★★

★

★★ ★

Budapest 1-3 October

1998

TempusInstitution

BuildingSeminar

Context

Background

Experience

★★

★

★★ ★

TempusInstitution

Building

Context

Background

Experience

CCOONNTTEENNTTSS

CCOONNTTEEXXTT AANNDD BBAACCKKGGRROOUUNNDD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

IInnttrroodduuccttiioonn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

PPhhaarree IInnssttiittuuttiioonn BBuuiillddiinngg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

TThhee TTeemmppuuss IInnssttiittuuttiioonn BBuuiillddiinngg CCoonncceepptt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88Key Actors of the Organisation and Implementation of TIB JEPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100

AANN OOVVEERRAALLLL IIMMPPRREESSSSIIOONN OOFF TTHHEE TTIIBB JJEEPP AAPPPPLLIICCAATTIIOONNSS

SSUUBBMMIITTTTEEDD IINN TTHHEE PPHHAARREE CCOOUUNNTTRRIIEESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111Statistical Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111Target Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1144The Overall Quality and the Main Aspects of TIB JEP Applications

in Need of Further Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155The Role of the NTOs in Tempus Institution Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1166

SSTTAATTIISSTTIICCAALL AANNAALLYYSSIISS OOFF TTHHEE TTIIBB JJEEPP AAPPPPLLIICCAATTIIOONNSS WWIITTHH

HHUUNNGGAARRIIAANN PPAARRTTIICCIIPPAATTIIOONN IINN TTHHEE FFIIRRSSTT TTIIBB SSEELLEECCTTIIOONN PPEERRIIOODD . . . . . . . . . . . . 1177The Co-ordinating Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1177European Dimension with Special Regard to the Phare IB Sectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1188Twinning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2200Target Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2233Other Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2233

AANNNNEEXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2255

CCOONNTTEEXXTT AANNDD BBAACCKKGGRROOUUNNDD

IInnttrroodduuccttiioonn

The adoption and implementation of the acquis communautaire by theEU-associated countries of Central Europe (CE-10 countries or CE candidatecountries1) gained a special importance in the enhanced pre-accession strategy.There has not been any doubt over the preceding applicants' capacity to imple-ment and enforce EU legislation, however, with regard to the CE-10 countries ithas been repeatedly pointed out as a key problem of the enlargement processsince the Madrid European Summit in December 1995.

This very special and completely new problem arose due to the specialsituation of the CE-10 countries' transition in consequence of which the acces-sion burden on candidates from Central and Eastern Europe is far greater than forother candidates or previous entrants. Compared to Austria, Finland or Sweden,they have to travel a greater distance from their starting position to achieve theconditions that will make Membership possible. Compared to the situation whenGreece, Portugal and Spain joined, the "acquis" is significantly larger and is stillexpanding.

The European Commission (further on: Commission) is deliberately pur-suing a broader interpretation of the acquis. The task is not just adoption andinterpretation of 80,000 pages of legal texts but also includes developing the abil-ity to manage the acquis. Candidate countries must integrate, within a relativelyshort period of time, the entire "acquis communautaire" and they must be able to

implement effectively Community directives and policies in their domesticcontexts. In accordance with the CCooppeennhhaaggeenn ccrriitteerriiaa

EU membership requires (i) that the candidate countryhas achieved stability of institutions guaranteeingdemocracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect

for and protection of minorities; (ii) the existence of afunctioning market economy, as well as the capacity to

cope with competitive pressure and market forces within theUnion; (iii) the ability to take on the obligations of member-

ship, including adherence to the aims of political, economic andmonetary union.

Ensuring that the CE-10 countries have the appropriate institutional andadministrative capacity to manage the acquis is a common interest of the CE

candidate countries and the Member States. The present Member States must besatisfied that new members are able to meet their obligations and guarantee thatCommunity rules are implemented with the same effectiveness as in the Member

33

1 Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania,the Slovak Republic and Slovenia.

States whereas the CE candidate countries are interested in acquiring adequatecapacity to draw their legitimate benefits from membership in defence of theirnational interest.

