Research & Innovation - Participant Portal

Search

TOPIC : Call for proposals on capacity-building in the area of rights of the child - putting in place robust national or regional integrated mechanisms to support children ageing out of/leaving alternative care

Topic identifier: REC-RCHI-PROF-AG-2018
Publication date: 30 January 2018

Types of action: REC-AG REC Action Grant
DeadlineModel:
Opening date:
single-stage
30 January 2018
Deadline: 31 May 2018 17:00:00

Time Zone : (Brussels time)
  Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme
Topic Updates
  • 04 June 2018 14:20

    A call flash info document (nr of proposals submitted, expected date of results) has been added under Topic conditions and documents, additional documents.

  • 04 May 2018 11:11

    A questions and answers document has been added under Topic conditions and documents, additional documents.

Topic Description
Scope:

Priorities and activities to be co-financed

1. Priorities

Projects shall support capacity building of professionals working for and with children on the rights of the child and child protection: project activities shall focus on putting in place robust national or regional integrated mechanisms to support children ageing out of/leaving alternative care and they shall encompass a strong child participation component (in project conception and design/empowerment of children/the child’s right to be heard/children’s involvement in reviewing service delivery).

2. Description of the activities

Project activities may include:

  • mutual learning, exchange of good practices, cooperation;
  • design and implementation of protocols, development of working methods which may be transferable to other regions or countries;
  • capacity-building and training (train the trainer);

EU funding is not intended to cover operational or running costs, but to support the development of integrated, coherent and robust mechanisms and frameworks for children in alternative care, to support their ageing out of care. As the focus is on national or regional integrated mechanisms, projects are expected to be inclusive in nature, covering all children in state or corporate care. Children in families can generally rely on family support over relatively long periods and “corporate” or “state” parents should have commensurate support mechanisms in place for children in care. As part of an approach fostering an integrated approach to children in state care, this call can also cover third-country national/migrant children (including unaccompanied children) who are in the care of the State. Children may be in care as a direct result of neglect, abuse and violence and aftercare supports should arguably be even more extensive, as evidenced by the fact that lack of support may lead to a high proportion of young careleavers ending up homeless/in poverty/in conflict with the law, etc. In Europe, supports generally need to be increased. Children in care and careleavers are often stigmatised. Siblings may have been separated. Project applications must demonstrate the close involvement in all project phases of those working directly with children in care. Thus, it is expected that applicants and partners include in the first instance organisations and actors responsible for and working with and for children in care. Projects should be practical projects fostering capacity-building and an integrated approach, the exchange of good practice, training on the rights and needs of careleavers (taking full account of the experience of former careleavers, e.g. by involving them in training, and at the very least taking account of their experience in designing training) and provide for the monitoring and review of aftercare plans, the continuous review of efforts resulting from this project and monitoring of outcomes. Given the target group, all projects are expected to involve and take account of the experience of careleavers themselves.

Projects should describe how they will contribute to the implementation of the 10 principles for integrated child protection systems (see bibliography).

Projects should be aligned with the UN Guidelines for the alternative care of children and Moving forward: implementing the guidelines for the alternative care of children (Focus 12). Proposals will be assessed against alignment with these two documents under the relevance criterion with a particular focus on individualised planning and the direct involvement and empowerment of the child/careleaver her or himself.

Projects should seek to address known gaps in policy and in service provision both in preparations for leaving care and for aftercare supports such as: a stronger focus by corporate and State parents on ensuring that children in care have a positive experience of education and the monitoring of educational outcomes all through alternative care, life skills/preparation for (semi)-independent living, addressing gaps in the child’s knowledge of their life history, therapeutic services, out-of-hours social services, housing, education, training and labour market integration services, promotion of positive sibling relationships and peer support services. We expect all projects to address and systemise the monitoring of outcomes for future careleavers. There should be a very clear focus on inclusive services and community involvement that also take account of minority groups, children with disabilities and third-country nationals in alternative care. For third-country nationals, status determination procedures may need to be addressed and the child’s status resolved in a timely manner as a matter of routine and an integral part of an integrated approach. ‘One-stop-shop’ or otherwise integrated models of support for careleavers could be explored. Social enterprise models and a corporate social responsibility focus on alternative careleavers could also be usefully explored as part of an integrated approach.

