Energy and Environment Partnership with the Mekong Region EEP Mekong Programme

Call-for-Proposal (CfP) Yangon – Myanmar - 1 July 2016

6th Call-for-Proposals

•  Announced on 30 May 2016

•  CN submission deadline 12 August 2016

•  FPP submission deadline 07 October 2016

•  Contracting projects for funding end-November 2016

Eligibility for Application

Technical focus NOT ELIGIBLE ARE: •  Feasibility studies •  Pilot projects (testing of new technology) •  projects with main focus on capacity building

Eligibility for Application

•  Geographic Coverage: Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam o  Regional projects – implemented in more than one of the Mekong partner countries are eligible

•  Duration: 20 months (*ending in 2018)

•  Lead Partners: Private sector companies and business associations registered in one or more of the Mekong countries or Finland

•  Promotion of South-South, North-South and trilateral cooperation between the Mekong countries and Finland.

•  Encourage transfer of know-how and technology in Clean Energy from Finland to the Mekong region •  cooperation with Finnish partners is considered an advantage in application for funding.

Partners must sign partnership commitment letter to be attached as signed scan copy to the concept note/project proposal.

•  NOT ELIGIBLE AS LEAD PARTNER ARE: multilateral institutions, development agencies, trust funds, govt. agencies, universities – but can cooperate with lead partners

EEP-MEKONG CONTRIBUTION

Project size - Euro Max EEP-M co-funding – Euro

Min self contribution - Euro

Max contribution EEP-M

500,000 245,000 255,000 49 %

1,000,000 400,000 600,000 40 %

1,500,000 525,000 975,000 35 %

2,500,000 625,000 1,875,000 25 %

5,000,000 750,000 4,250,000 15 %

10,000,000 1,000,000 9,000,000 10 %

Own contributions have to exclude grants from other sources (donors etc.) – loans from commercial sources or development agencies, however, are eligible.

Funding Approach Result based Funding - RBF

•  Project developers have to indicate which of the milestones/results in their proposal will trigger the EEP incentive

•  Eligible results are: A.  Increased access to sustainable energy services

o  number of households and/or businesses supplied with clean energy

B.  Increased renewable energy generation or energy saving o  kWh generated from renewable sources or saved by energy-

efficiency improvement v  combination of both types of results is possible

•  incentive is paid ex post after delivery of results •  no advance payment. •  but milestone results (e.g. partial or full completion of the

installation of a clean energy system) can also be proposed by developers.

eepmekong.org

Guidelines Download and calculator

On line application form: https://members.eepmekong.org/

Overview of funding applications received from project developers in

Myanmar on the 5th Call for Proposals

Concept Note Stage

•  Number of Concept Notes Received by Country

Concept Note Stage

•  Number of Concept Notes Received by Technology

Call-for-Proposal (CfP) Application – Selection Process CONCEPT NOTE stage

CN received

(RCU)

CN screening

(RCU)

CN Evaluation

(RCU + evaluators)

Evaluation summary

(RCU)

Endorsement by EoF-MFA

Invitation of selected CN/PD to submit

FPP

(RCU)

3 external evaluators for each CN

Call-for-Proposal (CfP) Application – Selection Process

CN received

71

CN screening

44

CN Screening (RCU)

CONCEPT NOTE SCREENING CRITERIA (must comply with all the criteria) 1. Is the Concept Note signed by an authorized representative of the Lead Partner, and are there signed MOUs with other possible partners attached.

2. No conflict of interest / privileged relationship with a member of the technical evaluation. The scan copy of the signed statement must be included as

annex, as well as a scan copy of the company business register or the country specific registration document in case of NGO application.

3. Clear additionality to the project from EEP grants funding?

4. Are the basic eligibility criteria respected (eligible partners, type of projects activity, technical focus, maximum implementation period, geographical

area)?

5. Is it relevant to the objectives and priorities of the call for proposal?

6. Is it relevant to the particular needs and constraints of the target country or region related to clean energy policies and promotion strategies of the

relevant countries?

