1st call and 2nd call Indicative general overviewcoopterritoriale.regione.veneto.it/Central-Europe/wp-content/... · 1st call and 2nd call Indicative general overview ... • i ftl

CENTRAL EUROPE PROGRAMME 2007 20132007-2013

Task Force meetingTask Force meetingVienna, 16 October 2009

1st call and 2nd call Indicative general overview

Barbara Di Piazza & Monika Schönerklee-Grasser

JTS CENTRAL EUROPE PROGRAMME

Important remarks for the correct understanding and appraisal of the proposed slides:

The overview analysis is based on data of the approved projects + y pp p jprovisional data on the second call for proposals (projects technically recommended to be funded by MC)

Data provided are anonymous (e.g.: no reference to acronyms of projects)

As far as data related to 2nd call projects, some changes in the to be recommended projects are still possible

STRUCTURE

Overview of approved+recommended projects per Priority

Overview of approved+recommended projects per Area of Intervention

Overview of allocated ERDF funds vs. Operational Programme allocationallocation

Relevance of investments in approved+recommended projects

Use of flexibility rules within the Programme (20% - 10% flexibility rules)

Overview of Overview of approved+recommended

j t P i itprojects per Priority

INPUTS FOR DISCUSSION

Adopted approach in the 1st and 2nd call demand driven and bottom Adopted approach in the 1st and 2nd call, demand driven and bottom up, has been characterized by:

P l b itt d i ll P i iti d i ll A f I t ti • Proposals submitted in all Priorities and in all Areas of Interventions

Approved+recommended projects show:

• Improved distribution of projects per Priorities and Areas of Intervention

• Significant resubmission of proposals rejected in the 1st round (out of the 179 proposal received, 36 were resubmitted with a current success rate of 25%)rate of 25%)


Projects approved+recommended for fundingper Priority (1st and 2nd call) indicative dataper Priority (1st and 2nd call) - indicative data

Equilibrated distribution of number projects among the Programme Priorities


Projects approved+recommended for funding (indicative)vs Operational Programme ex ante output indicatorsvs. Operational Programme ex ante output indicators

Approvedprojects

Recommended projects

Total (approved+recommended

OP ex anteOUTPUT*

% fulfilledprojects(1st call)

projects(2nd call)

recommended OUTPUT

Priority 1 4 11 15 33 45,4%

Priority 2 4 8 12 43 27,9%

Priority 3 11 7 18 43 41,8%

Priority 4 10 6 16 36 44,4%

TOTAL 29 32 62 155 40%TOTAL 29 32 62 155 40%

*The ex ante output results will not be reached due to the higher project sizesize

Overview of Overview of approved+recommended

j t projects per Area of Intervention



Details on the approved+recommended projects for funding (indicative) per Priority (indicative) per Priority

+ 1.1 Enhancing framework conditions for innovation+ 1.2 Establishing capabilities for the diffusion and application of innovation- 1.3 Fostering knowledge development


Details on the approved+ recommended projects for funding (indicative) per Priority (indicative) per Priority

+ 2 1 Improving Central Europe´s interconnectivity+ 2.1 Improving Central Europe s interconnectivity- 2.2 Developing multimodal logistics´ cooperation+ 2.3 Promoting sustainable and safe mobility

2 4 Promoting information ad Communication technologies and alternative - 2.4 Promoting information ad Communication technologies and alternative solutions for enhancing access



+ 3 1 Developing a high quality environment by managing and protecting + 3.1 Developing a high quality environment by managing and protecting natural resources and heritage+ 3.2 Reducing risks and impacts of natural and man-made hazards+ 3 3 Supporting the use of renewable energy sources and increasing energy + 3.3 Supporting the use of renewable energy sources and increasing energy efficiency- 3.4 Supporting environmentally friendly technologies and activities



+ 4.1 Developing polycentric settlement structures and territorial cooperationcooperation~ 4.2 Addressing the territorial effects of demographic and social change on urban and regional development (considered an important topic in the questionnaires filled in by the MS)questionnaires filled-in by the MS)+ 4.3 Capitalising on cultural resources for more attractive cities and regions


Final Remarks• Appreciable distribution of approved+recommended projects along all pp pp p j g

Priorities and all Areas of Interventions

• 2nd call has equilibrated the situation after the 1st call for proposals

• However, some Areas of Intervention present some weaknesses (1.3, 2.2, 2.4 and 3.4 )

• Presumed weaknesses not due to the lack of submission of proposals within the highlighted AoI

AoI 1st callreceived

1st callapproved

2nd callreceived

2nd callrecomm.

