European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR): 2018 Global Call for Proposals - EuropeAid/161054/DH/ACT/Multi

Deadline: Dec 21, 2018  
CALL EXPIRED

​​1.1. Background

The European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) is a European Union programme that aims to promote democracy and human rights worldwide through support to civil society initiatives. The EIDHR was adopted by the European Parliament and the Council in March 2014 (Regulation No. 235/2014) for the period 2014-2020 by replacing and building upon the EIDHR (2007-2013) and the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights (2000-2006). 

This instrument is designed to support civil society to become an effective force for political reform and defence of human rights. In doing this, it complements the geographical programmes, which focus on public institution-building. The EIDHR offers independence of action, which is a critical feature of cooperation with civil society organisations at national level, especially in the sensitive areas of democracy and human rights. It offers a great flexibility and an increased capacity to respond to changing circumstances or to support innovation. The EIDHR has considerable independence of action since it does not need the consent of the governments of the countries concerned for the financing of activities.

The EIDHR is global in scope. It operates at national, regional and international levels and supports actions carried out in third countries outside the European Union, throughout the world. The EIDHR regulation defines five main objectives:

1) Support to Human Rights and Human Rights Defenders in situations where they are most at risk;

2) Support to other EU Human Rights Priorities with main focus on protecting human dignity including abolition of the death penalty, eradication of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, support to a comprehensive approach to rehabilitation and prevention activities, protection and promotion of children's rights, protection of women's rights, fighting discrimination in all its forms, fighting against impunity, promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief, promotion of economic, social and cultural rights, promotion of the respect for international humanitarian law;

3) Support to Democracy;

4) Support to EU Election Observation Missions;

5) Support to targeted key actors and processes, including international and regional human rights instruments and mechanisms.

For the period 2018-2020, the EIDHR Multi Indicative Programme and Multi-Annual Action Plan describes the evolving global context and the shrinking civic, democratic and civil society space, it was decided to keep the 5 objectives as mentioned above. This particular call for proposals will mainly work on the objectives 1 (10mio EUR), 3 (7mio EUR) and 2 (5mio EUR).  

1.2. Objectives of the programme and priority issues 

The global objective of this call for proposals is to support civil society in protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms worldwide.

This call for proposals is fully in line with the European Consensus on Development, the EU's response to the UN 2030 agenda for sustainable development. The recently adopted European Consensus sets out in an integrated manner the main principles which will guide the approach of the EU and the Member States to cooperation with developing countries over the next 15 years, as well as a strategy for reaching the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The Consensus reiterates the EU and its Members states commitment to the principles of EU external action, set out in Article 21(1) of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU): democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.

This call is equally aligned with the EU's priorities as identified in policies and regulations, notably the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2015-2019 and the specific human rights guidelines adopted by the EU. 

The specific objectives of this call for proposals are:

• To support Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) Human Rights Defenders and their organisations working in areas where LGBTI persons are most at risk of discrimination. 

• To support civil society action towards universal abolition of the death penalty.

• To support civic activism and participation by leveraging digital technologies.

The definition of the objectives of each of the lots of this call for proposals has been subject to an exchange of views with civil society organisations on the 24th of May 2018 in Brussels. The outcome of this exchange is published on the EuropeAid website.  

Overarching and working principles 

The call will finance projects which respect the rights-based methodology. The European Consensus on Development commits the EU and its Member States to implementing a rights-based approach (RBA) to development cooperation, encompassing all human rights. It thereby reinforces the EU's commitment to an RBA as outlined in the 2012 EU Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy, the 2014 Tool-box "A Rights-Based Approach, Encompassing All Human Rights, for EU Development Cooperation", and the respective Council Conclusions. In addition, the EIDHR Regulation stipulates that in its implementation, the EU shall apply a Rights-Based Approach (RBA) encompassing all human rights, whether civil, political, economic, social or cultural. Therefore, all proposals under all lots of this call for proposals shall be designed according to a Rights-Based Approach. Please note that this aspect will be assessed at both concept note and full application phases.   

The RBA is a working methodology based on internationally recognised human rights and is directed to promoting and protecting human rights in practice. A RBA integrates the norms, standards and principles of international human rights law into the plans, policies and processes of development programmes and projects and applies to all sectors, all modalities, and each step of the project cycle – identification, formulation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. 

The RBA implies that target groups are considered as ‘rights-holders’ with legal entitlements, and government institutions are not mere service providers but ‘duty-bearers,’ who are under an obligation to deliver on people’s human rights. In line with a Rights-Based Approach, development cooperation should contribute to the development of the capacities of ‘rights-holders’ to claim their rights and ‘duty-bearers’ to meet their obligations. Programmes and projects therefore need to assess the capacities of rights-holders and duty-bearers and develop the appropriate strategies to build these capacities. At the heart of the RBA is the recognition that unequal power relations and social exclusion deny people their human rights and often keep them in poverty. The approach therefore puts strong emphasis on marginalised, disadvantaged, and excluded groups. 

The RBA methodology also reminds us that development projects can have unintended negative impact in terms of human rights such as disadvantaging certain groups, interfering with participation rights and labour rights or contributing to forced displacement. It is therefore important to abide by the 'do no harm' principle and carry out the required analysis and mitigation. 

Moreover, the RBA working methodology recognises that pursuing desired human rights outcomes is not, in itself, enough. The way these outcomes are achieved is equally important. Programmes therefore monitor and evaluate both outcomes and processes.

The five working principles, applying all rights, participation and access to decision-making, non-discrimination and equal access, accountability and access to rule of law and transparency and access to information, should be implemented as appropriate in relation to any proposed project.

Please find additional links to useful reference documents: 

• The UN Statement of Common Understanding on Human Rights-Based Approaches to Development Cooperation and Programming (the Common Understanding) adopted by the United Nations Development Group (UNDG) in 2003;

• OHCHR Human Rights Based Approach Frequently Asked Questions 

 

Cross-cutting elements

Gender equality is an integral part of the RBA, encompassing the promotion, protection and fulfilment of all human rights. Gender equality constitutes a fundamental human rights principle and a common value of the European Union (EU Treaties, EU Gender Action Plan 2016-2020). Each selected proposal will have to report against relevant "SMART" sex-disaggregated indicators mentioned in the mandatory EU Gender Action Plan 2016-2020.  

In addition, the paragraph below highlights important elements in order to guide you in the drafting process of your proposal, whenever relevant for the specific actions foreseen. Therefore, the whole list of issues/elements highlighted should not necessarily be integrated in your proposal. The selection procedure will evaluate proposals in their entirety depending on the context of the activities proposed and on the target groups and final beneficiaries/rights holders identified. 

Moreover, proposals should whenever relevant include conflict sensitivity and environmental issues. 

Focus on the needs and challenges faced by targeted groups/rights-holders living outside the capitals and in remote areas, and/or encourage the constitution and capacity-building of networks of local organisations and implementing actors, including at regional level should also be taken into account. 

Furthermore, it is important that any organisation or group that works with children or young people has a clear set of guidelines about how they will keep children safe and to respond to child protection concerns. Therefore, applicants and co-applicants working directly with or for children should demonstrate in their proposals that a child protection policy is in place for any project activities that involve interactions with children. 

These added value elements should be reflected both in the concept note and in the full application.    

 

LOT 1: SUPPORT TO LGBTI HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS AND THEIR ORGANISATIONS WORKING IN AREAS WHERE LGBTI PERSONS ARE MOST AT RISK OF DISCRIMINATION

 

The EU is committed to the principle of the universality of human rights and aims to promote and protect all human rights for all individuals. Human rights, including those for LGBTI persons, are protected under existing international human rights law. The right to equality and non-discrimination is embodied in Articles 2 and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 2 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) . 

However, LGBTI persons continue to be subject to discrimination, persecution, bullying, gross-ill treatment, extreme forms of violence and other serious human rights violations worldwide. Sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) continue to be used to justify serious violations of human rights. Discrimination against LGBTI persons is often rooted in societal norms and perceived roles and representations into societies that perpetuate gender inequality. Sexual orientation laws are still criminalising same-sex acts in many countries, and in others, the laws are not offering the level of protection needed or are not enough implemented and monitored, making various forms of discrimination happening on a daily basis in all spheres of life of LGBTI persons.

In this context, Human Rights Defenders who are working to promote and protect the human rights of LGBTI persons constitute an extremely vulnerable group. They are frequent targets for prosecution and violations of their rights. Therefore, support and protection for human rights defenders working on sexual orientation and gender identity matters has been established as a priority for action under the 2013 EU Guidelines to promote and protect the enjoyment of all Human Rights by Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) persons, The EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2015-2019 also recognises support to LGBTI human rights defenders as a tool to effectively protect and promote human rights of LGBTI persons.

The general objective of Lot 1 is to support and promote human rights of LGBTI persons and protect them against discrimination. 

The specific objectives of Lot 1 are:

a) to protect LGBTI Human Rights Defenders (HRD) and their organisations from threats in short, medium and long-term, and support their preventive security;

b) to build the capacities of LGBTI human rights defenders and their organisations in supporting local initiatives, grassroots and nascent movements, encouraging the creation of LGBTI alliances and networks and engagement with new allies in most at risk situations;

c) to strengthen advocacy work at local, regional and international level by LGBTI human rights defenders and organisations, including , including legislative and policy reforms, as well as awareness raising about discrimination against and violation of human rights of LGBTI persons;

d) to support LGBTI human rights defenders and organisations for better strategic litigation, reporting and documentation on cases of SOGI discrimination, and targeted capacity building of police and law enforcement agencies;

For the purpose of this call, actions should focus on at least one of the specific objectives mentioned above. 

Preference will be allocated to:

• - Proposals providing support to LGBTI defenders and organisations working on intersex and transgender matters and target groups; 
• - Proposals submitted by local organisations or by regional networks/platforms/alliances/consortia of organisations.