The Commission's Opinions on the applications for membership (adopt-ed in July 1997 with Agenda 2000) and the Luxembourg European Council'sexamination of these criteria took the view that none of the CE-10 countriesfully satisfies all of the Copenhagen criteria at the present. Therefore the devel-opment of the administrative and institutional capacity of the CE candidate coun-tries in order to ensure the implementation of the acquis was identified as a maintask of the enhanced pre-accession strategy and tailor-made institution buildingactivities were anticipated in order to support this process.

Institution building is a well-known concept and it has been widely usedas an effective tool for building and developing effective and democratic institu-tions for decades. Institution building projects are common in most UnitedNations Development Programme country portfolios. An institution building

project is called for if the need identified is to improve the capacity of anorganisation to serve its purpose as part of an institution of the society.

'Institution' means in this context 'a system of rules and structuresevolved to serve a purpose in society'. Institutional capacity build-

ing is the process of providing the organisations of an institu-tion with the capabilities and the resources necessary for

each to satisfactorily serve its purpose within the insti-tution. An iinnssttiittuuttiioonn bbuuiillddiinngg pprroojjeecctt is a set of

interrelated tasks amenable to unified manage-ment which is aimed at achieving specific

objectives within a given budget and agiven period whose primary objec-

tive is institutional capacitybuilding - i.e., improving the

efficiency, effectiveness and/or responsiveness of an organisation to better enableit to serve its purpose within an institution. Institution building is a flexible toolwhich must be tailored to the specific needs identified in the specific context.

In the present context the Phare programme is seen as the main instru-ment for EU-CE-10 co-operation, providing the necessary technical and finan-cial assistance to the integration process. Therefore related institution buildingactivities are incorporated in the Phare scheme.

PPhhaarree IInnssttiittuuttiioonn BBuuiillddiinngg

In March 1997 the Commission set new guidelines for the Phare pro-gramme concerning pre-accession assistance. For the CE-10 countries Phare wasconverted from a 'demand-driven' to an 'accession-driven' programme, i.e.instead of satisfying the demands identified by the CE-10 countries in a widerange of subject areas Phare projects will be focused on accession-related tasks inthe future.

The 'demand-driven' period: in its early days, Phare activities addressedthe immediate needs of Phare countries2 for critical aid and institutional reform.As the economic transition progressed, the scope of programmes widened toaddress the longer term requirements of economic development. Phare proveditself to be very flexible and responsive to diverse and rapidly evolving needs. Butprogrammes tended to become rather thinly spread, as priorities proliferated.

The 'accession-driven' period: the preparation of the Opinions producedan additional constraint to re-focus Phare on a small number of accession-relatedpriorities. Therefore in the ten CE candidate countries Phare was integrated intothe Accession Partnerships and from 1998 onwards the programme has one clearand simple objective: to prepare the CE applicant states for membership in theEuropean Union. Phare’s effectiveness will be strengthened by reformed admin-istrative methods, too, such as improved budgetary implementation, a radicalincrease in the size of projects and continued decentralisation of management infavour of the recipient countries. Programmes for other Phare countries whichdid not apply for EU membership - Albania, FYROM and Bosnia -, however,will not be changed.

The programme in its new phase addresses two major difficulties facingthe CE-10 countries as they prepare for accession, namely (i) their capacity toimplement the acquis communautaire and (ii) the upgrading of enterprises andmajor infrastructure to community standards by funding investment. All Phareassistance will henceforth be directed forwards two overriding priorities: financ-ing investment (70% of the budget) and institution building (30% of the budget).

55

2 Phare countries: Central and Eastern European countries benefitting from the Phare aid (at the dateof printing this document the CE-10 countries, Albania, FYROM and Bosnia).

The cornerstone of any PPhhaarree IInnssttiittuuttiioonn BBuuiillddiinngg (Phare IB) activity isthe implementation of administrative training aimed at national administrators ofthe CE candidate countries in order to prepare them for their relations with theEuropean institutions. It must be emphasised that Phare IB is clearly linked to theacquis communautaire. It has nothing to do with administration in general. Thismeans that the 500 MECU which will be made available annually to train per-sonnel in the CE-10 countries will be tied directly to areas of EU responsibilityand will not affect other areas/persons having no contact with the EU.

