security Policy
CSF
Common Strategic Framework
CSP
Country Strategy Paper
DG
Directorate General
DG AGRI
Directorate General Agriculture
DG NEAR
Directorate General European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations
EAFRD
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development
EAGGF
European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund
EC
European Community
ECB
European Central Bank
ECJ
European Court of Justice
ECSC
European Coal and Steel Community
EDC
European Defence Community
eds.
editors
EEAS
European External Action Service
EEC
European Economic Community
EMU
Economic and Monetary Union
ENI
European Neighbourhood Instrument
EP
European Parliament
EPC
European Political Community
ERDF
European Regional Development Fund
ESF
European Social Fund
ESI
European Structural and Investment Funds
67
TEN-T
European Transport
EU
European Union
Euratom
European Atomic Energy Community
Eurostat
European Statistical Office
EUSF
European Union Solidarity Fund
FYROM
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
GDP
Gross Domestic Product
GNP
Gross National Product
HR
High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
IGC
Intergovernmental Conference
IPA
Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance
ISPA
Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-accession
JHA
Justice and Home Affairs
LFA
Logical Framework Approach
MEP
Member of the European Parliament
MTEF
Medium-Term Expenditure Framework
NATO
North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
NGO
Non-Governmental Organisation
NIPAC
National IPA Coordinator
NPAA
National Programme for the Adoption of the Acquis
NUTS
Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics
OJ
Official Journal of the European Union
OVI
Objectively Verifiable Indicator
OP
Operational Programme
OS
Operating Structure
PAF
Performance Assessment Framework
PCM
Project Cycle Management
PHARE
Poland-Hungary: Actions for Economic Reconstruction
PRAG
Practical Guide to Contract Procedures for EC External Actions
QMV
Qualified Majority Voting
SAA
Stabilisation and Association Agreement
SAP
Stabilisation and Association Process
68
SAPARD
Special Accession Programme for Agricultural and Rural Development
SEA
Single European Act
SMEs
Small and Medium-sized Enterprises
SPD
SOV
Sources of Verification
SWOT
Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats
TAIB
Transition Assistance and Institution Building
TEC
Treaty establishing the European Community
TEEC
Treaty establishing the European Economic Community
TEU
Treaty on European Union
TFEU
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
TOR
Terms of Reference
WEU
Western European Union
69
A3 Glossary of Terms
Term
Definition
Accession Partnerships
An instrument of the Communitys pre-accession strategy. The Accession

Partnerships are designed to guide and assist the candidate countries in
their efforts to achieve the accession criteria, in particular to implement
the Community acquis. In one document per country, short and mediumterm priorities are determined.
Acquis communautaire
Set of common rights and obligations that bind all the member states
within the EU. It includes all the treaties, regulations and directives passed
by the European institutions as well as judgements laid down by the European Court of Justice. In order to become a member state, applicant countries have to accept the acquis, transpose it into their national legislation
and implement it upon accession.
Action
A coherent set of coordinated activities undertaken to meet a defined

objective of a geographic and/or sectorial scope, which have an estimated
total cost to which the EU approves a maximum contribution, as well as
implementation schedule and performance parameters.
Action Document
The Action Document serves as the underlying document for the preparation of the national IPA Action Programme. The Action Document is of an
operational nature and incorporates all actions planned in a beneficiary
country as well as their rationale.
Action Programme
A set of Actions for EU financial assistance defined by clearly identified

objectives and expected results, as well as implementation arrangements
and other related conditions for execution adopted through a Commission
implementing decision.
Activity
A component of an action which can be clearly identified by its costs and