 

Examples (indicative and non-exhaustive list) of activities for Lot 1:

• - Establishment of LGBTI HRDs emergency mechanisms for immediate protection, defence and support to LGBTI persons whose lives are at risk, including support to temporary relocation and shelters and other similar solutions.
• - Building crisis management capacities of LGBTI HRDs and organisations, support the adoption of proactive security plans, including digital security.
• - Building capacities of LGBTI HRDs to document violations and improve reporting and investigation of SOGI violations, notably through engaging with and building the capacity of police and law enforcement agencies.
• - Support to strategic litigation and challenge of discriminatory laws at local, national and regional level.
• - Development of strategic advocacy plans to raise awareness on SOGI discrimination and submit reports against national human rights organisation (including NHRI) and regional organisations.
• - Support to under-resourced intersex movements to address the fight against non-consensual /forced genital surgery and to relief trauma and depression of intersex persons.
• - Support to under-resourced transgender movements to address specific challenges such as lack of legal gender recognition, high violence (under reporting and lack of investigation), and limited access to education, employment and non-pathological healthcare. 
• - Challenge social norms and perceived roles of individuals in societies leading to discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons who are particularly vulnerable targets for bias-motivated killings and rape based on their sexual orientation and gender identity. 
• - Development of strategies by LGBTI activists to engage with new allies (doctors, teachers, families…) in the reality of shrinking space for civil society.
• - Capacity building for LGBTI local organisations, activists, and grassroots movements in sound financial management, advocacy and communication work, security plans, support to victims, monitoring and reporting, strategic engagement with  the authorities, encouraging peer learning and the creation of regional and international networks and alliances.

 

LOT 2: supporting the fight against the death penalty

 

The universal abolition of the death penalty is one of the key priorities of the EU external human rights policy. The EU is strongly opposed to the death penalty for all cases and all circumstances, in line with the Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy (Action 13 "Combatting torture, ill-treatment and the death penalty), the EU Guidelines on Death Penalty and at the international level, the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Where the death penalty still exists, the EU calls for its use to be progressively restricted and insists that it must be carried out according to minimum standards based on international human rights obligations.

 

Even though the general international trend points toward the abolition of the capital punishment, a thousand people are still executed each year (993 in 2017 according to Amnesty International) and over 20 000 people are known to be on death row. 

 

In this context, it is crucial that the EU political commitment goes hand in hand with dedicated financial assistance to support civil society organisations fighting capital punishment on the ground. The EU is the leading donor in that regard through the EIDHR, which addresses support to the fight against the death penalty under objective 2 of the regulation N° 235/2014.  

 

The general objective of this lot is to support civil society action towards universal abolition of the death penalty

Specific objectives are defined in line with the EU Guidelines on the Death Penalty, as follows: 

a) To support legal reform in order to abolish the death penalty, establish a moratorium and/or restrict the use of the death penalty;

b) To enhance respect of the right to a fair trial and of minimum standards for those facing the death penalty in line with the EU Guidelines on Death Penalty and the Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty (Economic and Social Council Resolution 1984/50);

c) To enhance capacities and raise awareness of legal professionals, judicial and administrative actors, local civil society, youth, media and other relevant stakeholders on the death penalty;

d) To improve transparency and access to accurate information on the death penalty.

For the purpose of this call, actions should focus on at least one of the specific objectives mentioned above.

Preference will be allocated to:

• • - Proposals submitted by lead applicants who are local organisations or by networks/platforms of local organisations;
  • - Proposals targeting countries where the death penalty is most in use, where most impact can be expected (for instance, in "swing states" in a moratorium situation) or where there is a high risk that the capital punishment could be reintroduced. In all three cases, relevant justification on the country(-ies) targeted by the action should be provided by the applicant. 
  • - Proposals with actions taking place in more than one country. 

 

Examples (indicative and non-exhaustive list) of activities for Lot 2:

• • - Advocacy and lobbying to push for legal reform and access/ratification of the second optional protocol to the ICCPR and other international and regional instruments providing for the abolition of the death penalty;
  • - Capacity-building targeting relevant actors, such as legal professionals, parliamentarians, administrative, judicial and political authorities, national human rights institutions or media;
  • - Awareness-raising, campaigning and educational activities addressed to youth, the general public, private sector and other relevant target groups;
  • - Monitoring, research and data collection on the use of death penalty, respect of minimum standards and conditions on death row;
  • - Provision of legal aid and assistance, trial monitoring for persons at risk of execution;
  • - Promoting networking, coordination and cooperation between CSOs active in the fight against the death penalty;

 

 

LOT 3: supporting civic activism and participation by leveraging DIGITAL technologies 

 

The general objective of Lot 3 is to support civic activism and participation by leveraging digital technologies.

This general objective is in line with Sustainable Development Goal 16, and in particular commitments 16.5, 16.6, 16.7, and 16.10. It is also consistent with the New European Consensus on Development, with particular reference to the EU's commitment to good governance, democracy, the rule of law and human rights (pp. 32-33) and with the Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy, which provides that "the EU will step up its efforts to promote a safe and enabling environment in which civil society and independent media can flourish "(page 8). It is also takes as a reference points the Commission Staff Working Document on Digital4Development, and the EU guidelines on Freedom of Expression online and offline. It is particularly focused on supporting women, youth and marginalised groups.

The digital revolution has transformed almost all aspects of public and private life, and new generations of technology are spreading ever faster and further across the globe. The impact of these changes is impossible to fully gauge, but it is clear that digital technologies present threats as well as opportunities to the global public good. Digital technologies represent an unparalleled opportunity for disadvantaged or marginalised sections of the population to have their voice heard, and to demand accountability and equity from their governments. Nevertheless, in recent years the shrinking space for civil and political rights is of increasing concern and there are signs that the use and misuse of technology itself is one of the exacerbating factors. The Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy notes that modern ICTs 'while facilitating the free exchange of information between individuals, have also massively increased the coercive power of authoritarian states.' Furthermore, as noted in the Commission Communication 'Tackling online disinformation: a European Approach'  "new technologies can be used, notably through social media, to disseminate disinformation on a scale and with speed and precision of targeting that is unprecedented, creating personalised information spheres and becoming powerful echo chambers for disinformation campaigns". 

The spread of illegal hate speech online not only negatively affects the groups or individuals that it targets, it also negatively impacts those who speak out for freedom, tolerance and non-discrimination and has a chilling effect on the democratic discourse on online platforms. As a result, the EU adopted in 2008 a framework decision on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law. On 31st May 2016, the Commission also agreed on a code of conduct with Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft including a series of commitments to combat the spread of illegal hate speech online in Europe

This call aims to help civil society to leverage the opportunities and counter the threats that digital technologies represent, with the ultimate goal of improving participation, transparency and accountability for all citizens. It should ultimately contribute to the promotion and protection of fundamental freedoms, and efforts to resist shrinking space for civil society.

The specific objectives of Lot 3 are to improve the capacity of civil society and citizenry to: 

1. 1. a) Support freedom of expression and a diversity of public opinion and representation, and countering illegal hate speech online, particularly in times of societal stress or crisis (Voice and Participation)
   2. b) Counter disinformation, promote reliable independent sources, and facilitate access to information for ordinary citizens on public issues (Transparency)
   3. c) Advocate for accountability in service delivery and the management of public funds (Accountability)

 

For the purpose of this call, actions should focus on at least one of the specific objectives mentioned above.

 

Examples (indicative and non-exhaustive list) of activities for Lot 3:

 

• - Application, adaptation and/or scaling of tested successful technologies:
• • o to increase awareness and civic engagement in public affairs and decision making,
  • o to monitor and respond to the impact of private sector activity and its impact people’s rights,
  • o to monitor implementation of public policy and the management of public funds
  • o to monitor public service delivery, improve transparency and accountability, and contribute to the fight against corruption, particularly at the level of client interface, 
  • o to monitor and respond to the proliferation of disinformation
  • o to research and monitor social media for illegal hate speech, disinformation, and restrictions of freedom of speech
  • o to develop online alternatives and counter-narratives to hate speech and restrictions of freedom of speech, and enhance transparency on how manifestations of hate speech and other forms of intolerance are addressed online

 

 

- Adapt, or scale successful technologies to facilitate advocacy on the above issues;

- Financial support to existing initiatives which include the above activities;

- Development of open source software libraries to facilitate use of technologies to protect and expand civic space online;

- Disseminate and facilitate best practice on the above activities

 

All technological solutions proposed must be open source and solutions for their sustainability must be provided in the proposals.

 

1.3. Financial allocation provided by the contracting authority

The overall indicative amount made available under this call for proposals is EUR 22,000,000. The contracting authority reserves the right not to award all available funds.

Indicative allocation of funds by lot:

• • • Lot 1: EUR 10,000,000
  • • Lot 2: EUR 7,000,000
  • • Lot 3: EUR 5,000,000

 

If the allocation indicated for a specific lot cannot be used due to insufficient quality or number of proposals received, the contracting authority reserves the right to reallocate the remaining funds to (an)other lot(s).

Size of grants

Any requested EU contribution under this call for proposals must fall between the following minimum and maximum amounts:

Lot 1: 

• • • minimum amount: EUR 500,000
  • • maximum amount: EUR 2,000,000

Lot 2: 

• • • minimum amount: EUR 500,000
  • • maximum amount: EUR 1,500,000

Lot 3: 

• • • minimum amount: 1,000,000
  • • maximum amount: 2,500,000

 

Any requested EU contribution under this call for proposals must fall between the following minimum and maximum percentages of total eligible costs of the action:

• • • Minimum percentage: 51 % of the total eligible costs of the action.
  • • Maximum percentage: 95 % of the total eligible costs of the action (see also section 2.1.5). 