Target institutions were proposed to be limited to a number of key min-istries, at least for 1998, covering the following sectors: Agriculture, Environ-ment, Finance, Justice and Home Affairs for all countries and possibly a fifth sec-tor specific to each country if there is a need. The specific needs of the indi-vidual CE candidate countries were summarised in the National Programmes forthe Adoption of the Acquis (NPAA). All CE candidate countries endorsed thechoice of priority areas and a significant number attributed top priority to Justiceand Home Affairs. Also the National Office for Standardisation was recurrentlymentioned as being of high priority. The Commission supports the specialemphasis on Justice and Home Affairs, especially border control.

In the ten CE candidate countries a total of 111 IB projects were includ-ed in the Phare programming for 19983 . The distribution of the 111 IB projectsamong the Phare sectors is the following: 33 projects in the field of Finance, 25projects in Agriculture, 25 in Justice and Home Affairs, 18 projects in Environ-ment and 10 projects in the Other sectors defined for the individual CE-10 coun-tries. Issues covered by the Other sector vary from country to country andinclude among others the development of a market surveillance system and train-ing for the national nuclear safety regulatory agency.

The backbone of Phare IB projects is the long-term secondment of EUpractitioners to CE-10 institutions on a full-time basis in order to provide tech-nical know-how to the adoption and implementation of the acquis. The Com-mission is favourable to "package" proposals, which could involve other differenttypes of long and short term staff exchanges to complement long-term second-ments and also expertise from different Member States to reflect the diversity ofsolutions adopted by present Member States as well as private sector staff. The setof complementary activities should be the most appropriate combination of mis-sions by extremely specialised or top-level experts in specific areas, training oftrainers (i.e. of CE candidate country officials who will run the new organisationsafter twinning), provision of services and intangible equipment (e.g. translationservices, computer software), etc. It is important to notice, however, that EU-CE-10 long-term secondments are in the focus and all other activities are of sec-ondary importance.

66

3 The distribution of the projects among the ten countries is the following: Bulgaria 11,the Czech Republic 9, Estonia 4, Hungary 19, Latvia 6, Lithuania 9, Poland 6, Romania 19,the Slovak Republic 14 and Slovenia 14.

Phare IB activities are to be carried out within the framework of ttwwiinn--nniinngg arrangements between administrative institutions of the CE candidate coun-tries and the relevant bodies in the EU Member States. Phare IB twinning agree-ments do not result in exclusive relationships between certain CE-10 countriesand EU Member States but in a very targeted matching of needs with relevantknow-how in each specific case. Twinning agreements are not declarations ofwillingness to co-operate in general for an indefinite period of time but theymust be aimed at achieving specific objectives within a given budget and a givenperiod. The establishment of twinning arrangements, i.e. surveying and matchingneeds in the CE candidate countries and supply in the Member States, is facili-tated by several organisational actors who undertake an interface role in thisprocess, e.g. the Commission and the National Contact Points for IB both in theMember States and the CE candidate countries. In addition, the Commission'sactive participation is required at all stages of twinning.

The Commission is developing also some other core mechanisms in sup-port of Institution Building, e.g. for co-operation between professional bodies,training of the judiciary, etc. Costs for actual projects under such mechanismswill also have to be covered by the national Phare envelopes.

The fulfilment of the objective of Phare IB with its emphasis on in-depthtraining for key officials cannot be expected in a few years. IB activities willstretch well into the next century. The first twinnings will already be launchedin the second half of 1998 yet IB in the CE-10 countries is planned as a 10 to 15-year programme and one that goes well beyond enlargement.

TThhee TTeemmppuuss IInnssttiittuuttiioonn BBuuiillddiinngg CCoonncceepptt

In the new phase of Tempus (Tempus II bis) the orientations of Tempus Pharewere updated in accordance with the new Phare orientations. In the CE candi-date countries, Tempus will focus on the implementation of the pre-accessionstrategy within the new Phare guidelines and enabling beneficiary institutions todevelop their management policy and skills, in view of their active participationin European Union education programmes such as Socrates-Erasmus.