EU contribution, as well as type of financing.
Activity Schedule
A schedule setting out the timing, sequence and duration of project activities. It can also be used to identify milestones for monitoring progress and
assigning management responsibility for the achievement of these milestones.
Assumptions
External factors that have the potential to affect or even determine the
success of a project. They lie outside the direct control of the project manager. Assumptions form the fourth column of the Logframe matrix and
should be formulated positively.
Beneficiaries
Groups that benefit from the implementation of a project. They can be

either the target group or final beneficiaries. Whereas target groups will
be immediately and positively affected by the actions, final beneficiaries benefit from the action in the long term at the level of the community,
society or sector at large.
70
Candidate country
The candidate country status is granted to applicant countries for European membership on the day the European Council officially accepts the
application. At present, these are: Albania, Turkey, the Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, Serbia, Montenegro and Iceland.
Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and Stabilisation
The programme of Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and Stabilisation aimed at supporting the participation of the Western Balkan countries in the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP). In
2007, CARDS was replaced by the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance
(IPA).
Cohesion Fund
This Fund was set up in 1994 in order to provide financial assistance to the
least prosperous countries of the EU. It supports projects in the fields of
environment and transport infrastructure. It is made available to member
states where the gross national product is less than 90 percent of the Community average.
Contracting Authority
The Contracting Authority is responsible for awarding grants, tendering,

contracting and payments. Whereas this is the case in the event of indirect management, it is the European Commission in the event of direct
management.
Copenhagen Criteria
Accession criteria decided at the Copenhagen European Council in 1993.

To join the EU, an applicant country must have stable institutions to guarantee democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights including the rights of minorities. Moreover, it must have a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competition and market
forces. Finally, it must have adopted common rules, standards and policies
that form the Community acquis.
Cost-benefit analysis
A cost-benefit analysis involves the valuation of the flow of the projects

costs and benefits over time to determine the projects return on investment. A comparison is made between the situation with and without
the project to determine the net benefit of the project.
Council of the European Union
One of the Unions central decision-making institutions. The Council

meetings are attended by one minister from each of the member states
governments.
Country Strategy Paper
The Country Strategy Paper is a multi-annual document defining the

scope and use of pre-accession assistance under IPA II for each beneficiary
country. It breaks down the general guidelines, principles, criteria and
indicators of pre-accession assistance and applies to the individual situation of the respective beneficiary country.
Direct management
In the event of direct management, all budget implementation tasks are

directly managed by the European Commission acting for and on behalf
of the beneficiarys government. These tasks include preparation, implementation and finalization of contracts procedures and can be done either
by the Commissions headquarters in Brussels, the EC Delegation in the
beneficiary country or through EU executive agencies.
Effectiveness
Contribution made by the projects results to the achievement of the project purpose.
Efficiency
The fact that the results were obtained at reasonable cost, i.e. how well
means and activities were converted into results, and the quality of the
results achieved.
71
European Atomic Energy Community

(Euratom)
Founded on 1 January 1958. Its aim is to conduct research and develop

nuclear energy, to create a common market for nuclear fuels and to supervise the nuclear industry to protect health and prevent abuse. The institutions of the European Coal and Steel Community, the European Economic
Community and Euratom were amalgamated under the Merger Treaty,
signed in Brussels on 8 April 1965 and in force since 1 July 1967.
European Coal and Steel Community
Founded in 1951 by France, West Germany, Italy and the Benelux States.
One of the functions of the creation of a common market for coal and
steel products was to tie West Germany into the post-war Western European order and guarantee peace in Western Europe. Since 1967 the institutions of Euratom, the European Coal and Steal Community and the
European Economic Community have merged.
European Commission
The European Commission is the quintessential supranational actor and

the executive arm of the EU. Its main tasks consist in initiating legislation
and implementing EU policies and the EU budget.
European Council
The European Council brings together the heads of state and government
of the European Union and the president of the Commission. It defines the
general political guidelines of the European Union.
European Court of Auditors
The Court of Auditors ensures that EU funds coming from the taxpayers
are properly collected and legally spent. Its task is to ensure that the taxpayers receive the maximum value for their money.
European Court of Justice
The Court of Justice of the European Community ensures that EU legislation is interpreted and applied in the same way in all EU member states.
Moreover, the Court makes sure that EU institutions and member states
do what the law requires.
European Parliament
The European Parliament is directly elected by the European citizens in

order to represent their interests and acts as a supranational institution.
Its main tasks consist in enacting legislation together with the Council of
the European Union and exercising budgetary power.
European Partnerships
An instrument of the Communitys pre-accession strategy. The European