The balance (i.e. the difference between the total eligible cost of the action and the amount requested from the Contracting Authority) must be financed from sources other than the European Union Budget or the European Development Fund.

The requested EU contribution may cover the entire eligible costs of the action if this is deemed essential to carry it out. If a full financing is requested (100%), the lead applicant must justify it in Annex A.2, section 2.1 at Full Application step. The validity of the justification provided will be examined during the evaluation procedure. The absence of any justification may lead to the rejection of the application. If the evaluation committee considers that the justification is not valid, only the maximum percentage allowed (95%) will be accepted.

Please note that the lead applicant can either ask for a maximum percentage of 95% or exceptionally of 100% (under the conditions described above). A percentage between 95.01% and 99.99% is not allowed and it will lead to the rejection of the application.

 

 

2. Rules FOR thIS call for proposalS

These guidelines set out the rules for the submission, selection and implementation of the actions financed under this call, in conformity with the practical guide, which is applicable to the present call (available on the internet at this address http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/prag/document.do?locale=en).

​​​​​​​2.1. Eligibility criteria

There are three sets of eligibility criteria, relating to:

1.  

(1) the actors:

• The ‘lead applicant’, i.e. the entity submitting the application form (2.1.1),

• if any, its co-applicant(s) (where it is not specified otherwise the lead applicant and its co-applicant(s) are hereinafter jointly referred as ‘applicant(s)’) (2.1.1), 

• and, if any, affiliated entity(ies) to the lead applicant and/or to a co-applicant(s). (2.1.2);

(2) the actions:

Actions for which a grant may be awarded (2.1.4);

 

(3) the costs:

• • • types of cost that may be taken into account in setting the amount of the grant (2.1.5).

2.1.1. Eligibility of applicants (i.e. lead applicant and co-applicant(s))

Lead applicant

(1) In order to be eligible for a grant, the lead applicant must:

• • be a legal person or an entity without legal personality or a natural person and 
• • be non-profit-making and
• • be a specific type of organisation such as: 
  • o civil society organisations or an association of civil society organizations, including non-governmental non-profit organisations and independent political foundations, community-based organisations, indigenous peoples’ organisations, disabled persons organisations and private-sector non-profit agencies, institutions and organisations and networks thereof at local, national, regional and international level;
  • o National Human Rights Institutions, Ombudspersons;
  • o universities;
  • • be directly responsible for the preparation and management of the action with the co-applicant(s) and affiliated entity(ies), not acting as an intermediary. 

 

For-profit organisations may also be eligible in exceptional and duly justified cases. Indeed, in situations where registration or receipt of foreign funding as non-profit organisation is made very difficult or might put the entity in danger, civil society organisations may be obliged to register as for-profit organisations to continue operating in the field of human rights. The validity of the justification will be examined by the Evaluation Committee.

International public-sector organisations set up by international agreements, specialised agencies set up by such organisations and other organisations assimilated to such international organisations (i.e. the International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Federation of National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies) are not eligible under this call for proposals. United Nations agencies are not eligible under this call for proposals. 

No nationality restriction applies to lead applicants and, if any, to co-applicants and affiliated entities.

 

(2) Potential applicants may not participate in calls for proposals or be awarded grants if they are in any of the situations listed in Section 2.6.10.1 of the practical guide;

 

Lead applicants, co-applicants, affiliated entities and, in case of legal entities, persons who have powers of representation, decision-making or control over the lead applicant, the co-applicants and the affiliated entities are informed that, should they be in one of the situations of early detection or exclusion according to Section 2.6.10.1 of the practical guide, personal details (name, given name if natural person, address, legal form and name and given name of the persons with powers of representation, decision-making or control, if legal person) may be registered in the early detection and exclusion system, and communicated to the persons and entities concerned in relation to the award or the execution of a grant contract. 

In Annex A.1, section 2 and Annex A.2, section 5 (‘declaration(s) by the lead applicant’), the lead applicant must declare that the lead applicant himself, the co-applicant(s) and affiliated entity(ies) are not in any of these situations.

 

The following criteria apply to all lots:

• • • The lead applicant may act individually or with co-applicant(s). However, to be eligible, an action must include at least one local organisation, as lead applicant or co-applicant. A "local organisation" (with or without legal personality) must be understood as established in the country or one of the countries where the action is taking place. An organisation is considered "local" when its charter demonstrates that the organisation has been established by an instrument governed by the national law of the country concerned (only for entities with legal personality) and that its head office is located in that country.

• • • When the lead applicant is not a local organisation, it must act with at least one local co-applicant, except when the project's activities are taking place in a country in which local organisations cannot operate. 

In situations where registration in the concerned country is made impossible or might put the lead applicant or co-applicant in danger, the lead applicant or co-applicant may be registered in another country. In this case, a justification must be provided in Annex A.1 section 1.2 and Annex A.2, section 2.1. In addition, the lead applicant or co-applicant must prove in its statutes or through other supporting documents that the objectives and activities of the said organisation are for the benefit of the targeted country. In the absence of any justification, the proposal will be rejected. The validity of the justification provided will be examined during the evaluation procedure. Should the justification not be deemed valid, the proposal may be rejected on that sole basis.

If awarded the grant contract, the lead applicant will become the beneficiary identified as the coordinator in Annex E3h1 (special conditions). The coordinator is the main interlocutor of the contracting authority. It represents and acts on behalf of any other co-beneficiary (if any) and coordinate the design and implementation of the action.

Co-applicant(s)

Co-applicants participate in designing and implementing the action, and the costs they incur are eligible in the same way as those incurred by the lead applicant. 

Co-applicants must satisfy the eligibility criteria as applicable to the lead applicant himself.

Co-applicants must sign the mandate in Annex A.2., section 5.

(3)  Applicants included in the lists of EU restrictive measures (see Section 2.4. of the PRAG) at the
        moment of the award decision cannot be awarded the contract.

If awarded the grant contract, the co-applicant(s) (if any) will become beneficiary(ies) in the action (together with the coordinator) ​​​​​​​

2.1.2. Affiliated entities

The lead applicant and its co-applicant(s) may act with affiliated entity(ies).

Only the following entities may be considered as affiliated entities to the lead applicant and/or to co-applicant(s):

Only entities having a structural link with the applicants (i.e. the lead applicant or a co-applicant), in particular a legal or capital link.

This structural link encompasses mainly two notions:

(i) Control, as defined in Directive 2013/34/EU on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings:

Entities affiliated to an applicant may hence be:

• - Entities directly or indirectly controlled by the applicant (daughter companies or first-tier subsidiaries). They may also be entities controlled by an entity controlled by the applicant (granddaughter companies or second-tier subsidiaries) and the same applies to further tiers of control;
• - Entities directly or indirectly controlling the applicant (parent companies). Likewise, they may be entities controlling an entity controlling the applicant;
• - Entities under the same direct or indirect control as the applicant (sister companies).

(ii) Membership, i.e. the applicant is legally defined as a e.g. network, federation, association in which the proposed affiliated entities also participate or the applicant participates in the same entity (e.g. network, federation, association) as the proposed affiliated entities.

 

The structural link shall as a general rule be neither limited to the action nor established for the sole purpose of its implementation. This means that the link would exist independently of the award of the grant; it should exist before the call for proposals and remain valid after the end of the action.

 

By way of exception, an entity may be considered as affiliated to an applicant even if it has a structural link specifically established for the sole purpose of the implementation of the action in the case of so-called ‘sole applicants’ or ‘sole beneficiaries’.  A sole applicant or a sole beneficiary is a legal entity formed by several entities (a group of entities) which together comply with the criteria for being awarded the grant. For example, an association is formed by its members.

What is not an affiliated entity? 

 

The following are not considered entities affiliated to an applicant:

- Entities that have entered into a (procurement) contract or subcontract with an applicant, act as concessionaires or delegatees for public services for an applicant,

- Entities that receive financial support from the applicant,

- Entities that cooperate on a regular basis with an applicant on the basis of a memorandum of understanding or share some assets,

- Entities that have signed a consortium agreement under the grant contract (unless this consortium agreement leads to the creation of a ‘sole applicant’ as described above).

 

How to verify the existence of the required link with an applicant?

 

The affiliation resulting from control may in particular be proved on the basis of the consolidated accounts of the group of entities the applicant and its proposed affiliates belong to.

 

The affiliation resulting from membership may in particular be proved on the basis of the statutes or equivalent act establishing the entity (network, federation, association) which the applicant constitutes or in which the applicant participates.

If the applicants are awarded a grant contract, their affiliated entity(ies) will not become beneficiary(ies) of the action and signatory(ies) of the grant contract. However, they will participate in the design and  in the implementation of the action and the costs they incur (including those incurred for implementation contracts and financial support to third parties) may be accepted as eligible costs, provided they comply with all the relevant rules already applicable to the beneficiary(ies) under the grant contract.

Affiliated entity(ies) must satisfy the same eligibility criteria as the lead applicant and the co-applicant(s).  They must sign the affiliated entity(ies) statement in Annex A.2., section 5.

Note that the fact of having a structural link with the lead applicant does not prevent an organisation from being co-applicant in the partnership. It is the lead applicant's decision to define the role of the actors composing its partnership and implementing the action: co-applicants or affiliated entities.

 

​​​​​​​2.1.3. Associates and contractors

The following entities are not applicants nor affiliated entities and do not have to sign the ‘mandate for co-applicant(s)’ or ‘affiliated entities' statement’:

• • • • Associates

Other organisations or individuals may be involved in the action. Such associates play a real role in the action but may not receive funding from the grant, with the exception of per diem or travel costs. Associates do not have to meet the eligibility criteria referred to in Section 2.1.1. Associates must be mentioned in Annex A.2., section 4 — ‘Associates participating in the action’. 