The actual activities were restructured and redefined in order to servethese objectives in the most effective way. In the CE-10 countries all Tempusactivities are focused on pre-accession issues. A major task is the preparation ofthe higher education sector for integration into the EU which is addressed by theUniversity Management Joint European Projects (JEP). Classical academic JEPsfocusing on curriculum development are supported only in subject areas directlyrelated to EU accession (as indicated in the national priorities). Accession-relatedactivities are preferred also within the IMG framework4 , e.g. conference travelsaimed at establishing links with Socrates’ Thematic Networks. The restructuredtraditional project types were complemented by a new sub-type of academic JEPwhich was designed specifically for institution building purposes: the TTeemmppuussIInnssttiittuuttiioonn BBuuiillddiinngg JJEEPP or TIB JEP. In those CE-10 countries which havealready joined the Socrates programme Tempus Institution Building activitiesimmediately gained top priority.

A TIB JEP aims at developing and delivering short-cycle (1-6 month)(re-)training courses for national administrators, professional associations, thesemi-public sector and local administrators who are involved in the implementa-tion of the pre-accession strategy. The (re-)training programme must be tailor-made, practice-oriented and it must be focused on factual knowledge and skills(e.g. language and computing skills) directly related to the adoption and imple-mentation of the acquis by the target institutions.

The training courses organised in the framework of a TIB JEP shouldmeet the following requirements:

(i) ensure a balance between training provided by academic institutionsand that provided by non-academic partners. Appropriate languageand computer training components must be incorporated into thetraining programme according to the modalities chosen by the part-ners in the network;

(ii) envisage a study visit in an EU Member State for the participants atthe end of each module of the course;

88

4 Project type IMG is open only to those Phare countries which have not joined the Socratesprogramme yet (at the date of printing this document the following Phare countries were eligible forthe Socrates programme: the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania and the Slovak Republic).

(iii) involve a significant number of CE-10 country officials as courseparticipants balanced in relation to the financing received;

(iv) foresee a follow-up to the JEP after the expiry of the contract, whichcould be the integration of project results into genuine universitycurricula.

The courses are organised by a CE-10 country higher education institu-tion (HEI) which is the “centre of excellence” in the project. A TIB networkmust be established which complies both with the minimum Tempus consortiumcriteria (i.e. at least one HEI from an EU Member State, at least one institutionfrom another Member State and at least one HEI per Phare country involved) andthe special TIB consortium requirements, i.e. involvement of non-academicinstitutions such as professional associations, national and local administrationsand a partner who can provide linguistic support for the specific training mod-ules.

The TIB network incorporates the Phare idea of twinning, i.e. theCE-10 country non-academic partners should be twinned with relevant EU non-academic partners, moreover, it lends an opportunity to establish not only bilat-eral but multilateral arrangements, i.e. pairing the CE-10 country non-academicpartners with relevant partners from more than one EU Member State. A TIBtwinning arrangement combines the advantages of Phare IB and Tempus JEP net-works, i.e. on the one hand, it provides a demand-driven training opportunity atlocal level for the CE-10 countries on the implementation of which the EU getsdirect feedback, on the other hand, it could lead to the establishment of long-term networks between EU Member States’ and CE-10 countries’ officials andinstitutions.

Tempus Institution Building (TIB) is not merely a task related to Phareactivities but also a logical step in the development of the Tempus programme.Tempus has seen three main stages in its evolution: the first concentrated on uni-versity structures, the second on universities in their immediate environment andthe third on universities in their institutional and national context. TIB natural-ly fits this third stage and makes use of the achievements of the previous stages,namely the adaptation of CE universities to the new European context by meansof JEPs covering university management and European Studies; a wide range ofactive academic co-operation networks involving both EU and Phare countryuniversities; links established between academic and non-academic institutions(“university-enterprise co-operation”).

The added value that Tempus offers to Phare IB is based on three pillars:

◆ enriching the training of national administrators with the theoreticalsupport that only universities can provide;

◆ a TIB network provides access to models in more than one EUcountries due to the special Tempus consortium requirements;

99

◆ as TIB should address any sectors of society involved in the pre-accession phase it facilitates the direct transfer of know-how relatedto the adoption and implementation of the “acquis” to the organisa-tions of public administration and civil society below the nationallevel.