Partnerships have been set up for the potential candidate countries within
the framework of the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP). They
define priority actions and a financial structure needed to improve stability and prosperity in the Western Balkans with a view to the eventual EU
membership of the potential candidate countries.
European Regional Development Fund
The European Regional Development Fund aims at fostering economic

and social cohesion in the European Union by correcting imbalances
between its regions. The ERDF is active in the areas of investment in
small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), investment in infrastructure and development of endogenous potential by measures which support regional and local development. It intervenes in the three objectives
of Regional Policy: Convergence, Regional Competitiveness and Employment as well as European Territorial Cooperation.
European Social Fund
The European Social Fund is one of the EUs structural funds. By promoting employment it aims at reducing differences in prosperity and living
standards across the member states and regions of the EU.
72
Evaluation
A periodic assessment of the efficiency, effectiveness, impact, relevance

and sustainability of aid policies and actions. Lessons of the evaluation are
used to influence future projects and programmes. The evaluation phase
is the final phase of the project cycle.
Feasibility study
A study usually carried out during the formulation phase. It verifies

whether the proposed action is well-founded, and is likely to meet the
needs of its intended target groups/beneficiaries. The study should design
the action in full operational detail and takes into account all policy, economic, financial, institutional, management and environmental aspects.
Due to the study, the Commission and partner governments will have sufficient information to justify acceptance, modification or rejection of the
proposed project for financing.
Financing Agreement
Document signed by the European Commission and the respective partner country/countries subsequent to a financing decision. It is the formal
commitment of the subscribers to finance a programme or project.
Formulation Phase
Third stage of the project cycle. The purpose of this stage is to confirm the
relevance and feasibility of the actions. The formulation phase consists of
finalising the Action Documents so that they are arranged in the form of a
draft Action Programme. For each Action, the Action Programme should
indicate the objectives pursued, the expected results and main activities,
the methods of implementation, the budget as well as an indicative timetable. The draft Action Programme will be an annex to the draft Commission Implementing Decision (CiD).
Identification phase
Second phase of the project cycle. This phase includes the identification
of project ideas that are consistent with partner priorities and those of the
Commission.
Impact
The effect of a project on its wider surrounding and its contribution to the
wider sector objectives (as summarised in the projects overall objective)
and to the achievement of the Commissions overarching policy objectives.
Implementation Phase
Fourth phase of the project cycle. Its primary objectives are to deliver
the results and achieve the purpose of an action and therefore contribute
positively and effectively to the overall programme objective. In addition,
during the implementation phase, available resources are to be managed
efficiently and progress of the actions is monitored and reported on.
Inception Phase
First period in the implementing phase, from project start until the writing of the inception report. During the inception phase, contracting
arrangements are to be concluded, resources are to be mobilized, working
relationships with stakeholders are to be established and the project plan
has to be reviewed and revised.
Indirect management
Under this management mode, the EU Commission confers budget implementation tasks to (a) partner countries, (b) international organisations,
(c) development agencies of EU member states or (d) other bodies. Indirect
management is possible with ex-ante or ex-post controls.
Instrument for Structural Policies for

