After the deadline for submission of proposals, a conformity check was carried out on the proposals received. As a result certain proposals were excluded from evaluation in the case they did not meet the selection criteria as published in the call for proposals. For instance the partnership had to cover at least four member states, co funding not exceeding 95% and proposal had to respect the deadline for submission.
An evaluation followed using the “award” criteria as stated in the call. The evaluation involved several units from DG ENV including the Financial Unit who in particular scrutinised criteria “IV” and “V”.
The final rating of the projects were based on arithmetic average of the evaluators results and using a 0 to 3 scale for the financial criteria (3=excellent,0= unacceptable).
A list was established in ranking order and based on the available funding only the two top ranking proposals. The Advisory committee (comprising of Member States representatives) adopted anonymously the list on 31 October, 2001.
The list was subject to
inter service consultation involving DG Budget, DG Regio, DG Enlargement, DG
Employment and DG RTD. During the finalisation of the contracts delays were
encountered and finally two contracts were signed:
Name of project:
Sustainable Towns and Cities Campaign
Name of Coordinator:
Eurocities
EC funding:
1.262.397,80 €
Project
summary sheet
Name of project: Sustainable consumption in
cities
Name of Coordinator: ACRR (Associations of cities and
regions for recycling
EC funding:
359.240€
Project
summary sheet
Projects financed in 2002
As for the previous year a conformity check was carried out after the deadline and certain projects were exccluded from evaluation as they had not met the exclusion criteria, for instance, exceeding the 95% assistance rate, not meeting the deadline, not covering at least four member states and requesting a subsidy outside the 350 000-700000€ bracket.
The projects passing stage 1 were evaluated using the "Award Criteria" included in the call (I to IX). Criteria "IV", "V" and the financial part of Criteria “IX, Feasibility”, were evaluated by the Budget and Finance Unit.
The remaining, “technical criteria” were evaluated by the Unit responsible for the management of the projects and the Communication and Civil Society unit. The bonus criteria (max 5 points) reflecting the project’s potential usefulness for the Thematic Strategy on the Urban Environment, was attributed by the Unit responsible for co-ordinating the development of the Thematic Strategy.
The final rating of the projects was based on the arithmetic average of the three evaluators on the “technical criteria” (Criteria I – III and VI – VIII), the bonus attributed and the score on the "financial criteria" (IV and V) using a 1 to 5 scale (5=excellent, 1=clearly unacceptable). Criteria IX was based on the average of the scores received on technical feasibility and financial feasibility. Maximum score 45 plus bonus max 5 points.
During this evaluation, some projects, although fulfilling the formal criteria referred to in point 1, were found to have serious deficiencies in one or several of the technical or financial award criteria (scores of 1 or 2). These were then taken out of the evaluation process and included with the eliminated proposals.
Based on the available credits, the Commission recommended that the five highest ranking projects were financed:
Name of project:
MIRIAD 21
Name of Coordinator:
Les ECO MAIRES
EC funding:
692.259,22 €
Project
summary sheet
Name of project:
SIPTRAM
Name of Coordinator:
ICLEI
EC funding:
497.134 €
Project
summary sheet
Name of project:
EMAS – Peer Review for cities
Name of Coordinator:
UBC (Union of Baltic Cities)
EC funding:
535.767,78 €
Project
summary sheet
Name of project:
DISPLAY- The Municipal Building
Climate Campaign
Name of Coordinator:
Energie Cités
EC funding:
394.541€
Project
summary sheet
Name
of project:
Integrated Approaches for health and
sustainable development
Name of Coordinator:
WHO (World Health Organisation)
EC funding:
480.298 €
Project
summary sheet
All documents are in pdf format (~200K)
| Last update: |
|
|