KKeeyy AAccttoorrss ooff tthhee OOrrggaanniissaattiioonn aanndd IImmpplleemmeennttaattiioonn ooff TTIIBB JJEEPPss

The organisation of TIB JEPs is slightly different from the formulationof traditional Tempus projects. Tempus is a “bottom-up” programme offering alarge scope to individual initiatives that enjoy institutional support; Tempus pro-jects are traditionally initiated and formulated by individual PPhhaarree ccoouunnttrryy HHEEIIss(or even faculties or departments of HEIs) and they should be responsive to thespecific needs of both the individual institutions concerned and the Phare coun-tries involved. The projects are formulated in co-operation with the EEUU ppaarrttnneerriinnssttiittuuttiioonnss which supply their know-how and experience to the implementationof the project. This special “bottom-up” organisational methodology of the pro-gramme is applied also in case of TIB JEPs and it is seen as a special opportuni-ty offered by Tempus to enrich and expand Phare IB activities.

The traditional model is, however, complemented by an extra service ini-tiated by the European Commission in case of TIB JEPs: the NNaattiioonnaall TTeemmppuussOOffffiicceess ((NNTTOOss)) of the CE-10 countries undertake an interface role betweenHEIs and potential organisational partners (ministries, etc.) in the project organ-isation process which means that the NTOs assist in matching training needs withthe appropriate teaching capacity. Therefore NTOs should survey both the pro-ject initiatives planned to be elaborated and submitted by the HEIs and the (re-)training needs identified by the potential organisational partners. The activeparti-cipation of the NTOs in this process is an effective way to ensure the prop-er matching of needs and supply. The TTeemmppuuss NNaattiioonnaall CCoonnttaacctt PPooiinnttss ((NNCCPPss))of the EU Member States should present the national needs of the CE candidatecountries to the EU academic and non-academic world.

1100

Once needs and supply are matched and the TIB network/consortium isestablished with appropriate Phare country and EU academic and non-academicpartners the implementation and monitoring of the project is the task of thisinternational TIB consortium. The CE-10 country HEIs are responsible for thedevelopment, organisation and delivery of the training courses. The EU partnerinstitutions, as mentioned above, provide technical assistance, i.e. supply theirknow-how and experience, participate in the training of trainers and also hoststudy visits and/or practical placements of the CE-10 country course participantsand teaching staff. The CE-10 country non-academic partners can undertake awide range of tasks depending on the profile of the institution: assist in the devel-opment and delivery of the courses, participate in the recruitment and selectionof course participants, exchange expertise with other partners, provide examplesof good practice to course participants.

It must be emphasised that the TIB JEP framework as described above isa very flexible tool that can and should be adapted to the specific needs, circum-stances, actors, etc. defining the individual projects. The shaping of TempusInstitution Building is an interactive process. The Commission has already elab-orated and offered a framework for the TIB projects. Now it is the project con-sortia’s turn; they should design and implement successful TIB projects, thus real-ising and slightly re-shaping the TIB concept at the same time.

AANN OOVVEERRAALLLL IIMMPPRREESSSSIIOONN OOFF TTHHEETTIIBB JJEEPP AAPPPPLLIICCAATTIIOONNSS SSUUBBMMIITTTTEEDDIINN TTHHEE PPHHAARREE CCOOUUNNTTRRIIEESS

The present section summarises the experiences of the first TIB selection roundin the Phare countries based upon the reports of the National Tempus Offices(NTOs). After a statistical overview of the selection results the target groups ofthe applications are examined because of their defining role in TIB JEPs. This isfollowed by a presentation of the overall quality of TIB JEP applications andfinally by the role of the NTOs played in TIB. Details on the results in the indi-vidual Phare countries are presented in the Annex.