Pre-accession
The Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-accession was a Community framework for the candidate countries of Central and Eastern Europe
in the period 2000-2006. It provided financial support in the areas of economic and social cohesion. In 2007, ISPA was replaced by IPA.
73
Intervention logic
The intervention logic is the strategy underlying the project. It contains

the steps to be realised by the project and the overall objective to which
it contributes. The intervention logic forms the first column of the Logframe matrix.
Logical Framework Approach
The Logical Framework Approach is an essential management tool in each

phase of the project cycle. It should be used for the preparation, implementation and evaluation of a project.
Logical Framework matrix
The documented product of an analytical process (including stakeholder

analysis, problem analysis, analysis of objectives, analysis of strategies).
In the Logframe matrix the projects Intervention Logic, Assumptions,
Objectively Verifiable Indicators and Sources of Verification are presented.
Means
Means (or inputs) are physical and non-physical resources that are necessary to carry out the planned activities and manage the project.
Monitoring
An analysis of project progress towards achieving planned results with

the purpose of improving management decision-making. Monitoring is
undertaken regularly during the implementation phase.
Multi-beneficiary programmes
Programmes designed to assist a group of beneficiary countries and to

complement the support given under National Programmes. Multi-beneficiary actions require the cooperation between the participating countries
and encourage the establishment of regional structures and networks,
most prominently by means of Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes.
National IPA Coordinator
The NIPAC shall ensure a close link between the Commission and the
beneficiary country with regards both to the general accession process
and the use of assistance under the IPA Regulation.
Objective Tree
Diagrammatic visualisation of a desired future situation once problems

have been remedied, following a problem analysis and showing a meansto-end relationship.
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Measurable indicators showing whether or not objectives have been

achieved. OVIs lay down the basis for designing an appropriate monitoring system.
Overall objective
Description of a future changed situation that a project strives to accomplish. The overall objective explains why a project is important for the
society in terms of long-term benefits for the beneficiaries. It also shows
how the programme or project is consistent with regional/sectoral policies as well as the Commissions overarching policy objectives.
Performance Assessment Framework
The Performance Assessment Framework is a monitoring system to assess

the progress made towards achieving sector policies.
Potential candidate countries
Countries that may apply for EU membership. Currently, these are: Bosnia
and Herzegovina and Kosovo* as defined in UNSC Regulation 1244.
Problem Analysis
A structured investigation of the negative aspects of a situation in order to

establish causes and their effects.
Problem Tree
Diagrammatic visualisation of a negative situation showing a cause-effect

relationship. The problem tree is the documented output of a problem
analysis.
74
Programming Phase
First phase of the project cycle during which priorities of cooperation are
identified by the European Commission and the partner country governments. The output is a national indicative programme that defines general guidelines for cooperation with the EU and specifies focal sectors and
themes within a country or a region.
Project cycle
Life-cycle of a project leading from the initial idea to its completion. The
project cycle defines decision options, key documents, key tasks, roles and
responsibilities so that informed decisions can be made at each phase in
the life of a project.
Project Cycle Management
Methodology for the preparation, implementation and evaluation of projects and programmes based on the Logical Framework Approach. In
1992, the European Commission adopted PCM as its primary set of project
design and management tools.
Project purpose
Central objective of a project in terms of sustainable benefits to be delivered to the projects beneficiaries.
Regulation
A legislative act of the European Union which is binding in its entirety

and directly applicable in all member states.
Results
Tangible products or services that are delivered as a consequence of the

implementation of a set of activities. Results are what the project managers are responsible for achieving by the actions completion date.
Risks
External factors that have the potential to affect the success of an action
and that are not very likely to hold true.
The Sector Planning Document is a multi-annual document which

assesses the sector maturity of a given sector in a beneficiary country and
specifies the actions planned within this sector. It includes an overview of
the sector and the sector assessment as well as a sequencing of IPA actions
with a mid-term and long-term perspective.
Shared management
Under shared management, budget implementation tasks are delegated

to EU member states. This management mode is most common in case of
cross-border cooperation programmes.
Sources of Verification
SOVs describe the sources of information that should be used to measure

the achievement of indicators. They form the third column of the Logframe matrix.
Special Accession Programme for Agricultural and Rural Development
Through SAPARD, the EU provided financial assistance for the alignment