Applicants are invited to take note of previously funded projects (see bibliography).

The continuation or follow-up of successful initiatives, including the scaling up of existing initiatives and/or testing them in a different context, may be funded if it is aligned with the priority. However, the exact duplication of an initiative will not be funded.

Applicants shall explain and demonstrate how their proposals are aligned with the respective EU policies and with the documents published by the European Commission or referred to below (see bibliography). The degree of relevance to the priority of the call for proposals will be assessed under the relevance award criterion.

All projects must take a rights-based approach (for projects relevant to children, see child rights approach definition: paragraph 59 of General Comment No 13 of the UN Committee on the rights of the child) and be clearly grounded in the EU Charter of Fundamental rights and the UN Convention on the rights of the child (UNCRC). Applicants are required to include clear and explicit references to EU and international law and standards they will adhere to or be guided by in project design, implementation, evaluation and monitoring and explain the project rationale.

This call aims to fund targeted, practical projects ensuring maximum tangible and demonstrable benefits and impacts on the lives of beneficiaries (i.e. future careleavers). The projects should be practical projects rather than research and should include a combination of elements to form a coherent whole. All projects should not only develop a sound methodology using recognised existing good practice or tried and tested intervention models, but consist of a large proportion of practical implementation measures and outcomes. These aspects will be taken into account when evaluating the quality of proposals. Applicants are invited to consider the weighting of the work streams, with a view to ensuring maximum practical benefits, positive outcomes and impacts for the target groups and the final beneficiaries, and to check that the management and coordination work streams (including travel) are not over-resourced. Activities such as the development of materials, the mapping of existing materials or research should be, at most, minor components of project proposals. If included, the need should be solidly justified in the proposal; they should lead to practical applications and interventions.

Any training and/or practical tools should have an overarching objective to make the system work better to improve outcomes for the beneficiaries (future careleavers). This may include development and delivery of new training modules/tools or roll out and delivery of previously tried and tested training modules/tools. Proposal should describe how access to those to be trained will be assured and describe how training/tools will be rolled out in the participating countries. In terms of promoting sustainability, capacity-building should preferably focus on train-the-trainer approaches and may also include tools such as checklists/draft protocols, etc. For national projects, we expect projects to be coherent and address the situation of all future careleavers in state care whether they are e.g. deprived of parental care, children with disabilities or third country national children. For transnational projects, any training modules developed should be made available with a view to being replicated or adapted for reuse in other EU Member States. New training modules must be piloted and, if necessary, adapted prior to delivery.

All projects under this call can be either national or transnational and should be elaborated in close partnership with and/or be led by appropriate key players, in particular those working for and directly with children in alternative care and child protection agencies, careleavers’ associations, ministries/authorities for children or social affairs, social protection, children’s ombudspersons, services responsible for: housing, labour market integration, higher education and vocational training (including scholarships and grants), health and mental health, counselling and psychosocial support; civil society organisations, the judiciary, social workers, academia, etc. Applicants must document that they have the prior commitment of participating key players. Good quality cooperation among partners will be instrumental in making innovative projects successful. Regardless of whether projects are national or transnational in nature, they should aim to produce results that create or contribute to implementation of minimum standards at European level, or that could be transferable to other Member States.

One public authority per participating country must be actively involved in the projects, as applicant or partner or by providing support , e.g. Ministries and/or agencies responsible for children (e.g. child protection agencies and services), Ministries for children, child protection, social services, social protection, labour market integration, education, health and mental health services, social affairs, justice, children's ombudspersons and/or national human rights institutes for children, responsible regional authorities, etc). The rationale for the choice must be documented and explained in Part B Project description and implementation. In practical terms, it means that if, for instance, a transnational project is submitted by a partnership involving four different eligible countries, at least four public authorities as described above (one per each eligible country) must either be involved in the project as applicant or partner(s) or express in writing its support of the application. In the latter case, this support will be expressed through Annex 5 - Letter from the public authority supporting the application. The requirement will be assessed under the award criterion b) quality.