1.3 5 0 14 22.2 1 0 2 12.4 2 1 3 03.4 4 2 1 0

Overview of allocated ERDF Overview of allocated ERDF funds vs.

O ti l P g Operational Programme allocation


Allocation of ERDF fundsapproved+recommended projects for funding per Priority (indicative)approved+recommended projects for funding per Priority (indicative)

• Currently the Programme is allocating ca. 133 Mio ERDF to projects of the 1st and 2nd call • The provided data do not take into account eventual budget cuts due p gto the financial assessment and results of the State Aid compliance check


Allocation of ERDF fundsApproved+recommended projects for funding per Priority (indicative) Approved+recommended projects for funding per Priority (indicative)

1st and 2nd ll ERDF

OperationalP ERDF

% ERDF ll t d

% ERDF il blcall ERDF

allocation(EUR)

Programme ERDF allocation(EUR)

allocated available

ca.133.000.000,00 231.250.410,00 58% 42%



Allocation of ERDF fundsApproved+ recommended projects for funding per Priority (indicative) Approved+ recommended projects for funding per Priority (indicative)

vs. Operational Programme allocation


Allocation of ERDF fundsApproved+ recommended projects for funding per Priority (indicative) Approved+ recommended projects for funding per Priority (indicative)

vs. Operational Programme allocation


Allocation of ERDF fundsApproved+ recommended projects for funding per per AoI (indicative) Approved+ recommended projects for funding per per AoI (indicative)

Relevance of investments in Relevance of investments in the Programme


Investments (indicative information)

No of projects

Total investments

Averageamount per

Incidence of the

with investments

(EUR) project (EUR)

investmentson the total budgets

1st call 8 2.859.678 357.459,75 12,7%2nd call* 15 2.905.284 193.685 6,7%

* Amount of second call could be reduced due to necessary budget revisions

The Programme does not attract significant investments as it is not seen g gprimarily as an investment-oriented Programme

Position contrary to what stated in the filled-in questionnaires by the Member States

Use of flexibility rules within Use of flexibility rules within the Programme (10%—20%)


Use of 20% flexibility rule

Limited use of the 20% flexibility rule:• out of the 179 received applications only 9 used the 20% flexibility • out of the 179 received applications, only 9 used the 20% flexibility rule• out of them 2 are recommended for funding

Use of 10% flexibility rule

Limited use of the 10% flexibility rule:y• 7 projects used it for a total amount of ca EUR 290.000 ERDF


Final remarks

•The proposed analysis does not highlight the need of filling-in specific gaps in Priorities and/or Areas of Intervention

•Identified weaknesses can be overcome with targeted and sharper communication/fertilization activities (see next slides)

NEXT STEPS

Identified options

A. Launch of a third standard callB Launch of a third standard call and of a strategic call (with limited B. Launch of a third standard call and of a strategic call (with limited funds) within 2010C. Identification of strategic projects within those approved in the standard calls

A. LAUNCH OF A THIRD STANDARD CALLTHIRD STANDARD CALL

Main characteristics:Main characteristics:

•Open to all prioritiesBottom up approach•Bottom up approach

•Weaknesses identified in some Areas of Intervention will beaddressed through:

Specific focus in public events/info daysMore incisive CPs´ fertilization activities on theirnational/regional territory through the identification of newapplicants/ institutions and relevant/ interested persons withinTargeted meetings with potential applicants (also addressed toa geted eet gs w t pote t al appl ca ts (also add essed tospecific Priorities) organized by the CPs

•Proposed allocation of ERDF funds of ca. 55-60 Mio EUR

A. LAUNCH OF A THIRD STANDARD CALL

Indicative timetable (Option 1)

THIRD STANDARD CALL

Activity TimelineActivity TimelineAnnouncement of thecall

Annual event 2009(Verona)

Launch of the 3rd call 1 March 2010Closure of the 3rdcall 30 April 2010Administrative May 2010Administrativecompliance analysis

May 2010

Assessment June-November 2010MC meeting (decision forfunding)