to the Common Agricultural Policy and related policies. The programme
was targeted on a sustainable development in the rural and agricultural
sector of the Central and Eastern European Countries in the period 20002006.
Stabilisation and Association Agreement
Main element of the Stabilisation and Association Process. The SAA provides a framework of mutual commitments on a wide range of political, trade and economic issues between the EU and each Western Balkan
country.
Stakeholder Analysis
Identification of all stakeholder groups that will be affected by the proposed intervention, the analysis of their interests, problems and potentials. The results of this analysis are to be integrated into the action
design.
Stakeholders
Individuals, societal groups or institutions that may directly or indirectly,

positively or negatively affect or be affected by the action.
75
Imprint
Published by
Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Internationale
Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH
Registered offices
Bonn and Eschborn, Germany
Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 40, 53113 Bonn, Germany
Phone: +49 228 44 60-0
Fax: +49 228 44 60-17 66
Dag-Hammarskjld-Weg 1-5, 65760 Eschborn, Germany
Phone: +49 61 96 79-0
Fax: +49 61 96 79-11 15
info@giz.de
www.giz.de
Responsible
Angela Marx
Senior Project Manager EU Integration of South Eastern Europe
angela.marx@giz.de
As at
March 2015
Author
Institut fr Europische Politik e.V.
Bundesallee 23
10717 Berlin
Telefon: +49 30 8891 340
info@iep-berlin.de
www.iep-berlin.de
Design and layout
Nicole Fritsch | Visuelle Kommunikation
August-Bebel-Str. 61, 04275 Leipzig
nicole_fritsch@gmx.de
Photo credits
GIZ; Cover photo: shutterstock
GIZ is responsible for the content of this publication.
On behalf of the
German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ)

IPA II Trainer Manual

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

IPA II Trainer Manual

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

PRAG guidelines

country strategy paper

European Regional Policy

instrument for pre-accession assistance

logical framework approach

IPA II - The Instrument for

IPA II - The Instrument for

Before You Start Information for the Trainer .............................................................................................................................. 10

4.2.3 Stage 2: Identification................................................................................................................................................................................................. 41

cally concentrates on informing the reader about the

country strategy paper

European Regional Policy

INSTRUMENT FOR PRE-ACCESSION ASSISTANCE

logical framework approach

Before You Start

In this chapter you will find:

1 Before You Start Information for the Trainer

Structure of the Training Manual

The Training Manual on the Instrument for Pre-Accession

Objectives of the Training Manual

The pre-accession strategy of the EU is based on a highly

ming processes on the local, regional, and national levels

The following criteria were adhered to while devising the

tively. We also want to support you in your teaching

Tips and Tools for Your Teaching

lish dialogue between trainer or presenter and trainees

work results is obligatory. You also might announce in

1.4.2 Feed-back and Evaluation

After this training session the participants are

Key learning points

Welcome and introduction

Active listening, active participation

IPA II legal and strategic framework

Active listening, active participation

Sector approach and the

Active listening, active participation

Action Document writing

Active listening, active participation (short simulation on AD quality

After this training session the participants are

After this training session the participants are able

After this training session the participants are able

country strategy paper

instrument for pre-accession assistance

logical framework approach

European Regional Policy

In this chapter you will find:

2 European Regional Policy

Why do we need a European Regional Policy? Today

History of EU Regional Policy

In 1957, the authors of the Treaty of Rome defined the

The Treaty of Maastricht (Treaty on European Union) of

Poland and Hungary: Aid for Restructuring of the Economies

increased by 5 percent. The disparities in terms of income

Overview of the period of 2007-2013

the gross domestic product (GDP) was below 75 percent of

Objective 3 - European Territorial Cooperation

Structural Funds and Instruments

Regional Competitiveness and Employment

Source: European Commission, Directorate General Regional Policy

In order to reduce regional disparities between future EU

Reform of Cohesion Policy 2014-2020:

EU Cohesion Policy for the current period (2014-2020) has

2.3.2 Common Rules, Objectives and Allocation

COHESION POLICY ARCHITECTURE