All proposals are expected to respect the child's right to participate and be aligned with Article 24 of the Charter, relevant EU law and the UN Convention on the rights of the child. The child's right to be heard, as set out in UNCRC Article 12 and General Comment No 12, must be an integral part of all project activities. The involvement of careleavers and future careleavers themselves is expected; including in project design. Proposals must make children's involvement central and integral to the project, in designing training, in designing protocols and development of working methods, in reviewing services, in complaint mechanisms, in assessing what needs to be changed at system level, in empowering children to be involved in decisions that affect them and in empowering children and young people to help themselves and other children, etc. Are there possibilities to involve children in project design prior to submission of proposals? Are the views of children on issues addressed in the call (possibly gathered elsewhere) reflected in the proposal? Accessible guidance on how to ensure child participation is also contained in the Lundy Model of Participation and the Lundy Voice Model Checklist for Participation, designed by Professor Laura Lundy of Queen's University, Belfast (see bibliography).

Child protection/safeguarding policy

If a project will involve direct contact with children, the beneficiaries of funding (including partners) need to provide their child protection/safeguarding policy, if they work directly with children during the project. Each partner must provide their own child protection policy if they will be working directly with children. However, given the subject matter of this call, for all projects, child safeguarding must be central to project design and implementation. The applicant must describe and submit the child protection/safeguarding policy it will adhere to (see Annex 4 of the Guide for applicants). A child protection policy should include standards that cover four broad areas: (1) policy, (2) people, (3) procedures, and (4) accountability. More information on these areas can be found in "Child safeguarding standards and how to implement them" issued by Keeping Children Safe (see bibliography). The quality of the applicant’s child safeguarding/protection policy will be assessed under award criterion b) quality.

Monitoring and evaluation

Appropriate attention has to be given to developing a robust evidence base and involving reliable monitoring, evaluation and reporting procedures based on recognised methodological approaches, developed by a competent and experienced policy impact evaluator (for further details please refer to "Applying Behavioural Sciences to EU Policy-making", Joint Research Centre Scientific and Policy Report 2013), in consultation with the relevant project partners. This should include defining the expected impact of the activity in measurable terms and defining a robust methodology and indicators to measure the impact of the activity. Applicants are free to choose the method for evaluating the impact of the activities, the method should be robust and appropriate, and involve rigorous data collection and monitoring. Proposals must make provisions to document the number of persons reached, provide anonymised data disaggregated by sex and by age, and must describe in their grant application how this will be done and how the target group will be reached.

Sustainability of projects and dissemination of results

Applications should also include a clear communication, dissemination and sustainability plan, with measures to maintain and monitor results after the end of funding. Applicants should also describe the potential for scaling up the measure, should the activities produce the expected results. The projects should aim at ensuring their durability, including through the involvement of the relevant authorities in the project itself, and appropriate dissemination, including at the end of funding (by promoting and enabling access to their results to the widest possible audience).

3. Bibliography

Rights of the child/child protection systems

1. EU acquis on the rights of the child: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/files/acquis_rights_of_child.pdf (in particular the Victims' rights directive 2012/29/EU Directive 2011/93/EU on child sexual abuse and exploitation and Directive 2011/36/EU on trafficking in human beings)

2. DG Justice website on rights of the child: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/rights-child/index_en.htm;

3. Ten principles for integrated child protection systems: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/files/2015_forum_roc_background_en.pdf

4. DG JUSTICE website on child protection systems: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/rights-child/protection-systems/index_en.htm;

5. FRA mapping of national child protection systems: http://fra.europa.eu/en/project/2014/mapping-child-protection-systems-eu

6. UN Convention on the rights of the child: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx

7. United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child General Comment 13 (2011) on the right of the child to freedom from all forms of violence: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/docs/CRC.C.GC.13_en.pdf

8. HUDOC database; case law of the ECtHR: http://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=caselaw/HUDOC&c=

9. European Law Handbook on rights of the child: FRA/CoE/ECtHR Handbook on European law relating to rights of the child: http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2015/handbook-european-law-child-rights

Alternative care

1. UN Guidelines for the alternative care of children: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4c3acd162.html

2. CELCIS: Moving Forward: Implementing the Guidelines for the alternative care of children: http://www.alternativecareguidelines.org/MovingForward/tabid/2798/language/en-GB/Default.aspx