SSttaattiissttiiccaall OOvveerrvviieeww

There were altogether 147 TIB JEP applications submitted in the first TIB selec-tion round in the Phare countries, out of which 67 were proposed for funding5.In spite of the special importance attributed to the TIB priority the percentage of

1111

5 With the entry of Phare countries into European programmes other than Tempus all applications aresubmitted to a so-called interservice consultation in order to examine whether they are not paralellyfunded from other EU grants, too. Depending on the results of the consultation the list of supportedapplications mentioned in this publication is therefore subject to alteration.

TIB JEP applications (27%) was lower than that of the other two JEP types, namely the curriculum development6

(45%) and university management (28%) projects (UM JEPs). This follows from the fact that there is still a sig-nificant need for curriculum development at under- and post-graduate level, as well as for modernisation of themanagement strategies applied at higher education institutions (HEIs). The following tables and diagrams presentthe distribution of the submitted applications and those proposed for funding according to JEP type in the CE-10countries7.

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn ooff SSuubbmmiitttteedd AApppplliiccaattiioonnss AAccccoorrddiinngg ttoo JJEEPP TTyyppee iinn tthhee CCEE--1100 CCoouunnttrriieess

IB UM CD TOTAL

Country N R T N R T N R T N R T

Bulgaria 13 - 13 16 - 16 33 6 39 62 6 68

Czech Republic 26 1 27 11 1 12 9 6 15 46 8 54

Estonia 4 2 6 3 1 4 2 5 7 9 8 17

Hungary 34 1 35 21 - 21 32 8 40 87 9 96

Latvia 2 2 4 4 1 5 6 4 10 12 7 19

Lithuania 7 2 9 7 1 8 7 4 11 21 7 28

Poland 20 3 23 58 1 59 26 7 33 104 11 115

Romania 16 - 16 16 - 16 76 12 88 108 12 120

Slovak Republic 16 2 18 12 - 12 8 4 12 36 6 42

Slovenia 4 - 4 3 - 3 12 1 13 19 1 20

TOTAL 142 5 147 151 2 153 211 28 239 504 35 539

N= National, R= Regional8, T= Total of national and regional projects

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn ooff AApppplliiccaattiioonnss PPrrooppoosseedd ffoorr FFuunnddiinngg

TIB UM CD TOTALCountry N R Total N N R Total N R Total

Bulgaria 8 - 8 6 6 - 6 20 - 20Czech Republic 7 - 7 3 1 - 1 11 - 11Estonia 2 1 3 3 - - - 5 1 6Hungary 14 - 14 6 2 - 2 22 - 22Latvia 2 1 3 2 2 - 2 6 1 7Lithuania 1 1 2 1 3 - 3 5 1 6Poland 13 - 13 20 7 - 7 40 - 40Romania 7 - 7 6 10 - 10 23 - 23Slovak Republic 11 - 11 8 3 - 3 22 - 22Slovenia 1 - 1 2 2 - 2 5 - 5

Total 66 1 67 57 36 0 36 159 1 160

1122

6 In order to differentiate between the new subtype TIB academic JEP and the traditional academic JEP this latter one is often referred to ascurriculum development JEP (CD JEP).

7 According to the database of the European Training Foundation (ETF).8 A regional JEP application is submitted by a consortium including HEIs of more than one Phare countries.

Out of the 5 regional TIB JEP applications the one proposed for funding was aBaltic regional project with the participation of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.This indicates that the three Baltic states managed to comply with the specialcommon regional priorities defined for their co-operation by the Tempus author-ities on the one hand and that the institution building concept was difficult torealise at regional level in the case of other country groups on the other hand.

The high proportion of approved TIB applications indicates that within the Tem-pus programme the European Commission applies the greatest part of its finan-cial resources and its special attention to the JEP type directly related to the issuesof European enlargement. In many countries a high percentage of the applica-tions were formulated within the Phare IB sectors9 defined in the National Pro-gramme for the Adoption of the Acquis of the country in question - Latvia: 75%,Czech Republic: 74%, Poland and Hungary: 69%, Estonia: 67%; - which showsthat the contribution provided by the Tempus programme to the integrationprocess is in harmony with the policy defined by the highest EU and nationalauthorities (see table below). This is also reflected in the fact that out of the fourPhare IB sectors the most TIB applications were submitted in the area of Justiceand Home Affairs, which is attributed top priority both by the European Com-mission and the national authorities of all CE-10 countries.

