Neighbourhood Programme RomaniaUkraine Phare CBC 20042006

1
Neighbourhood Programme Romania-Ukraine (Phare
CBC 2004-2006)

• Synthesis

2
Topics

• Main objectives envisaged by the programme
• Financial allocations for grant schemes
• Size of grants
• The contracting status
• Distribution of the contracted funds over the
  eligible counties
• Distribution of the contracted funds between
  priorities/measures envisaged by the programme
• Problems encountered solutions implemented
• Conclusions.

3
Main objectives

• Promoting cooperation between regions,
  communities and authorities from each side of the
  borders, in order to address common issues,
  through implementation of projects that
  contribute to the development of the envisaged
  regions
• Promoting good neighborly relations, social
  stability and economic development within the
  border regions, by financing of projects showing
  visible benefic impact for the regions and
  communities within these areas
• Increasing the institutional capacity for
  managing, programming and efficient
  implementation of the future structural funds.

4
Financial allocations
5
Size of grants
6
Contracted funds
7
Distribution of the contracted funds over the
counties
8
Distribution of the contracted funds between
priorities/measures envisaged by the programme
9
Problems encountered and solutions identified (1)

• Delays in the evaluation process due to various
  reasons (eg. large number of the projects
  submitted, projects that were not eligible and
  had to be considered for examination during the
  first 3 stages of evaluation, because the
  eligibility checks are performed only during the
  4-th stage, thus hindering the work of
  evaluators, etc.).
• Implementation of a series of measures designed
  to make the evaluation process more efficient and
  less time-consuming (eg. cumulating some stages
  in the evaluation, as, for example, the opening
  and administrative checks with the evaluation of
  the concept note, the resulting reports being
  sent for approval simultaneously using an
  appropriate number of evaluators and secretaries,
  etc.).

10
Problems encountered and solutions identified (2)

• Problems related to the process of implementation
  of projects, mainly
• 1.Clarifying the situation regarding the
  legislation applicable (after Romania became a
  Member State of the UE) to the process of
  secondary procurements necessary in order to
  implement the financed Actions (the performance
  of many projects was blocked, until the
  clarifications from the EC and the national
  authorities having competences in this domain
  were issued) specific Phare CBC 2004 problem,
  considering that, initially, grant contracts were
  mentioning PRAG rules as applicable to the
  process of secondary procurements.
• All contracts were amended in order to state upon
  the applicable legislation (not PRAG, but the
  national one, harmonized with the relevant
  Community directives), but the implementation of
  projects was gravely delayed.

11
Problems encountered and solutions identified (3)

• 2.Clarifying the situation regarding the
  modality of payment and recovering of the VAT for
  those expenditures included in the projects which
  involved VAT costs (not eligible expenditures),
  as, according to the new fiscal legislation
  (applicable since January 2007), the exemptions
  related to the VAT payments under these projects
  were no longer applicable.
• Legislative measures had to be taken in this
  respect (a Government Ordinance and further
  implementation rules were issued).
• All contracts were amended in order to state upon
  the modality of payment and recovering of the
  VAT.

12
Problems encountered and solutions identified (4)

• Other problems encountered in the process of
  implementing and monitoring of projects (related
  to the poor flow of communication between the
  Beneficiaries, the ROCBC Suceava and the
  Implementing Agency poor knowledge in what
  concerns the implementation rules eg. regarding
  Payment or Reporting procedures, or, in some
  cases, reluctance to observe such rules,
  insufficient staff involved in the monitoring
  process large number of amendments to the grant
  contracts requested during their performance
  poor quality of the reports submitted, especially
  those accompanied by a payment request, etc.).
• Better oriented trainings for the Beneficiaries
  in each eligible county were organized (the JTS
  within the ROCBC Suceava was responsible for
  performing this task) for Phare CBC 2005 and
  2006 grant schemes, depending on the number and
  complexity of projects, a more appropriate number
  of experts with attributions related to the
  monitoring of projects and assisting the
  Beneficiaries during implementation was ensured.

13
Conclusions (1)

• Clear and flexible implementation procedures
  (related to all stages involved, as the launching
  of the CFPs, the evaluation process, the
  contracting one, the implementation and
  monitoring of projects), which are considering,
  as much as possible, both the ex jure and ex
  facto situation that might affect the
  implementation of projects and also the specific
  of the programme have to be prepared, as early as
  possible, and reevaluated as often as necessary,
  in order to contribute to a smooth
  implementation.

14
Conclusions (2)

• Local human and financial resources necessary in
  the process of implementation have to be
  thoroughly considered since the beginning of the
  programme development.
• Since the projects are to be implemented at
  local level (in the eligible areas covered by the
  programme), ensuring an appropriate number of
  specialized staff to perform the delegated tasks
  within the concerned regions and of the
  appropriate resources in this respect is a must.

15
Conclusions (3)

• In spite of the programmes implemented so far,
  there is a high number of local actors which
  lacks sufficient expertise in what concerns
  projects elaboration/implementation.
• Continuous assistance for the local actors
  (helpdesks, workshops, etc.) has to be provided,
  both before and after the contracting stages,
  thus helping also in the establishment of an
  efficient relational system between them and the
  local structures involved in the implementation
  of the programmes.

16
Conclusions (4)

• More emphasis should be put on the specific
  control and monitoring of projects (e.g.
  regularly quarterly site visits should be
  performed) and also on the prevention of other
  various problems (e.g. for investment projects -
  maladjusted, not updated technical
  projects/designs, unrealistic needs assessments,
  including the financial/human resources, or the
  time necessary for completing the project, etc.).
• The risk factors and related countermeasures
  should be periodically reevaluated during the
  implementation of the programme, taking into
  account also the experience gained following this
  process. The resulting analysis constitutes a
  relevant prerequisite for the future
  completion/amendments of the procedures used by
  the institution involved in the implementation
  process, or the necessary adjustments of the
  grant contracts and/or related annexes.

17
A successful storyDanube Delta Eco-Tourism
Center Beneficiary County Council Tulcea
18
A successful storyDanube Delta Eco-Tourism
Center Beneficiary County Council Tulcea
19
A successful storyDanube Delta Eco-Tourism
Center Beneficiary County Council Tulcea
20
A successful storyDanube Delta Eco-Tourism
Center Beneficiary County Council Tulcea
21
THANK YOU!