3. A training manual for care professionals working with children in alternative care, SOS Children's Villages, 2016: http://www.sos-childrensvillages.org/getmedia/94064fdf-41dd-4ca5-94fc-fac167857c2c/Realising-Childrens-Rights-Training-Manual-ENG-web.pdf

Child refugees and migrants

1. European Commission, DG Justice and Consumers, webpage children in migration: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/rights-child/protection-systems/index_en.htm

2. 10th European Forum on the rights of the child, the protection of children in migration, 28 – 30 November 2016, general background paper (and bibliography with further links) http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/document.cfm?doc_id=42359

3. European Commission, 10th European Forum on the rights of the child, the protection of children in migration, webpage with relevant links (programme, background documents, webstreaming, presentations): http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/item-detail.cfm?item_id=34456

4. European Commission, Compilation of data, situation and media reports on children in migration: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/document.cfm?doc_id=40299

5. Guidelines for Integrating Gender-Based Violence Interventions in Humanitarian Action: http://gbvguidelines.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/2015-IASC-Gender-based-Violence-Guidelines_lo-res.pdf

Undocumented and stateless children

1. European Network on Statelessness, ‘No Child Should be Stateless’, September 2015: http://www.statelessness.eu/sites/www.statelessness.eu/files/ENS_NoChildStateless_final.pdf

2. European Network on Statelessness, ‘Ending Childhood Statelessness – A Comparative Study of Safeguards to Ensure the Right to a Nationality for Children Born in Europe’, May 2016: http://www.statelessness.eu/sites/www.statelessness.eu/files/file_attach/ENS_1961_Safeguards_Stateless_children.pdf

3. Protecting undocumented children-Promising policies and practices from governments, PICUM, 2015: http://picum.org/picum.org/uploads/publication/Protecting%20undocumented%20children-Promising%20policies%20and%20practices%20from%20governments.pdf

4. Undocumented children in Europe: invisible victims of immigration restrictions, Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM), 2009: http://picum.org/picum.org/uploads/publication/Undocumented%20Children%20in%20Europe%20EN.pdf

5. Examples of gaps in status determination and resolution while in state care: Immigrant Council of Ireland: Child Migration Matters (Children and Young People’s Experiences of Migration, (2016): http://immigrantcouncil.ie/files/publications/9675c-child-migration-matters.pdf

Compilation of previously funded projects on rights of the child and violence against children

1. Compilation previously funded projects on violence against children and the rights of the child, 2013 – present: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/files/rights_child/compilation_previously_funded_projects_rights_of_the_child_and_violence_against_children.pdf

Child participation

1. Commission study evaluating legislation, policy and practice on child participation in EU28: Final report - Children and young people's summary - Research summary - Resource catalogue - Reports for each of the 28 Member States

2. Inclusion Europe participation rights children with disabilities: http://www.childrights4all.eu/?page_id=114

3. Welsh examples cited above: http://www.ssiacymru.org.uk/home.php?page_id=4769 and http://www.participationworkerswales.org.uk/

4. Laura, Lundy (2007) "Voice" is not enough: conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child', British Educational Research Journal, 33:6, 927- 942

5. Lundy Model of Participation and Lundy Voice Model Checklist: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/files/lundy_model_child_participation.pdf

6. Ireland, Department of Children and Youth Affairs, National Strategy on Children and Young People's Participation in Decision-Making 2015-2020 (17 June 2015), p. 21-22. Accessible here: http://dcya.gov.ie/documents/playandrec/20150617NatStratParticipationReport.pdf and

7. Lundy Model of Participation and Lundy Voice Model Checklist: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/files/lundy_model_child_participation.pdf

Child safeguarding policies

1. Keeping Children Safe standards: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/files/rights_child/standards_child_protection_kcsc_en.pdf

Monitoring of outcomes

1. See, for example, http://reclaimingfutures.org/resources/evaluation

2. Turning the Curve: outcomes-based accountability – adapted from ‘Trying hard is not good enough’, Mark Friedman e.g. http://www.yor-ok.org.uk/downloads/CYPP%20and%20Early%20Help/Commissioning/Outcomes%20Based%20Accountability.pdf ;

3. www.raguide.org

4. www.resultsaccountability.com

4. Expected results

  • all children in state or corporate care are better supported in preparing to leave care;
  • support and preparation measures start well before children age out/leave care and are individualised;
  • known gaps at national level are better addressed;
  • ageing out of care systems are joined up, coherent and integrated and designed to ensure that all children who are care leavers have a strong support network and do not fall through cracks;
  • careleavers’ access to essential services, higher education, vocational training and the labour market is improved;
  • outcomes for children in care/careleavers are monitored;
  • good practice is collected and shared (also across borders) with a view to being replicated;
  • project activities reflect and contribute to practical implementation of the 10 principles for integrated child protection systems;
  • practices and methods live on after project end.
Topic conditions and documents

Please read carefully all provisions below before the preparation of your application.