1133

9 The four common Phare IB sectors are: Agriculture; Environment; Finance; Justice and Home Affairs.

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn ooff AApppplliiccaattiioonnss PPrrooppoosseedd ffoorr FFuunnddiinngg

CCDD2233%%

TTIIBB4411%%

UUMM3366%%

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn ooff TTIIBB JJEEPP AApppplliiccaattiioonnss bbyy PPhhaarree IIBB SSeeccttoorrss

iinn tthhee CCEE--1100 CCoouunnttrriieess

JJuussttiiccee aanndd HHoommee AAffffaaiirrss „„OOtthheerr““ PPhhaarree sseeccttoorrss

OOtthheerr aarreeaassAAggrriiccuullttuurree

EEnnvviirroonnmmeenntt

FFiinnaannccee

4466%%88%%

1166%%

2200%%

77%%

22%%

TTaarrggeett GGrroouuppss

Projects in other than the four common Phare IB sectors were formulated withthe objective of providing expertise on European regulations in various fields ofcivil society, such as journalism, sport administration, arts and humanities, busi-ness and management, consumer protection, standardisation, information tech-nology, biotechnology, telecommunication, energy, work and social affairs,including the training of trade unions, as well as the following EU regulated pro-fessions: medicine, nursing and architecture.

In accordance with the high proportion of TIB JEPs formulated in the Phare IBsectors the relevant ministries featured frequently in the consortia. As mentionedabove the most TIB JEPs were submitted in the sector of Justice and HomeAffairs, which was attributed top priority both by the EU and the nationalauthorities. Lawyers, judges, notaries and police officers expressed their willing-ness to take part in the training courses. A most significant issue in this sector,border control, was also addressed in two countries by applications submitted forthe training of border guards. Since both countries in question lie along theexternal borders of the EU Tempus in these cases will contribute not only to real-ising the objectives of the Phare policy but also those laid down in frame of theCo-operation in the Fields of Justice and Home Affairs, the third pillar of theEU, in which special emphasis is put on strengthened control at the external bor-ders of the Member States (Schengen Agreement).

One of the most frequent subject areas of TIB JEP applications apart from thePhare IB sectors was the training of public administrators in EU policy mattersboth at central and local level. Consequently, the participation of the variousgovernmental institutions and local authorities at town, county and regional levelin the consortia was significant.

Besides the state institutions which define the pre-accession strategy of the CE-10countries organisations in the business sphere and the public service, as well asvarious non-governmental organisations of industry, agriculture, environmentprotection and other fields were also involved in numerous applications.

The training to be realised in frame of the approved TIB JEPs in the various sec-tors of society provides an indispensable contribution to the implementation ofthe acquis which ensures that EU regulations are understood at the institutionswhere they will be applied. The added value of Tempus Institution Building con-sists in developing adapted forms of training for professionals working in the mostdiverse social institutional structures where the acquis communautaire has to betransferred and ensuring hereby the social balance between institutions and citi-zenship in the pre-accession phase.

1144

TThhee OOvveerraallll QQuuaalliittyy aanndd tthhee MMaaiinn AAssppeeccttss ooff TTIIBB JJEEPP AApppplliiccaattiioonnss iinn NNeeeedd ooffFFuurrtthheerr DDeevveellooppmmeenntt

Among the NTOs of all Phare countries only three were satisfied with the qual-ity of the TIB applications submitted in the first TIB selection round. ManyNTOs found that the HEIs did not always prove to be ready to take the respon-sibility of functioning as centres of excellence in their region providing expertiseon the acquis communautaire and were rather concentrating on developmentwithin and according to the needs of their own structures. Often HEIs remainedthe primary agents of the projects whereas the target groups were not clearlydefined and consequently the degree of their involvement was not measurableeither. In some applications only the training of trainers and not the actual deliv-ery of courses for the professionals was foreseen for the lifetime of the project. Itis important that applicants should be aware of the differences in the possibilitiesof the first, demand-driven period of the Tempus programme during which CDJEPs could be formulated according to the actual needs of the HEI in questionand those of the accession-driven phase in which projects should focus on thedevelopment of tailor-made courses corresponding to the exact needs of profes-sionals involved in the implementation of the acquis in a certain field. To this endHEIs have to survey the training needs resulting from the integration process intheir country and formulate their applications accordingly.