• Contractors

The beneficiaries and their affiliated entities are permitted to award contracts. Associates or affiliated entity(ies) cannot be also contractors in the project. Contractors are subject to the procurement rules set out in Annex IV to the standard grant contract.

​​​​​​​2.1.4. Eligible actions: actions for which an application may be made

Definition

An action is composed of a set of activities.

Duration

The initial planned duration of an action may not be lower than 24 months nor exceed 48 months.

Sectors or themes

The specific sectors or themes to which the actions must relate are described for each lot under section 1.2 above.

Location

Action must take place in one country (mono-country) or more than one country (multi-country) outside the European Union.

Nevertheless, punctual activities may, if duly justified in the description of the action, take place in EU countries when they are directly related to situations arising in third countries and for the benefit of those countries, e.g. a seminar or conference, a visit to the European Institutions, an opening or closing of a campaign in an EU Member State, a specific exhibition or other similar single events. These reasons will be examined during the evaluation process.

Geographical balance will be taken into account by the Evaluation Committee at any stage of the technical evaluation

Types of action

The following types of action are ineligible:

• • actions concerned only or mainly with individual sponsorships for participation in workshops, seminars, conferences and congresses;
• • actions concerned only or mainly with individual scholarships for studies or training courses;
• • actions concerned only with one-off conferences. Conferences can only be funded if they form part of a wider range of activities to be implemented during the project;
• • actions where financial support to third parties is the main purpose of the action;

Types of activity

Examples of activities (indicative and non-exhaustive list) which may be financed under this call are described for each lot under section 1.2 above. 

Financial support to third parties

Applicants may propose financial support to third parties in order to help achieving the objectives of the action. 

Third parties are neither affiliated entity(ies) nor associates nor contractors.

The maximum amount of financial support per third party is EUR ≤ 60 000.

Under this call, financial support to third parties may not be the main purpose of the action (for none of the three lots).

In compliance with the present guidelines and notably of any conditions or restrictions in this Section, the lead applicant should define mandatorily in Section 2.1.1 of the grant application form: 

1. (i) the overall objectives, the specific objective(s) and the outputs (i.e. the results) to be achieved with the financial support 
2. (ii) the different types of activities eligible for financial support, on the basis of a fixed list 
3. (iii) the types of persons or categories of persons which may receive financial support  

(iv) the criteria for selecting these entities and giving the financial support  

1. (v) the criteria for determining the exact amount of financial support for each third entity
2. (vii) system of control set up to verify the eligibility of costs (relevant to the implementation phase).
3. (vi) the maximum amount which may be given, and

 

In all events, the mandatory conditions set above for giving financial support (points (i) to (vii)) have to be strictly defined in the grant contract as to avoid any exercise of discretion.

The quality and integration of the financial support to third parties (including in the Budget) will be assessed at both concept note and full application phases.   

Please refer to Annex X for additional information on Financial Support to Third Parties.

 

Visibility

The applicants must take all necessary steps to publicise the fact that the European Union has financed or co-financed the action. As far as possible, actions that are wholly or partially funded by the European Union must incorporate information and communication activities designed to raise the awareness of specific or general audiences of the reasons for the action and the EU support for the action in the country or region concerned, as well as the results and the impact of this support.

Applicants must comply with the objectives and priorities and guarantee the visibility of the EU financing (see the Communication and Visibility Manual for EU external actions specified and published by the European Commission at http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/funding/communication-and-visibility-manual-eu-external-actions_en).

When judged necessary, the visibility requirements of projects financed under this call may be removed or limited due to the total or partial confidentiality of the action and/or safety of beneficiaries. In this case, the applicant is required to duly justify this requirement in its application.

 

Number of applications and grants per applicants / affiliated entities

An organisation may not submit more than 1 application under this call for proposals as lead applicant.

An organisation may not submit more than 2 applications per lot under this call for proposals as co-applicant / affiliated entity.

An organisation may not be lead applicant in an application and co-applicant / affiliated entity in another application under the same lot. 

In case an organisation will submit more than one application without complying with the above-mentioned rules, the EC will only consider the first application arrived (based on the date and hour of submission) and any other additional application(s) will be rejected. It is the responsibility of each lead applicant to verify that its co-applicants are not involved as lead applicant or co-applicant in other applications.

 

​​​​​​​2.1.5. Eligibility of costs: costs that can be included 

Only ‘eligible costs’ can be covered by a grant. The categories of costs that are eligible and non-eligible are indicated below. The budget is both a cost estimate and an overall ceiling for ‘eligible costs’. 

The reimbursement of eligible costs may be based on any or a combination of the following forms:

• − actual costs incurred by the beneficiary(ies) and affiliated entity(ies);
• − one or more simplified cost options.

Simplified cost options may take the form of:

• − unit costs: covering all or certain specific categories of eligible costs which are clearly identified in advance by reference to an amount per unit.
• − lump sums: covering in global terms all or certain specific categories of eligible costs which are clearly identified in advance.
• − flat-rate financing: covering specific categories of eligible costs which are clearly identified in advance by applying a percentage fixed ex ante.

 

Simplified costs options (SCOs) are divided in two categories:

1/ "output or result based SCOs": this category includes costs linked to outputs, results, activities, deliverables in the framework of a specific project (for example the determination of a lump sum for the organization of a conference, or for the realisation of a determined output/activity). Where possible and appropriate, lump sums, unit costs or flat rates shall be determined in such a way to allow their payment upon achievement of concrete outputs and/or results. This type of SCO can be proposed by the Beneficiary (no threshold is applicable) at Full application stage. In case the evaluation committee and the contracting authority are not satisfied with the quality of the justification provided reimbursement on the basis of actually incurred costs is always possible.

2/ "other/recurrent SCOs". This second category entails simplified cost options embedded in the accounting practices of the beneficiary, for which an ex-ante assessment is deemed necessary, considering the need of a consistent application of the conditions required. Examples are: an additional percentage on actual salaries to cover remuneration-related costs or the use of an allocation method to apportion costs of a project office foreseen in the Description of the Action. In order the use of systemic/recurrent SCOs, the beneficiary's accounting practices need to have been positively assessed by an audit firm based on standard ToRs provided by the Commission. To obtain reimbursement of this category of SCOs, the beneficiary shall make reference to the previously obtained ex-ante assessment in the budget justification sheet (annex e3c).

The amounts or rates have to be based on estimates using objective data such as statistical data or any other objective means or with reference to certified or auditable historical data of the applicants or the affiliated entity(ies). Determining SCO is possible also through ‘expert judgement’ provided by internally available experts or procured in accordance with the applicable rules. Experts must be either commissioned auditors or chartered accountants, or staff of the Commission but cannot be staff of the beneficiary. The methods used to determine the amounts or rates of unit costs, lump sums or flat-rates must comply with the criteria established in Annex K, and especially ensure that the costs correspond fairly to the actual costs incurred by the beneficiary(ies) and affiliated entity(ies), are in line with their accounting practices, no profit is made and the costs are not already covered by other sources of funding (no double funding). Refer to Annex K for the details of the procedure to be followed depending on the type and amount of the costs to be declared as SCO.

Applicants proposing this form of reimbursement, must clearly indicate in worksheet no.1 of Annex B, each heading/item  of eligible costs concerned by this type of financing, i.e. add the reference in capital letters to ‘UNIT COST’ (per month/flight etc.), ‘LUMPSUM’, ‘FLAT RATE’ in the Unit column (see example in Annex K). 

Additionally in Annex B, in the second column of worksheet no.2, ‘Justification of the estimated costs’ per each of the corresponding budget item or heading applicants must:

• − describe the information and methods used to establish the amounts of unit costs, lump sums and/or flat-rates, to which costs they refer, etc for output or result based SCO.
• − make reference to the previously obtained ex-ante assessment for other/recurrent SCOs.
• − clearly explain the formulas for calculation of the final eligible amount for output or result based SCO

In case of output or result based SCOs, the evaluation committee and the contracting authority decide whether to accept the proposed amounts or rates on the basis of the provisional budget submitted by the applicants, by analysing factual data of grants carried out by the applicants or of similar actions. In case the evaluation committee and the contracting authority are not satisfied with the quality of the justification provided reimbursement on the basis of actually incurred costs is always possible.

No threshold is set ex-ante for the total amount of financing that can be authorised by the contracting authority on the basis of simplified cost options. Other/recurrent SCOs can be declared only if previously successfully ex-ante assessed.

Recommendations to award a grant are always subject to the condition that the checks preceding the signing of the grant contract do not reveal problems requiring changes to the budget (such as arithmetical errors, inaccuracies, unrealistic costs and ineligible costs). The checks may give rise to requests for clarification and may lead the contracting authority to impose modifications or reductions to address such mistakes or inaccuracies. It is not possible to increase the grant or the percentage of EU co-financing as a result of these corrections.

It is therefore in the applicants' interest to provide a realistic and cost-effective budget.

Eligible direct costs

To be eligible under this call for proposals, costs must comply with the provisions of Article 14 of the general conditions to the standard grant contract (see Annex G of the guidelines).

Contingency reserve

The budget may include a contingency reserve not exceeding 5 % of the estimated direct eligible costs. It can only be used with the prior written authorisation of the contracting authority.

Eligible indirect costs

The indirect costs incurred in carrying out the action may be eligible for flat-rate funding, but the total must not exceed 7 % of the estimated total eligible direct costs. Indirect costs are eligible provided that they do not include costs assigned to another budget heading in the standard grant contract. The lead applicant may be asked to justify the percentage requested before the grant contract is signed. However, once the flat rate has been fixed in the special conditions of the grant contract, no supporting documents need to be provided.

If any of the applicants or affiliated entity(ies) is in receipt of an operating grant financed by the EU, it may not claim indirect costs on its incurred costs within the proposed budget for the action.