 
1. Admissibility requirements

(a)  Applications must be submitted no later than the deadline for submission as indicated on the Participant Portal
(b)  Applications must be submitted in writing using the Electronic Submission System of the Participant Portal
(c)  Applications must be submitted using the standard Submission Form Part A and Part B. They must include all the mandatory information and be accompanied by all the compulsory Annexes
(d)   Applications must be drafted in one of the EU official languages (Note: for reasons of efficiency, the Commission advises Applicants to use English)
 

2. Eligibility criteria

2.1 List of eligible countries:
The Member States (MS) of the European Union (EU), including their overseas departments, and Iceland.
Proposals from applicants in candidate or associated countries may be selected provided that, on the date of award, agreements have entered into force setting out the arrangements for the participation of those countries in the programme.
Should a candidate or associated country join the programme during the call process, a notification will be posted on the Participant Portal.
2.2        Eligibility of the applicant and partners (lead applicant and co-applicant(s))

The applicant and partners must be public entities or private organisations, duly established in one of the countries participating in the programme, or international organisations. Organisations which are profit-oriented must submit applications in partnership with public entities or private non-profit organisations.
Note: Under the REC and Justice programmes, entities affiliated to a beneficiary are not considered as project participants. Their costs are not eligible.
2.3        Eligibility of the application

(a) The project can be either national or transnational;
(b) The application must involve at least two organisations (applicant and partner);
(c) The EU grant requested cannot be lower than EUR 75 000.
Note: For British applicants and partners: please be aware that eligibility criteria must be complied with for the entire duration of the grant. If the United Kingdom withdraws from the EU during the grant period without concluding an agreement with the EU ensuring in particular that British applicants continue to be eligible, you will cease to receive EU funding (while continuing, where possible, to participate) or be required to leave the project on the basis of Article 34 of the grant agreement.  

 

3.         Exclusion criteria

3.1        Exclusion
Organisations (i.e. applicant and partners) will be excluded from participating in this call for proposals if they are in any of the following situations: 

(a) the applicant is bankrupt, subject to insolvency or winding-up procedures, where its assets are being administered by a liquidator or by a court, where it is in an arrangement with creditors, where its business activities are suspended, or where it is in any analogous situation arising from a similar procedure provided for under national laws or regulations;

(b) it has been established by a final judgment or a final administrative decision that the applicant is in breach of its obligations relating to the payment of taxes or social security contributions in accordance with the law of the country in which it is established, with those of the country in which the authorising officer is located or those of the country of the performance of the contract;

(c) it has been established by a final judgment or a final administrative decision that the applicant is guilty of grave professional misconduct by having violated applicable laws or regulations or ethical standards of the profession to which the applicant belongs, or by having engaged in any wrongful conduct which has an impact on its professional credibility where such conduct denotes wrongful intent or gross negligence, including, in particular, any of the following:
(i) fraudulently or negligently misrepresenting information required for the verification of the absence of grounds for exclusion or the fulfilment of selection criteria or in the performance of a contract, a grant agreement or a grant decision;
(ii) entering into agreement with other applicants with the aim of distorting competition;
(iii) violating intellectual property rights;
(iv) attempting to influence the decision-making process of the Commission during the award procedure;
(v) attempting to obtain confidential information that may confer upon it undue advantages in the award procedure;