7. Does it present a defined business model?

8. Does it apply proven and mature technologies?

9. Does it meet the minimum self-financing ratio set for the investment?

10. Is the proposed funding results-based or can it easily be adapted at FPP stage?

11. Does the lead applicant have sufficient technical and project management expertise, as well as financial capacity?

12. Clear adherence to the development policy of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs (MFA) of Finland regarding the Human Rights Based Approach (HRBA)

and Cross-Cutting Objectives (CCO) particularly regarding the issues of (i) participation, (ii) good governance (accountability and transparency), (iii) non-

discrimination and gender equality, (iv) reducing inequality, poverty and marginalization, (v) climate sustainability.1

Distribution of screened and validated CNs by country Country CN submitted CN validated (%)

Cambodia 11 9 (82 %) Lao PDR 10 5 (50 %) Myanmar 9 7 (78 %) Thailand 13 9 (69 %) Vietnam 24 13 (54%) Regional 4 1 (25 %)

TOTAL 71 44 (62 %)

Main reasons why CN did not pass screening •  Project value below min. funding level 1CN

•  Project developer not registered an eligible country 1CN

* PD have been contacted by RCU during CN screening to adjust funding share if made mistakenly

Call-for-Proposal (CfP) Application – Selection Process – CONCEPT NOTE stage

CN received

(RCU)

CN screening

(RCU)

CN Evaluation

(RCU + evaluators)

Evaluation summary

(RCU)

Endorsement by EoF-MFA

Invitation of selected CN/PD to submit

FPP

(RCU)

3 external evaluators for each CN

EVALUATION OF CONCEPT NOTES

Evaluation by external evaluators contracted by RCU – validated by MFA/EoF-Hanoi

•  3 evaluators for each CN

44 Concept Notes for evaluation 7 CN from Myanmar (16%)

17 Concept Notes pass evaluation 3 CN from Myanmar (18%)

CN selected during evaluation process

Country CN to evaluation CN rejected CN validated Cambodia 9 4 5 (56 %) Lao PDR 5 3 2 (40 %) Myanmar 7 4 3 (43 %) Thailand 9 8 1 (11 %) Vietnam 13 8 5 (38%) Regional 1 0 1 (100 %)

TOTAL 44 27 17 (39%)

Main reasons why CN not pass the evaluation process

•  Sustainability of project not given – business plan 2CN

•  Business as usual – Market distortion - Additionality 1CN

•  Cost too high – pilot 1CN

Call-for-Proposal (CfP) Application – Selection Process Full-Project PROPOSAL stage

FPP received

(RCU)

FPP Evaluation

(RCU + evaluators)

Evaluation summary – recommen-

dation of projects for

funding(RCU)

Validation of recommendation

for funding by EoF-MFA

Endorsement of projects for

funding(SC)

Funding Contract PD - MFA

3 external evaluators for each FPP

Reasons why FPP did not pass the evaluation process

•  Cost too high – pilot 1CN

Full-Project PROPOSAL

Country no. of projects Cambodia 5 Lao PDR 2 Myanmar 3 Thailand 1 Vietnam 5 Regional 1

TOTAL 17

Technology - overall FPP Solar-PV 8 Solar thermal 1 Biomass 5 Biogas 3

TOTAL 17

Technology – Myanmar FPP Solar 3

TOTAL 3

FPP Applications – received - approved

* One project developer from Vietnam decided not to submit FPP

Project value Euro

Funding request Euro

FPP received (total)* 16 31.2 Mio 4.8 Mio

FPP Myanmar 3 11.3 Mio 1.9 Mio

Project value Euro

Funding request Euro

FPP approved (total) 7 27.8 Mio 3.26 Mio

FPP Myanmar 2 9.8 Mio 1.4 Mio

List of projects approved for funding during CfP-5

More information please contact

bernhard.meyhofer@eepmekong.org cosme.arana@eepmekong.org

visit our website

www.eepmekong.org