Contributions in kind

Contributions in kind mean the provision of goods or services to beneficiaries or affiliated entities free of charge by a third party. As contributions in kind do not involve any expenditure for beneficiaries or affiliated entities, they are normally not eligible costs. 

As an exception, contributions in kind may include personnel costs for the work carried out by volunteers under an action or work programme (which are eligible costs).

Contributions in kind from third parties in the form of volunteers' work, valued on the basis of unit costs defined and authorised by the contracting authority, shall be presented in the estimated budget, separately from the other eligible costs (i.e. as an accepted costs together with other contributions in kind). 

Volunteers' work may comprise up to 50 % of the co-financing. For the purposes of calculating this percentage, contributions in kind and other co-financing shall be based on estimates provided by the applicant.

When the estimated costs include volunteers' work, the grant shall not exceed the estimated eligible costs other than the costs for volunteers' work.

Contributions in kind may not be treated as co-financing

However, if the description of the action as proposed includes contributions in kind, the contributions have to be made.

Ineligible costs

The following costs are not eligible:

• − debts and debt service charges (interest);
• − salary costs of the personnel of national administrations
• − credit to third parties. 
• − currency exchange losses;
• − purchases of land or buildings, except where necessary for the direct implementation of the action, in which case ownership must be transferred in accordance with Article 7.5 of the general conditions of the standard grant contract, at the latest at the end of the action;
• − costs declared by the beneficiary(ies) and financed by another action or work programme receiving a European Union (including through EDF) grant;
• − provisions for losses or potential future liabilities;

 

Ethics clauses and Code of Conduct

a) Absence of conflict of interest

The applicant must not be affected by any conflict of interest and must have no equivalent relation in that respect with other applicants or parties involved in the actions. Any attempt by an applicant to obtain confidential information, enter into unlawful agreements with competitors or influence the evaluation committee or the contracting authority during the process of examining, clarifying, evaluating and comparing applications will lead to the rejection of its application and may result in administrative penalties according to the Financial Regulation in force. 

b) Respect for human rights as well as environmental legislation and core labour standards 

The applicant and its staff must comply with human rights. In particular and in accordance with the applicable act, applicants who have been awarded contracts must comply with the environmental legislation including multilateral environmental agreements, and with the core labour standards as applicable and as defined in the relevant International Labour Organisation conventions (such as the conventions on freedom of association and collective bargaining; elimination of forced and compulsory labour; abolition of child labour).

Zero tolerance for sexual exploitation and sexual abuse:

The European Commission applies a policy of 'zero tolerance' in relation to all wrongful conduct which has an impact on the professional credibility of the applicant.  

Physical abuse or punishment, or threats of physical abuse, sexual abuse or exploitation, harassment and verbal abuse, as well as other forms of intimidation shall be prohibited. 

 

c) Anti-corruption and anti-bribery 

The applicant shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations and codes relating to anti-bribery and anti-corruption. The European Commission reserves the right to suspend or cancel project financing if corrupt practices of any kind are discovered at any stage of the award process or during the execution of a contract and if the contracting authority fails to take all appropriate measures to remedy the situation. For the purposes of this provision, ‘corrupt practices’ are the offer of a bribe, gift, gratuity or commission to any person as an inducement or reward for performing or refraining from any act relating to the award of a contract or execution of a contract already concluded with the contracting authority.

      d)  Unusual commercial expenses 

Applications will be rejected or contracts terminated if it emerges that the award or execution of a contract has given rise to unusual commercial expenses. Such unusual commercial expenses are commissions not mentioned in the main contract or not stemming from a properly concluded contract referring to the main contract, commissions not paid in return for any actual and legitimate service, commissions remitted to a tax haven, commissions paid to a payee who is not clearly identified or commissions paid to a company which has every appearance of being a front company.

Grant beneficiaries found to have paid unusual commercial expenses on projects funded by the European Union are liable, depending on the seriousness of the facts observed, to have their contracts terminated or to be permanently excluded from receiving EU/EDF funds.

 

e) Error, irregularities or fraud

The contracting authority reserves the right to suspend or cancel the procedure, where the award procedure proves to have been subject to substantial errors, irregularities or fraud. If substantial errors, irregularities or fraud are discovered after the award of the contract, the contracting authority may refrain from concluding the contract.

 

​​​​​​​2.2. How to apply and the procedures to follow

To apply for this call for proposals the lead applicants need to:

I. Provide information about the organisations involved in the action. Please note that the registration of this data in PADOR is obligatory for this call for proposals:

Concept note step: Registration is obligatory for lead applicants.

Full application step: Registration is obligatory for co-applicant(s) and affiliated entity(ies). Lead applicants must make sure that their PADOR profile is up to date. 

II. Provide information about the action in the documents listed under sections 2.2.2 (concept note) and 2.2.5 (full application). Please note that online submission via PROSPECT is obligatory for this call,

PADOR is an on-line database in which organisations register and update information concerning their entity. Organisations registered in PADOR get a unique ID (EuropeAid ID) which they must mention in their application. PADOR is accessible via the website: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/pador_en 

It is strongly recommended to register in PADOR well in advance and not to wait until the last minute before the deadline to submit your application in PROSPECT. 

If it is impossible to register online in PADOR for technical reasons, the applicants and/or affiliated entity(ies) must complete the ‘PADOR off-line form attached to these guidelines. This form must be sent together with the application, by the submission deadline (see sections 2.2.3 and 2.2.7). 

Before starting using PADOR and PROSPECT, please read the user guides available on the website. All technical questions related the use of these systems should be addressed to the IT helpdesk at EuropeAid-IT-support@ec.europa.eu via the online support form in PROSPECT.

​​​​​​​2.2.1. Concept note content  

Applications must be submitted in accordance with the concept note instructions in the grant application form annexed to these guidelines (Annex A.1). 

Applicants must apply in English, French, or Spanish. Applicants must apply in the language most commonly used by the target population in the country(ies) in which the action takes place. 

Please note that:

1. 1. In the concept note, lead applicants must only provide an estimate of the requested EU contribution as well as an indicative percentage of that contribution in relation to the eligible costs of the action. A detailed budget is to be submitted only by the lead applicants invited to submit a full application in the second phase. 
2. 2. The elements outlined in the concept note may not be modified in the full application. The EU contribution may not vary from the initial estimate by more than 20 %. Lead applicants are free to adapt the percentage of co-financing required within the minimum and maximum amount and percentages of co-financing, as laid down in these guidelines in section 1.3. The lead applicant may add, replace or remove a co-applicant or an affiliated entity only in duly justified cases (e.g. bankruptcy of initial co-applicant or affiliated entity). In case of replacement, the new co-applicant/affiliated entity must be of a similar nature as the initial one. The lead applicant may adjust the duration of the action if unforeseen circumstances outside the scope of the applicants have taken place following the submission of the concept note and require such adaptation (risk of action not being carried out). In such cases the duration must remain within the limits imposed by the guidelines for applicants. An explanation/justification of the relevant replacement/adjustment shall be included in section 2.1.1(iv) of the full application form. The validity of the justification provided will be examined during the evaluation procedure. Should the justification not be deemed valid, the proposal may be rejected on that sole basis.

Own contributions by the applicants can be replaced by other donors' contributions at any time.​​​​​​​

3. Only the concept note form will be evaluated. It is therefore of utmost importance that this document contains all relevant information concerning the action. No additional annexes should be sent.

Any error or major discrepancy related to the concept note instructions may lead to the rejection of the concept note.

Clarifications will only be requested when information provided is not sufficient to conduct an objective assessment. 

Hand-written concept notes will not be accepted.

​​​​​​​2.2.2. Where and how to send concept notes

The concept note together with the declaration by the lead applicant (Annex A.1 section 2) must be submitted online via PROSPECT https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/europeaid/prospect following the instructions given in the PROSPECT user manual.

Upon submission of a concept note online, the lead applicant will receive an automatic confirmation of receipt in its PROSPECT profile. 

If it is impossible for lead applicants to submit their concept note online via PROSPECT for technical reasons, they must send their proposal in a sealed envelope and attach the concept note together with the declaration by the lead applicant (Annex A.1 section 2). In particular, the lead applicant must send, in a sealed envelope as described below the following items:

 a. One original of the concept note. The signed declaration by the lead applicant (Annex A.1 section 2) must be printed and stapled separately and enclosed in the envelope

b. An electronic version of the items under point (a). The electronic file must contain exactly the same application as the paper version enclosed. 

Please note that "technical reasons" should be understood ONLY in a situation when PROSPECT is not responding. Paper submission when PROSPECT is working may lead to the rejection of the application.

The validity of the submission off-line will be examined by the Evaluation Committee. 

The envelope must bear the reference number and the title of the call for proposals, together with the lot number and title the full name and address of the lead applicant, and the words ‘Not to be opened before the opening session’ .

To reduce expense and waste, we strongly recommend that you do not use plastic folders or dividers. Please also use double-sided printing if possible.

Concept notes must be submitted in a sealed envelope by registered mail, private courier service or by hand-delivery (a signed and dated certificate of receipt will be given to the deliverer) to the address below. 

Submission off-line for technical reasons should not be mixed up with paper submission for confidentiality reasons (please see below).

NB: In exceptional cases, when the applicants do not find it appropriate to send the Concept Note through PROSPECT due to security and confidentiality concerns of the actors involved, Concept Notes can instead be submitted in a sealed envelope by registered mail with delivery confirmation, private courier service or by hand-delivery at the address below (a signed and dated acknowledgement of receipt will be given by the European Commission). The fact that the proposal is sent due to security and confidentiality concerns should also be made clear in the envelope. When the organizations involved in the proposal do not find it appropriate to register in PADOR online due to security and confidentiality concerns, they must complete the ‘PADOR off-line form attached to these guidelines. This form must be sent together with the application, by the submission deadline (see sections 2.2.3 and 2.2.7.). 