(d) it has been established by a final judgment that the applicant is guilty of any of the following:
(i) fraud, within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests, drawn up by the Council Act of 26 July 1995;
(ii) corruption, as defined in Article 3 of the Convention on the fight against corruption involving officials of the European Communities or officials of Member States of the European Union, drawn up by the Council Act of 26 May 1997, and in Article 2(1) of Council Framework Decision 2003/568/JHA, as well as corruption as defined in the law of the country where the contracting authority is located, the country in which the applicant is established or the country of the performance of the contract;
(iii) participation in a criminal organisation, as defined in Article 2 of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA;
(iv) money laundering or terrorist financing, as defined in Article 1 of Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council;
(v) terrorist-related offences or offences linked to terrorist activities, as defined in Articles 1 and 3 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA, respectively, or inciting, aiding, abetting or attempting to commit such offences, as referred to in Article 4 of that Decision;
(vi) child labour or other forms of trafficking in human beings as defined in Article 2 of Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council;

(e) the applicant has shown significant deficiencies in complying with main obligations in the performance of a contract, a grant agreement or a grant decision financed by the Union's budget, which has led to its early termination or to the application of liquidated damages or other contractual penalties, or which has been discovered following checks, audits or investigations by an authorising officer, OLAF or the Court of Auditors;

(f) it has been established by a final judgment or final administrative decision that the applicant has committed an irregularity within the meaning of Article 1(2) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95.

(g) for the situations of grave professional misconduct, fraud, corruption, other criminal offences, significant deficiencies in the performance of the contract or irregularity, the applicant is subject to:
(i) facts established in the context of audits or investigations carried out by the Court of Auditors, OLAF or internal audit, or any other check, audit or control performed under the responsibility of an authorising officer of an EU institution, of a European office or of an EU agency or body;
(ii) non-final administrative decisions which may include disciplinary measures taken by the competent supervisory body responsible for the verification of the application of standards of professional ethics;
(iii) decisions of the ECB, the EIB, the European Investment Fund or international organisations;
(iv) decisions of the Commission relating to the infringement of the Union's competition rules or of a national competent authority relating to the infringement of Union or national competition law.
(v) decisions of exclusion by an authorising officer of an EU institution, of a European office or of an EU agency or body.

3.2        Remedial measures

If an applicant declares one of the situations of exclusion listed above (see section 3.1), it should indicate the measures it has taken to remedy the exclusion situation, thus demonstrating its reliability. This may include e.g. technical, organisational and personnel measures to prevent further occurrence, compensation of damage or payment of fines. The relevant documentary evidence which illustrates the remedial measures taken must be provided in annex to the declaration. This does not apply for situations referred in point (d) of section 3.1.

3.3        Rejection from the call for proposals

A grant shall not be awarded to an applicant who:

(a) is in an exclusion situation established in accordance with section 3.1 ;

(b) has misrepresented the information required as a condition for participating in the procedure or has failed to supply that information;

(c) was previously involved in the preparation of calls for proposal documents where this entails a distortion of competition that cannot be remedied otherwise.

Administrative and financial penalties may be imposed on applicants who are guilty of misrepresentation

 

4.         Selection criteria

4.1        Financial capacity

Applicants and partners must have stable and sufficient sources of funding to maintain their activity throughout the duration of the grant and to participate in its funding. Organisations participating in several projects shall have sufficient financial capacity to implement multiple projects.

The financial capacity shall consist of a financial viability check performed by the Research Executive Agency (REA) and completed by the Commission.

For the purpose of demonstrating its financial capacity, and if the total amount of the grant requested exceeds EUR 60.000, the applicant must provide the most recent closed and signed financial statements of its organisation containing the balance sheet and profit & loss accounts, for the last two closed financial years (a single financial document containing comparative data of the annual accounts of the two years under assessment is acceptable. The same applies to the statutory audit report which may cover the two financial years). In case of an application submitted on behalf of a consortium, the Commission reserves the right to verify every member of the consortium to submit this information, with the exception of public bodies, higher or secondary education establishments and international organisations. If the share of a grant requested by an organisation (applicant or partner) exceeds EUR 750.000, this organisation must also provide an audit report produced by an approved external auditor certifying its accounts for the last closed financial year. Both financial statements and the audit report must be uploaded in the Beneficiary Register when uploading the application package.

