Materials from a training for NGOs about how to develop high quality project proposals for EU funding.

1. Master Class on EU funding for EPHA members Tamsin Rose October 2009

6. Reminder: a project… Responds to priorities of funder Limited set of actions Concrete results Short time-frame Delivered in partnership Pan-European in nature Co-financing of activities Co-ownership of results

7. Reminder: a tender… Responds exactly to requirements of funder Limited set of actions Funder defines the expected results Contractor proposes a methodology Can generate a profit Deliverables carry the funder's logo/brand Funder owns the results

8. Sample SANCO project cycle Summer: Commission gathers ideas for Annual work programme Autumn: Programme committee reviews and approves Annual work programme February: Publication of the call for projects May: Deadline for submission June-July: Evaluation process July: Programme Committee decision on funding August: Results of evaluation Sept – Nov: Negotiation and signature of contracts January: Start of new projects

11. What is the problem? Key problem to address: conduct problem analysis with accuracy to tackle causes and effects Finding “the roots of the evil”: - What is the problem to be solved? - Where does it start? - Focus on one problem only! - Find its causes and effects - The project activities “tackle” the causes of the problem in order to solve the problem in a sustainable way

12. Sample project logic Overall objective : to provide the trained workforce required for the next phase of the development plan. Project objective : x number of people with y skills should find suitable employment after training Results : Successful training leading to employment Activities : develop training course, test course, publicise it, pilot phase of students Outputs: a well functioning institute and a flow of well-trained people Inputs : personnel, trainers and training material

17. Policy and context Contribution to Public Health Programme and the annual workplan – note the specific priorities of the funding call Strategic relevance to existing knowledge and implications for health European added value - Impact on target groups and long-term multiplier effect - Complementarity/synergy with other EU policies and programmes Geographic coverage Adequacy of project with social/political/cultural context

19. Management quality The organisation applying for funding must: — guarantee an appropriate governing structure, management processes, human and financial resources and administration, and good working relationships with relevant partners and stakeholders, — be able to demonstrate the level of achievement of its organisational objectives and its capacity to achieve result.

22. Scoring used by DG Research 0: The proposal fails to address the criterion under examination or cannot be judged due to missing or incomplete information 1: Poor. The criterion is addressed in an adequate manner, or there are serious inherent weaknesses. 2: Fair. While the proposal broadly addresses the criterion, there are significant weaknesses. 3: Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well, although improvements would be necessary. 4: Very good. The proposal addresses the criterion very well, although certain improvements are still possible. 5: Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion in question. Any shortcomings are minor.