Postal address

European Commission
Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development
Unit DEVCO B6 Finance and Contracts

Attn. Head of Unit L-41 03/110 

Avenue du Bourget, 1
B-1140 Brussels
BELGIUM

Address for hand delivery or by private courier service

European Commission
Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development
Unit DEVCO B6 Finance and Contracts

Attn. Head of Unit L-41 03/110
Central Mail Service
Avenue du Bourget, 1
B-1140 Brussels (Evere)
BELGIUM

Tel : +32 2 2997916 

 

Concept notes sent by any other means (e.g. by fax or by e-mail) or delivered to other addresses will be rejected. 

Hand-written concept notes will not be accepted.

Please note that incomplete concept notes may be rejected. Lead applicants are advised to verify that their concept note is complete by using the checklist for concept note (Annex A.1, Instructions).

​​​​​​​2.2.3. Deadline for submission of concept notes 

The deadline for the submission of concept notes is the 21st of December 2018, at 12:00 Brussels time.  In order to convert this deadline to local time you can use any online time converter tool that takes into account timezones and winter/summer time changes (example available here). The lead applicant is strongly advised not to wait until the last day to submit its concept note, since heavy Internet traffic or a fault with the Internet connection (including electricity failure, etc.) could lead to difficulties in submission. The Contacting Authority cannot be held responsible for any delay due to such afore-mentioned difficulties. 

In exceptional cases (see section 2.2.2), there are two different systems for sending concept notes: one is by post or private courier service, the other is by hand delivery.

In the first case, the concept note must be sent before the date for submission, as evidenced by the date of dispatch, the postmark or deposit slip, but in the second case it is the acknowledgment of receipt given at the time of the delivery of the concept note which will serve as proof. The deadline for the submission of concept notes is 21st of December 2018, as evidenced by the date of dispatch, the postmark or the date of the deposit slip. In the case of hand-deliveries, the deadline for receipt is the 21st of December 2018, at 12:00 Brussels time, as evidenced by the signed and dated receipt. 

Any concept note submitted after the deadline will be rejected.

The contracting authority may, for reasons of administrative efficiency, reject any concept note submitted on time to the postal service but received, for any reason beyond the contracting authority's control, after the effective date of approval of the concept note evaluation, if accepting concept notes that were submitted on time but arrived late would considerably delay the evaluation procedure (for instance when concept notes are received after the evaluation committee has finished its work and evaluating them would imply re-calling the evaluation committee) or jeopardise decisions already taken and notified (see indicative calendar under Section 2.5.2) 

​​​​​​​2.2.4. Further information about concept notes

Questions may be sent by e-mail no later than 21 days before the deadline for the submission of concept notes to the address(es) below, indicating clearly the reference of the call for proposals:

E-mail address: EuropeAid-161054@ec.europa.eu

The contracting authority has no obligation to provide clarifications to questions received after this date.

Replies will be given no later than 11 days before the deadline for submission of concept notes. 

To ensure equal treatment of applicants, the contracting authority cannot give a prior opinion on the eligibility of lead applicants, co-applicants, affiliated entity(ies), an action or specific activities.

No individual replies will be given to questions. All questions and answers as well as other important notices to applicants during the course of the evaluation procedure will be published on the website of DG International Cooperation and Development: https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/europeaid/online-services/index.cfm?do=publi.welcome, as the need arises. It is therefore advisable to consult the abovementioned website regularly in order to be informed of the questions and answers published.

All questions related to registration in PADOR or the online submission via PROSPECT should be addressed to the IT helpdesk at EuropeAid-IT-support@ec.europa.eu via the online support form in PROSPECT: Please note that the working languages of the IT support are: English French and Spanish. Therefore users are invited to send their questions in English, French or Spanish should they wish to benefit from an optimum response time.

​​​​​​​2.2.5. Full applications 

Lead applicants invited to submit a full application following pre-selection of their concept note must do so using the full application form annexed to these guidelines (Annex A.2). Lead applicants should then keep strictly to the format of the grant application form and fill in the paragraphs and pages in order.

1. The elements outlined in the concept note cannot be modified by the lead applicant in the full application form. The EU contribution may not vary from the initial estimate by more than 20 %, although lead applicants are free to adapt the percentage of co-financing required within the minimum and maximum amount and percentages of co-financing, as laid down in these guidelines under section 1.3. The lead applicant may add, replace or remove a co-applicant or an affiliated entity only in duly justified cases (e.g. bankruptcy of initial co-applicant or affiliated entity). In case of replacement, the new co-applicant/affiliated entity must be of a similar nature as the initial one. The lead applicant may adjust the duration of the action if unforeseen circumstances outside the scope of the applicants have taken place following the submission of the concept note and require such adaptation (risk of action not being carried out). An explanation/justification of the relevant replacement/adjustment shall be included in section 2.1.1(iv) of the grant application form. The validity of the justification provided will be examined during the evaluation procedure. Should the justification not be deemed valid, the proposal may be rejected on that sole basis.

2. Lead applicants must submit their full applications in the same language as their concept notes. A copy of the lead applicant’s accounts of the latest financial year (the profit and loss account and the balance sheet for the last financial year for which the accounts have been closed) and of the external audit report (where the total amount of the requested EU contribution exceeds EUR 750 000) must be uploaded in PADOR by the full application deadline. A copy of the latest accounts and external audit report is neither required from (if any) the co-applicant(s) nor from (if any) affiliated entity(ies)).

3. Only the full application form and the published annexes which have to be filled in (budget and logical framework) will be transmitted to the evaluators. It is therefore of utmost importance that these documents contain ALL the relevant information concerning the action. No additional annexes should be sent.

Please complete the full application form carefully and as clearly as possible so that it can be assessed properly. 

Any error related to the full application instructions or any major inconsistency in the full application (e.g. if the amounts in the budget worksheets are inconsistent) may lead to the rejection of the application.

Clarifications will only be requested when information provided is unclear and thus prevents the contracting authority from conducting an objective assessment.

Hand-written applications will not be accepted.

2.2.6. Where and how to send full applications 

Full application forms together with the budget, the logical framework, the declaration by the lead applicant and the mandate(s) by the co-applicant(s) must be submitted online via PROSPECT https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/ europeaid/prospect following the instructions given in the users’ manual. 

Upon submission of the full application online, the lead applicants will receive an automatic confirmation of receipt in their PROSPECT profile. 

(a) If the lead applicant submitted the concept note by post / hand delivery (see section 2.2.3) it must send the full application by the same means (by post or hand delivery). 

(b) If the lead applicant submitted the concept note online via PROSPECT but it is technically impossible for the organisation to submit the full application online.

In the above two cases the lead applicant must send by post the application, i.e the full application form, the budget, the logical framework, the declaration by the lead applicant and the mandate(s) by the co-applicant(s). The lead applicant must send, in a sealed envelope as described below, the following items:

a. One original signed copy of the full application form, the budget and the logical framework. The declaration by the lead applicant and the mandate(s) by the co-applicant(s) (Annex A.2, section 5) must be printed and stapled separately and enclosed in the envelope.

b.  An electronic version (e.g. CD-Rom) of the items under point (a). The electronic file must contain exactly the same application as the paper version enclosed. 

To reduce expense and waste, we strongly recommend that you use only paper for your file (no plastic folders or dividers). Please also use double-sided printing if possible.

Applications must be sent in a sealed envelope by registered mail, private courier service or by hand-delivery (a signed and dated certificate of receipt will be given to the deliverer) to the address below. 

Postal address

European Commission
Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development
Unit DEVCO B6 Finance and Contracts

Attn. Head of Unit L-41 03/110 

Avenue du Bourget, 1
B-1140 Brussels
BELGIUM

Address for hand delivery or by private courier service

European Commission
Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development
Unit DEVCO B6 Finance and Contracts

Attn. Head of Unit L-41 03/110
Central Mail Service
Avenue du Bourget, 1
B-1140 Brussels (Evere)
BELGIUM

Tel : +32 2 2997916 

 

The envelope must bear the reference number and the title of the call for proposals, together with the number and title of the lot, the full name and address of the lead applicant, and the words ‘Not to be opened before the opening session’.

Applications sent by any other means (e.g. by fax or by e-mail) or delivered to other addresses will be rejected. Hand-written applications will not be accepted.

Please note that incomplete applications may be rejected. Lead applicants are advised to verify that their application is complete using the checklist (Annex A.2, Instructions).

2.2.7. Deadline for submission of full applications 

The deadline for the submission of full applications will be indicated in the letter sent to the lead applicants whose application has been pre-selected. This letter will appear online automatically in the PROSPECT profile of the lead applicant. Lead applicants who, in exceptional cases (see section 2.2.6) had to submit their application by post or hand-delivery, will receive the letter by email or by post if no e-mail address was provided.

Lead applicants are strongly advised not to wait until the last day to submit their full applications, since heavy Internet traffic or a fault with the Internet connection (including electricity failure, etc.) could lead to difficulties in submission. The Contacting Authority cannot be held responsible for any delay due to such afore-mentioned difficulties. 

In the case of submission by post, (see section 2.2.6), the date of submission is evidenced by the date of dispatch, the postmark or the date of the deposit slip. In the case of hand-deliveries, the deadline for receipt is at 16:00 Brussels time as evidenced by the signed and dated receipt.

Any application submitted after the deadline will be rejected. 

However, for reasons of administrative efficiency, the Contracting Authority may also reject any full application sent in due time but received after the effective date of approval of the full application evaluation (see indicative calendar under section 2.5.2)

2.2.8. Further information about full applications 

Questions may be sent by e-mail no later than 21 days before the deadline for the submission of full applications to the addresses listed below, indicating clearly the reference of the call for proposals:

E-mail address: EuropeAid-161054@ec.europa.eu

The contracting authority has no obligation to provide clarifications to questions received after this date.

