X - Capacity4Dev

Joint Programming
Technical Seminar
Brussels, 19 February 2016
SESSION 1
Replies by MS + EU: core elements
Structure of the Questionnaire
Info on MS programming process
•
•
•
•
Ownership of partner govt. & consultations
Steps & Decision level process
HQ instructions to the field
Status of programming document
Requirements of a JP document
• Minimum info of Joint Strategy
• Flexibility on syncronisation
• Possibility of substitution
Replies from 17 MS
Belgium (BE)
Bulgaria (BG)
Denmark (DK)
Finland (FI)
France (FR)
Germany (DE)
Italy (IT)
Lithuania (LT)
Luxembourg (LU)
Netherlands (NL)
Poland (PL)
Romania (RO)
Slovakia (SK)
Slovenia (SI)
Spain (ES)
Sweden (SE)
Austria (AT)
THANK YOU! 
Country programming documents
Systems and practices vary significantly…
• France "in a limited number of countries" ;
• Germany only in "focal countries" (currently 50);
• Slovakia only strategy papers in "program countries" (3) ;
• Slovenia "strategic/documents programs" only in 2 countries ;
• Romania has no country programming
• Drafted after consultations in the field (with partner government
+ other stakeholders) ;
• With high involvement of Embassies (and implementing agencies:
Luxemburg, Belgium, Slovakia, Sweden, Spain) ;
• Approved at HQ level
Duration of programming period
1 year
RO, PL, SK, LT
3 years
SI, IT
2-4 years
FR*
4 years
NL
3-5 years
5 years
3-6 years
Up to 6 years
DK, BE, BG, ES*
LU, SE
AT
DE (with medium term reviews)
*Adaptation to the partner country cycle
Co-signature of the document
Co-signature: 6MS
Luxemburg, Denmark, Belgium, Slovenia, France and
Spain
+ EU in ACP countries (EDF)
No need for co-signature: 7 MS
Romania, Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Slovakia,
Bulgaria and Italy (+ lately, also Austria)
+ EU in DCI countries
Consultations
Carried out in the partner countries and
normally include:
Partner govt./national administration
Other stakeholders
Some MS have specifically mentioned :
• CSO in partner country (LU, RO, DE, PL, BG, IT + EU)
• CSO in the MS (DE)
• Local private sector (LU, PL, IT + EU)
• Other donors (DE, SK)
Guidelines / Instructions
Policy Guidelines
6 MS + EU
DK, IT, LT, NL, RO
Country programming AT, BG, DE, DK, ES, FR, IT, LU,
11 MS + EU
NL, PL, SI
Joint Programming
3 MS + EU
DE, DK, FR
Flexibility towards synchronisation
Possible for many MS
11 MS + EU
AT, BG, DE, DK, FR, IT, LU, NL,
RO, SE
BE due to strict internal ruling &
Difficult for 2 MS
current budget constrains
LT due to annual budgets
Looking ahead …
Required elements for joint strategy (I)
Objectives
14 MS + EU
Indicators per sector
5 MS + EU
Priority sectors
8 MS + EU
Results framework
12 MS + EU
AT, BE, BG, DE, ES, FI, FR, IT, LU, NL,
PL, SE, SI, SK
Risk assessment
10 MS + EU
Monitoring
10 MS + EU
AT, BE, DE, FR, IT, NL, PL, SE, SI, SK
IT, LU, NL, SE, SI
BE, BG, DE, FR, IT, SE, SI, SK
AT, BE, DE, ES, FR, IT, LU, NL, PL, SE,
SI, SK
AT, BE, BG, DE, FR, IT, NL, PL, SE, SI
Required elements for joint strategy (II)
Division of Labour
7MS + EU
AT, DE, ES, FI, FR, IT, SI
Allocations per sector
BE, BG, NL, PL, RO, SI, SK
14 MS + EU
Indicative: DE, ES, SE, IT, FI, SE, AT
Financial Planning
2MS
DE, ES
Possible substitution of bilateral programming
7 MS + EU have replied:
• EU, Germany & France : possible
• Sweden : yes but would need a political decision
• Luxemburg, Spain, Finland : not ready
• Lithuania not ready to take a position yet
• And the others …
Proposed elements
Executive Summary
Joint Analysis
Joint Response :
 EU shared vision
 Objectives
 Priority sectors: related objectives and expected
results by sector
 Indicative financial sector allocations
 Division of Labour (lead donor by sector)
 Risk assessment
Overall indicative multi-annual financial planning
Indications on intervention modalities and programme
management
Monitoring and results framework
Cross cutting issues (gender, climate change, etc…)
Communication Strategy
Sector fiches in annex
Core
Optional
element
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Conclusion
• Required content by MS and EU in line
with the Guidance Pack
• Guidance Pack formulated as 'Menu of
potential content'
• In case of substitution, the required
content becomes obligatory