December 2010

A. LAUNCH OF A THIRD STANDARD CALL

Indicative timetable (Option 2)

THIRD STANDARD CALL

Activity TimelineAnnouncement of the call Annual event 2009

(Verona)Launch of the call 1 February 2010

Cl f h ll 31 M h 2010Closure of the call 31 March 2010

Administrativecompliance analysis

April 2010compliance analysisAssessment May - October 2010

MC meeting (decision forf di )

November 2010funding)

This option is technically preferred on condition that no significant changes in the Application Package take placechanges in the Application Package take place

B. LAUNCH OF A STRATEGIC CALL

In case the MS still consider the option of having a strategic projects call In case the MS still consider the option of having a strategic projects call viable, some driving principles must be agreed upon:

• avoid confusing applicants with approaches (standard/strategic call) • avoid confusing applicants with approaches (standard/strategic call) that are very similar and prevent making the right choice• strategic call must have a special appealing compared to the standard oneone• Strategic Projects to be considered like the CENTRAL EUROPE flagship projects

different concept approachp pp

B. LAUNCH OF A STRATEGIC CALL

• Open to selected topics considered as relevant according to the MS filled-in questionnaires

• Foresee at least 4 strategic projects (e.g.: 1 per selected topic within g p j ( g p peach Priority)

• Possibility of supporting/enhancing investments (according to the Possibility of supporting/enhancing investments (according to the filled-in questionnaires MS showed interest in getting a transnational added value to already planned investments)

• Top down approach

P d ll ti f 16 20 Mi EUR ERDF• Proposed allocation of ca. 16-20 Mio EUR ERDF

• Max project duration of 36 months (+ eventual additional 4 months in case of need)

B. LAUNCH OF A STRATEGIC CALL: HOW?

• Accompanying measures offered by the JTS (guidance during the

:

elaboration of the project)

• Directly report to the Monitoring Committee (e.g.: twice during the y p g ( g gproject life-time)

• Benefit from a special targeted promotion (e g : dedicated Benefit from a special targeted promotion (e.g.: dedicated knowledge management measures and capitalization actions)

Reflections and analysis on some slides already presented at the 4th MC meeting follow

B. CALL ON STRATEGIC PROJECTSTHE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Activity Time

Announcement of the presence of strategic projects –press conference

Annual event 2009(Verona)p ( )

JTS will identify the experts for the identification of theproject concepts (preparation of ToR)

November 2009?

Id tifi ti f t i d tIdentification of topics and partners

1. Identification of topics2 Expression of interest by the MS in taking the

January 2010 (at thelatest)2. Expression of interest by the MS in taking the

leadership in one topic (optional)3. Preparation of the Terms of Reference of the at least 4

strategic projects (to be later approved by the MC)

latest)

February 2010g p j ( pp y )

4. Launch of calls for expression of interest at nationallevel for the identification of partners (criteria to bedeveloped) in accordance with the project concepts

March 2010

5. Elaboration of a list of suitable partners April 2010

B. CALL ON STRATEGIC PROJECTSTHE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Activity Time

Partnership generation1. Elaboration of partnership (CPs involvement) End of April 2010

2 Official launch of the targeted strategic call (addressed Mid June 20102. Official launch of the targeted strategic call (addressedonly to the selected topics and project concepts)

Mid June 2010

3. JTS accompanying measures for the projectdevelopment (also with the contribution of the CPs)

Mid of Julydevelopment (also with the contribution of the CPs)Official closure of the call Mid of July

MC meeting for the approval of the Strategic Projects September 2010g pp g j p

Strategic projects start October NovemberStrategic projects start October – November2010

Closure of the projects (at the latest) End of 2013

C. IDENTIFICATION OF STRATEGIC PROJECTS

• No launch of strategic calls

PROJECTS

• Strategic projects are identified along their implementation based on their capacity of meeting the foreseen targets

• Specific monitoring tools and criteria will be developed in order to identify strategic projects

• Possibility of giving them additional funds for communication, PR, knowledge management and capitalization

• Involvement in specific networks promoted by the EU COM (e.g.: URBACT, ESPON, involvement of the Committee or Regions…)g )

Thank you for your attention!y y

Documents

1st call and 2nd call Indicative general overviewcoopterritoriale.regione.veneto.it/Central-Europe/wp-content/... · 1st call and 2nd call Indicative general overview ... • i ftl