Replies will be given no later than 11 days before the deadline for the submission of full applications. 

To ensure equal treatment of applicants, the contracting authority cannot give a prior opinion on the eligibility of lead applicants, co-applicants, affiliated entity(ies), or an action.

No individual replies will be given to questions. All questions and answers as well as other important notices to applicants during the course of the evaluation procedure, will be published on the website of DG International Cooperation and Development: https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/europeaid/online-services/index.cfm?do=publi.welcome [and <other websites>], as the need arises. It is therefore advisable to consult the abovementioned website regularly in order to be informed of the questions and answers published.

All questions related to registration in PADOR or the online submission via PROSPECT should be addressed to the IT helpdesk at EuropeAid-IT-support@ec.europa.eu via the online support form in PROSPECT. Please note that the working languages of the IT support are: English French and Spanish. Therefore users are invited to send their questions in English, French or Spanish should they wish to benefit from an optimum response time.

 

2.3. Evaluation and selection of applications

Applications will be examined and evaluated by the contracting authority with the possible assistance of external assessors. All applications will be assessed according to the following steps and criteria.

If the examination of the application reveals that the proposed action does not meet the eligibility criteria stated in Section 2.1, the application will be rejected on this sole basis. 

 

(1) STEP 1: OPENING & ADMINISTRATIVE CHECKS AND CONCEPT NOTE EVALUATION

During the opening and administrative check the following will be assessed:

♣ If the deadline has been met. Otherwise, the application will be automatically rejected.

• If the concept note satisfies all the criteria specified in the "checklist for Concept Note" (Annex A.1). This includes also an assessment of the eligibility of the action. If any of the requested information is missing or is incorrect, the application may be rejected on that sole basis and the application will not be evaluated further.

The concept notes that pass this check will be evaluated on the relevance and design of the proposed action.

The concept notes will receive an overall score out of 50 using the breakdown in the evaluation grid below. The evaluation will also check on compliance with the instructions on how to complete the concept note, which can be found in Annex A.1.

The evaluation criteria are divided into headings and subheadings. Each subheading will be given a score between 1 and 5 as follows: 1 = very poor; 2 = poor; 3 = adequate; 4 = good; 5 = very good.

Evaluation Grid

1. Relevance of the action

Maximum Score 20

1.1. How relevant is the proposal to the objectives and priorities of the call for proposals and to the specific themes/sectors/areas or any other specific requirement stated in the guidelines for applicants? Are the expected results of the action aligned with the priorities defined in the guidelines for applicants (section 1.2)?

It includes the evaluation of the preference to proposals submitted by local organisations for LOT 1 and LOT 2 (cfr: section 1.2).

It includes the evaluation of the preference to proposals with actions taking place in more than one country for LOT 2 (cfr: section 1.2).

Maximum Score 5

1.2. How relevant is the proposal to the particular needs and constraints of the target country(ies), region(s) and/or relevant sectors (including synergy with other development initiatives and avoidance of duplication)?

It includes the evaluation of the Rights Based approach Methodology (cfr: section 1.2).

It includes the evaluation of the relevance of the selected country(-ies) for LOT 2 (cfr: section 1.2).

Maximum Score 5

1.3. How clearly defined and strategically chosen are those involved (final beneficiaries, target groups)? Have their needs (as rights holders and/or duty bearers) and constraints been clearly defined and does the proposal address them appropriately?

It includes the evaluation of the methodology for Financial Support to Third Parties, if any (cfr: section 2.1.4)

Maximum Score 5

1.4. Does the proposal contain particular added-value elements (e.g. innovation, best practices) ? [and the other additional elements indicated under 1.2. of the guidelines for applicants]

Maximum Score 5

 

2. Design of the action

Maximum Score 30

2.1. How coherent is the overall design of the action? Does the proposal indicate the expected results to be achieved by the action? Does the intervention logic explain the rationale to achieve the expected results? 

Maximum Score 5x2**

2.2. Does the design reflect a robust analysis of the problems involved, and the capacities of the relevant stakeholders? 

Maximum Score 5

2.3. Does the design take into account external factors (risks and assumptions)? 

Maximum Score 5

2.4. Are the activities feasible and consistent in relation to the expected results (including timeframe)? Are results (output, outcome and impact) realistic? 

Maximum Score 5

2.5. To which extent does the proposal integrate relevant cross-cutting elements such as environmental/climate change issues, promotion of gender equality and equal opportunities, needs of disabled people, rights of minorities and rights of indigenous peoples, youth, combating HIV/AIDS (if there is a strong prevalence in the target country/region)? 

Maximum Score 5

Maximum total score

50

**: this scores is multiplied by 2 because of its importance

Note: A score of 5 (very good) will only be allocated if the proposal specifically addresses more than the required minimum number of priorities as indicated in Section 1.2 (objectives of the programme) of these guidelines.

Once all concept notes have been assessed, a list will be drawn up with the proposed actions ranked according to their total score. 

Firstly, only the concept notes with a score of at least 30 will be considered for pre-selection. 

Secondly, the number of concept notes will be reduced, taking account of the ranking, to the number of concept notes whose total aggregate amount of requested contributions is equal to at least 200% of the available budget for this call for proposals. The amount of requested contributions of each concept note will be based on the indicative financial envelopes for each lot, where relevant.

Lead applicants will receive a letter indicating the reference number of their application and the respective results. This letter will automatically appear online in the PROSPECT profile of the lead applicant. Lead applicants who, in exceptional cases (see section 2.2), had to submit their application by post or hand-delivery will receive the letter by email or by post if no e-mail address was provided.

The pre-selected lead applicants will subsequently be invited to submit full applications.

​​​​​​​(2) STEP 2: OPENING & ADMINISTRATIVE CHECK AND EVALUATION OF THE FULL APPLICATION 

Firstly, the following will be assessed:

 

• If the submission deadline has been met. Otherwise, the application will automatically be rejected.

• If the full application satisfies all the criteria specified in the checklist in Annex A.2. This includes also an assessment of the eligibility of the action.  If any of the requested information is missing or is incorrect, the application may be rejected on that sole basis and the application will not be evaluated further.

The full applications that pass this check will be further evaluated on their quality, including the proposed budget and capacity of the applicants and affiliated entity(ies). They will be evaluated using the evaluation criteria in the evaluation grid below. There are two types of evaluation criteria: selection and award criteria.

The selection criteria help to evaluate the applicant(s)'s and affiliated entity(ies)'s operational capacity and the lead applicant's financial capacity and are used to verify that they:

 

• have stable and sufficient sources of finance to maintain their activity throughout the proposed action and, where appropriate, to participate in its funding (this only applies to lead applicants);

• have the management capacity, professional competencies and qualifications required to successfully complete the proposed action. This applies to applicants and any affiliated entity(ies).

For the purpose of the evaluation of the financial capacity, lead applicants must ensure that the relevant information and documents (i.e. accounts of the latest financial year and external audit report, where applicable) in their PADOR profile are up to date. If the information and documents in PADOR are outdated and do not allow for a proper evaluation of the financial capacity, the application may be rejected.

The award criteria help to evaluate the quality of the applications in relation to the objectives and priorities set forth in the guidelines, and to award grants to projects which maximise the overall effectiveness of the call for proposals. They help to select applications which the contracting authority can be confident will comply with its objectives and priorities. They cover the relevance of the action, its consistency with the objectives of the call for proposals, quality, expected impact, sustainability and cost-effectiveness.

Scoring:

The evaluation grid is divided into Sections and subsections. Each subsection will be given a score between 1 and 5 as follows: 1 = very poor; 2 = poor; 3 = adequate; 4 = good; 5 = very good. 

 

Evaluation grid

1. Financial and operational capacity

Maximum Score 20

1.1. Do the applicants and, if applicable, their affiliated entity(ies) have sufficient in-house experience of project management?

Maximum Score 5

1.2. Do the applicants and, if applicable, their affiliated entity(ies) have sufficient technical in-house expertise (especially knowledge of the issues to be addressed)?

Maximum Score 5

1.3. Do the applicants and, if applicable, their affiliated entity(ies) have sufficient management in-house capacity (including staff, equipment and ability to handle the budget for the action)?

Maximum Score 5

1.4. Does the lead applicant have stable and sufficient sources of finance?

Maximum Score 5

 

2. Relevance of the action

Maximum Score 20

2.1. How relevant is the proposal to the objectives and priorities of the call for proposals and to the specific themes/sectors/areas or any other specific requirement stated in the guidelines for applicants? Are the expected results of the action aligned with the priorities defined in the guidelines for applicants (section 1.2)?

It includes the evaluation of the priority to proposals submitted by local organisations for LOT 1 and LOT 2 (cfr: section 1.2).

It includes the evaluation of the preference to proposals with actions taking place in more than one country for LOT 2 (cfr: section 1.2).

Maximum Score 5

2.2. How relevant is the proposal to the particular needs and constraints of the target country(ies), region(s) and/or relevant sectors (including synergy with other development initiatives and avoidance of duplication)?

It includes the evaluation of the Rights Based approach Methodology (cfr: section 1.2).

It includes the evaluation of the relevance of the selected country(-ies) for LOT 2 (cfr: section 1.2).

Maximum Score 5

2.3. How clearly defined and strategically chosen are those involved (final beneficiaries, target groups)? Have their needs (as rights holders and/or duty bearers) and constraints been clearly defined and does the proposal address them appropriately?