Start-up entities which do not have closed accounts at the date of request for financial assessment are requested to submit prospective financial data for one year only

Recently created entities which have closed annual accounts for one year only will be assessed based on the documents for the sole closed financial year

The REA will assess the organisation’s financial viability by checking that it:

           Has sufficient liquidity - is able to cover its short-term commitments;

           Is financially autonomous;

           Is solvent - capable of covering its medium and long term commitments;

           Is profitable – generating profits, or at least with self-financing capacity 

The REA will then propose to the Commission a ranking of each organisation’s financial viability based on a qualification: insufficient, weak, acceptable or good.

The methodology used by the REA to assess the financial viability may be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/docs/h2020-funding-guide/grants/applying-for-funding/register-an-organisation/financial-capacity-check_en.htm

The Commission will assess further elements if they are available/relevant such as:

           Auditor’s findings on previous projects,  

           Weak financial viability results from other projects or sources

           Involvement in case of serious administrative errors or fraud

           Pending legal procedures or judicial proceedings for serious administrative errors or fraud

           Due recovery orders

In view of the above, if the Commission considers that the financial capacity is weak, it may request further guarantees or impose risk mitigation measures (e.g. reduced or no pre-financing, bank guarantee covering the amount of pre-financing payment; replacement of the weak organisation), or reject the application in case the Commission considers the financial capacity as insufficient.

4.2        Operational capacity

The applicant and the partners must have sufficient operational and professional capacities to implement the activities for which co-funding is requested. Organisations participating in several projects shall have sufficient operational capacity to implement multiple projects.

For the purpose of demonstrating its operational capacity, the applicant must upload:

- CVs of key staff involved in the project (employed by the applicant and the partners), who must have the necessary education, skills, experience and capacity to carry out the tasks that are assigned to them during the project

- its annual activity report for the last available year. The requirement to provide such a report does not apply to public bodies (i.e. a body governed by public law, e.g. public authorities at local, regional or national level) and universities

Applicants may not be awarded a grant if they fail to demonstrate that they have the capacity, the experience and the expertise necessary for the successful implementation of the proposed activities.

 

5. Declarations on honour referring to points 2, 3 and 4

The applicant must provide the following declarations on honour by ticking appropriate boxes in Part A of the submission system, some of them on behalf of the partner(s). The applicant has to check with all the partners before clicking those boxes.

1) The coordinator declares to have the explicit consent of all partners on their participation and on the content of this proposal. Or the single applicant confirms the content of this proposal.

2) The information contained in this proposal is correct and complete. None of the actions foreseen in the proposal have started prior to the date of submission of the current application.

3) The coordinator hereby declares that

           he is fully compliant with the exclusion and eligibility criteria set out in the call for proposals/topic, and has the financial and operational capacity to carry out the proposed actions.

           each partner has confirmed that they are fully compliant with the exclusion and eligibility criteria set out in the call for proposal/topic, and they have the financial and operational capacity to carry out the proposed action.

Or the single applicant declares that

           he is fully compliant with the exclusion and eligibility criteria set out in the call for proposal/topic, and has the financial and operational capacity to carry out the proposed actions.

 

6.  Award criteria

The award criteria are set in order to evaluate the quality of proposals. On the basis of these criteria, grants will be awarded to applications that best address the objectives and priorities of the present call for proposals in a cost-effective manner. Synergies and complementarities with other Union instruments and programmes shall be sought and overlaps and duplications with existing activities avoided.

(a) Relevance to the priorities of the call (25 points):

Relevance of the action and its objectives to the priorities of the call for proposals, as described under each topic notice on the Participant Portal, relevance of the issues addressed by the project, contribution of the proposal to the priorities, and complementarity with other Union activities, avoiding duplication with projects funded by other Union programmes. Every proposed action has to be based on a reliable needs assessment.

(b) Quality of the proposed action (30 points):

Quality shall be assessed in terms of the proposed methodology for implementing the activities; the organisation of work, the allocation of resources and the time schedule; the appropriateness of the envisaged activities.
The evaluation of the project's quality will also asses the strategy for monitoring the project implementation and the identification of risks and the measures to mitigate them; the proposed evaluation, including measures to assess the success of the activities and the indicators to be used; the identification of ethical issues and the proposed action to address them.