It includes the evaluation of the methodology for Financial Support to Third Parties, if any (cfr: section 2.1.4)

Maximum Score 5

2.4. Does the proposal contain particular added-value elements (e.g. innovation, best practices) ? [and the other additional elements indicated under 1.2. of the guidelines for applicants]

Maximum Score 5

 

3. Design of the action

Maximum Score 15

3.1. How coherent is the design of the action? Does the proposal indicate the expected results to be achieved by the action? Does the intervention logic explain the rationale to achieve the expected results? Are the activities proposed appropriate, practical, and consistent with the envisaged outputs and outcome(s)?

Maximum Score 5

3.2. Does the proposal/Logical Framework include credible baseline, targets and sources of verification? If not, is a baseline study foreseen (and is the study budgeted appropriately in the proposal)?

Maximum Score 5

3.3. Does the design reflect a robust analysis of the problems involved, and the capacities of the relevant stakeholders?

Maximum Score 5

 

4. Implementation approach

Maximum Score 15

4.1. Is the action plan for implementing the action clear and feasible? Is the timeline realistic?

Maximum Score 5

4.2. Does the proposal include an effective and efficient monitoring system? Is there an evaluation planned (previous, during or/and at the end of the implementation)?

Maximum Score 5

4.3. Is the co-applicant(s)'s and affiliated entity(ies)'s level of involvement and participation in the action satisfactory?

Maximum Score 5

 

5. Sustainability of the action

Maximum Score 15

5.1. Is the action likely to have a tangible impact on its target groups?

Maximum Score 5

5.2. Is the action likely to have multiplier effects, including scope for replication, extension capitalisation on experience and knowledge sharing?

Maximum Score 5

5.3. Are the expected results of the proposed action sustainable?- Financially (e.g. financing of follow-up activities, sources of revenue for covering all future operating and maintenance costs)- Institutionally (will structures allow the results of the action to be sustained at the end of the action? Will there be local ‘ownership’ of the results of the action?)- At policy level (where applicable) (what will be the structural impact of the action — e.g. improved legislation, codes of conduct, methods) - Environmentally (if applicable) (will the action have a negative/positive environmental impact?)

Maximum Score 5

 

6. Budget and cost-effectiveness of the action

Maximum Score 15

6.1. Are the activities appropriately reflected in the budget?

Maximum Score 5

6.2. Is the ratio between the estimated costs and the expected results satisfactory?

Maximum Score 5x2**

Maximum total score 100

**: this scores is multiplied by 2 because of its importance

 

If the total score for Section 1 (financial and operational capacity) is less than 12 points, the application will be rejected. If the score for at least one of the subsections under Section 1 is 1, the application will also be rejected.

If the lead applicant applies without co-applicants or affiliated entities the score for point 3.3 shall be 5 unless the involvement of co-applicants or affiliated entities is mandatory according to these guidelines for applicants.  

Provisional selection

After the evaluation, a table will be drawn up listing the applications ranked according to their score. The highest scoring applications will be provisionally selected until the available budget for this call for proposals is reached. In addition, a reserve list will be drawn up following the same criteria. This list will be used if more funds become available during the validity period of the reserve list.

 

(3) STEP 3: VERIFICATION OF ELIGIBILITY OF THE APPLICANTS AND AFFILIATED ENTITY(IES)

The eligibility verification will be performed on the basis of the supporting documents requested by the contracting authority (see Section 2.4). It will by default only be performed for the applications that have been provisionally selected according to their score and within the available budget for this call for proposals. 

 

• The declaration by the lead applicant (section 5 of Annex A.2) will be cross-checked with the supporting documents provided by the lead applicant. Any missing supporting document or any incoherence between the declaration by the lead applicant and the supporting documents may lead to the rejection of the application on that sole basis. 

• The eligibility of applicants and the affiliated entity(ies) will be verified according to the criteria set out in Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.1.3.

Any rejected application will be replaced by the next best placed application on the reserve list that falls within the available budget for this call for proposals.

2.4. Submission of supporting documents for provisionally selected applications 

A lead applicant whose application has been provisionally selected or placed on the reserve list will be informed in writing by the contracting authority. It will be requested to supply the following documents in order to allow the contracting authority to verify the eligibility of the lead applicant, (if any) of the co-applicant(s) and (if any) of their affiliated entity(ies):

Supporting documents must be provided through PADOR (see section 2.2).

1. The statutes or articles of association of the lead applicant, (if any) of each co-applicant and (if any) of each affiliated entity. Where the contracting authority has recognised the lead applicant’s, or the co-applicant(s)’s, or their affiliated entity(ies)’s eligibility for another call for proposals under the same budget line within 2 years before the deadline for receipt of applications, it should be submitted, instead of the  statutes or articles of association, a copy of the document proving their eligibility in a former call (e.g. a copy of the special conditions of a grant contract received during the reference period), unless a change in legal status has occurred in the meantime.  This obligation does not apply to international organisations which have signed a framework agreement with the European Commission.  

1. 2. For action grants exceeding EUR 750 000, the lead applicant must provide an audit report produced by an approved external auditor where it is available, and always in cases where a statutory audit is required by EU or national law. That report shall certify the accounts for up to the last 3 financial years available. In all other cases, the applicant shall provide a self-declaration signed by its authorised representative certifying the validity of its accounts for up to the last 3 financial years available. 

This requirement shall apply only to the first application made by a beneficiary to an authorising officer responsible in any one financial year.                                                                                    

The external audit report is not required from (if any) the co-applicant(s)) or affiliated entities.

This obligation does not apply to public bodies and international organisations provided that the international organisation in question offers the guarantees provided for in the applicable Financial Regulation, as described in Chapter 6 of the practical guide.

3. A copy of the lead applicant’s latest accounts (the profit and loss account and the balance sheet for the last financial year for which the accounts have been closed). A copy of the latest account is neither required from (if any) the co-applicant(s) nor from (if any) affiliated entity(ies)).

1. 4. Legal entity sheet (see Annex D of these guidelines) duly completed and signed by each of the applicants (i.e. by the lead applicant and (if any) by each co-applicant), accompanied by the justifying documents requested there. If the applicants have already signed a contract with the contracting authority, instead of the legal entity sheet and supporting documents, the legal entity number may be provided, unless a change in legal status occurred in the meantime.
2. 5. A financial identification form of the lead applicant (not from co-applicant(s)) conforming to the model attached as Annex E of these guidelines, certified by the bank to which the payments will be made. This bank should be located in the country where the lead applicant is established. If the lead applicant has already submitted a financial identification form in the past for a contract where the European Commission was in charge of the payments and intends to use the same bank account, a copy of the previous financial identification form may be provided instead.

 6. Entities without legal personality must, to the extent possible, submit the documentation listed above. In addition, a letter must be provided by the legal representative certifying his/her capacity to undertake legal obligations on behalf of the entity. 

The requested supporting documents (uploaded in PADOR or sent together with the PADOR offline form) must be supplied in the form of originals, photocopies or scanned versions (i.e. showing legible stamps, signatures and dates) of the said originals.

Where such documents are not in one of the official languages of the European Uniona translation into one of the language(s) of the call for proposals of the relevant parts of these documents proving the lead applicant's and, where applicable, co-applicants' and affiliated entity(ies)' eligibility, must be attached for the purpose of analysing the application.

Where these documents are in an official language of the European Union other than one of the language(s) of the call for proposals, it is strongly recommended, in order to facilitate the evaluation, to provide a translation of the relevant parts of the documents, proving the lead applicant's and, where applicable, co-applicants' and affiliated entity(ies)' eligibility, into one of the language(s) of the call for proposals.

Applicants have to take into consideration the time necessary to obtain official documents from national competent authorities and to translate such documents in the authorised languages while registering their data in PADOR.

If the abovementioned supporting documents are not provided before the deadline indicated in the request for supporting documents sent to the lead applicant by the contracting authority, the application may be rejected.

After verifying the supporting documents, the evaluation committee will make a final recommendation to the contracting authority, which will decide on the award of grants.

NB : In the eventuality that the contracting authority is not satisfied with the strength, solidity, and guarantee offered by the structural link between one of the applicants and its affiliated entity, it can require the submission of the missing documents allowing for its conversion into co-applicant. If all the missing documents for co-applicants are submitted, and provided all necessary eligibility criteria are fulfilled, the above mentioned entity becomes a co-applicant for all purposes. The lead applicant has to submit the application form revised accordingly.

 

 

2.5. Notification of the Contracting Authority’s decision

2.5.1. Content of the decision

The lead applicants will be informed in writing of the Contracting Authority’s decision concerning their application and, if rejected, the reasons for the negative decision. This letter will be sent by e-mail and will appear online automatically in the PROSPECT profile of the user who submitted the application. Lead applicants who, in exceptional cases (see section 2.2), had to submit their application by post or hand-delivery, will be informed by email or by post if they did not provide any e-mail address. Therefore, please check regularly your PROSPECT profile, taking into account the indicative timetable below.

An applicant believing that it has been harmed by an error or irregularity during the award process may lodge a complaint. See further Section 2.4.15 of the practical guide. 

Applicants who were unsuccessful at the Opening and Administrative Check stages of the procedure wishing to obtain further information should send their request by letter, indicating the reference of the Call for Proposals and the reference allocated to the proposal, to:

European Commission
Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development
Unit DEVCO B6 Finance and Contracts

Attn. Head of Unit L-41 03/110 

Avenue du Bourget, 1
B-1140 Brussels
BELGIUM

Applicants who were unsuccessful at the Technical evaluation stages of the procedure or at the Eligibility check stage wishing to obtain further information should send their request, by letter indicating the reference of the Call for Proposals and the reference allocated to the proposal, to:

European Commission

Directorate-General for International Development and Cooperation — EuropeAid

Unit B.1 “Gender Equality, Human Rights and Democratic Governance”

Attn. Head of Unit

Avenue du Bourget, 1
B-1140 Brussels
BELGIUM

 

Public link:   Only for registered users