(c) European added value of the project (15 points):

The European added value of the project shall be assessed in the light of criteria such as its contribution to the consistent and coherent implementation of Union law and policies and to wide public awareness about the rights deriving from it, its potential to develop mutual trust among Member States and to improve cross-border cooperation, its transnational impact, its contribution to the elaboration and dissemination of best practices or its potential to create practical tools and solutions that address cross-border or Union-wide challenges.

(d) Expected results, dissemination, sustainability and long-term impact (20 points):

How appropriate are the expected results to achieve the objectives of the action? Is there a long-term impact of these results on the target groups and/or the general public? A clear, targeted and appropriate dissemination strategy, which will ensure that the results and/or lessons learnt will reach the target groups and/or the general public? Is sustainability of the activities after the EU funding ensured?

(e) Cost-effectiveness (10 points):

Financial feasibility of the proposed activities by means of a realistic and reasonable budget. Appropriateness of the amount requested in relation to the scale and type of the activities, to the expected results and to the size of the partnership.
As a result of the evaluation carried out against the above award criteria the proposals will be ranked according to the points attained. The list of awarded projects will be established based on the amount of budget available.
Proposals not attaining a score of 18 points for the relevance criterion will not be considered for the award of a grant. Proposals not attaining an overall score of 70 points will not be considered for the award of a grant even in case the available budget is not consumed fully.
 

7. Timetable

The maximum time for the European Commission to inform all applicants is six months from the final date for the submission of complete proposals as specified in the call. The maximum time to sign grant agreements is within three months from the date of information of the successful applicants.
Those time limits may be exceeded in exceptional cases, in particular for complex actions, if there is a large number of proposals or due to delays attributable to the applicants.

The abstracts of the successful proposals will be published on the relevant topic's page after the signature of their grant agreements.

8. Budget available

The indicative maximum amount earmarked for this call is EUR 4 000 000. The Commission reserves the right not to distribute all the available funds.

9. Duration of the projects

The initial duration of the projects should not exceed 24 months. No grant may be awarded retrospectively for actions already completed. A grant may be awarded for an action which has already begun only where the applicant can demonstrate the need to start the action before the grant agreement is signed. In such cases, costs eligible for financing may not have been incurred prior to the date of submission of the grant application.


10. Other practical information

10.1 Co-financing rate

The grant will be defined by applying a maximum co-financing rate of 80% to the eligible costs actually incurred and declared by the beneficiary (ies). The beneficiaries should ensure that the outstanding balance is covered from sources other than the EU budget such as:
- the beneficiary's own resources,
- income generated by the action,
- financial contributions from third parties.

10.2 Flat rate for indirect costs

The flat rate for indirect costs is set at 7%. However, indirect costs may not be claimed at the final payment stage, by beneficiaries/co-beneficiaries receiving operating grants from the EU budget.

10.3 Financial support to third parties

Projects through which the beneficiaries use the budget of the project to award grants to other organisations under their own procedures and authority (financial support to third parties) are not allowed.

10.4 Multi-beneficiary projects

Based on our experience with multi-beneficiary agreements, and to support our aim to co-finance efficient, practical and targeted projects, we encourage the applicants to limit the size of the proposed partnerships to a maximum of 6 organisations (applicant and co-applicants).

11. Financial provisions

Information related to the financial provisions in relation to this topic is available in the Annex on financial provisions (which forms an integral part of the topic conditions) under the below point.

 

12. Provisions, proposal templates and evaluation forms for the type(s) of action(s) under this topic

13.  Useful information

REC Programme – Annual work plan 2018
REC Programme legal basis
EU Financial Regulation

 

 

Members of consortium are required to conclude a consortium agreement, in principle prior to the signature of the grant agreement.


 

Additional documents

  • Questions and answers en
  • Call flash info document en

Submission Service

No submission system is open for this topic.

Get support

Contact the REC Programme helpdesk for further assistance related to the call, topics and the content of proposals EC-REC-CALLS@ec.europa.eu.

Participant Portal FAQ – Submission of proposals.

IT Helpdeskcontact the IT helpdesk for questions such as forgotten passwords, access rights and roles, technical aspects of submission of proposals, etc.

H2020 Online Manual - Please use the manual with caution and only for the Participant Portal tools guidance, i.e. Submission service and Beneficiary register, because it is H2020 specific and does not cover the Justice Programme rules. Some aspects of the Justice Programme are different from the provisions of the H2020 programme.