Due to the newness of the TIB priority and the shortness of time that the NTOshad at their disposal to present this concept to the potential applicants not all TIBcomponents proved to be equally well integrated in the applications and manycontained CD elements. The following aspects need to gain more emphasis in thefuture: twinning; European dimension; networking; language and computertraining; presentation of EU management, PR and marketing practices.

In accordance with the twinning concept the transfer of know-how is to berealised through the active involvement of EU professionals in the developmentand delivery of the courses on the one hand, and the participation in the train-ing and consequent study visits paid by the Phare country professionals to the EUinstitutions on the other hand. In most Phare countries a wide scale of organisa-tions were addressed from ministries and other governmental institutions, region-al and local authorities, various NGOs, chambers, SME, news agencies, to tradeunions, armed forces, political parties and various institutions of the civil society.With regard to involving the EU counterparts of these organisations the resultscan be considered less favourable: there are significantly fewer non-academicpartners from the EU than from the Phare countries and in many applications therole and commitment of the EU partners are not clear. The NTOs are aware ofthe need of developing effective partner searching strategies in order to assist ininvolving at least one twinning partner for each Phare country non-academicinstitution so that the professionals of the candidate countries can be familiarisedwith the practises applied in the various Member States and design their ownmodel based upon their experiences.

In order to provide their project with a European dimension and to guarantee its

sustainability applicants need to be better informed on the acquis communautaire

in general and the integration policy of their country in particular, as well as on

the activities of other European programmes with special regard to the Phare

programme in their country.

It is important that ways of dissemination are foreseen and integrated in the

application in order to ensure the sustainability and multiplier effect of the pro-

ject results. Contacts among the various institutions established during the life-

time of the project should be maintained in the systematic form of networks,

which accelerates the transfer of information and facilitates the formation of new

contacts.

TThhee RRoollee ooff tthhee NNTTOOss iinn TTeemmppuuss IInnssttiittuuttiioonn BBuuiillddiinngg

The NTOs consider that one of their main tasks consists in acting as interface

between potential JEP partners, i.e.: HEIs and non-academic institutions. It is of

major importance that the new opportunities offered by Tempus in the frame of

TIB should reach those sectors of society which did not traditionally participate

in previous Tempus projects but constitute the main target groups of TIB JEPs,

such as the central and local administration, NGOs, the public service, as well as

agricultural and economical organisations.

In order that the applications comply with the requirements of the TIB concept

NTOs have to follow carefully the development of the EU policy with special

regard to the enlargement strategy and the Phare programme. Based upon the

experiences of the first TIB selection period the national Tempus priorities need

to be further clarified in a way which reflects the actual changes in the Tempus

policy so that applicants can become acquainted with the constraints and possi-

bilities of the programme.

Since the objective and the structure of a TIB JEP are entirely different from the

other project types special guidelines for their assessment, as well as for monitor-

ing need to be worked out. The courses are developed according to the demands

of the non-academic partners thus their assessment of the objectives, the progress

and the utility value of the results of the project need to be given full attention.

Finally, NTOs can assist in the forming of TIB JEP applications through consult-

ing with applicants on their draft plans and drawing their attention to aspects that

need further elaboration.

◆

All in all it can be said that most NTOs grasped the unique opportunities lying

in TIB and the long-term impact it may make not only on higher education but

also on society as a whole. The courses offered by the HEIs in the frame of TIB

JEPs will be developed in correspondence with the actual needs of the country in

question and a wide scale of organisations may benefit from their professionals

being skilled to handle the issues raised by the integration process and from the

new contacts established with other organisations of their type, as well as with

1166

1177

the authorities regulating their activities. Thus Tempus Institution Building may

become far more than an occasional tool for the execution of some urgent tasks

on the way to EU accession. If it is well understood both by the governmental

institutions and the citizens Tempus Institution Building can unite the various

sectors of society urging them to share tasks and activities, to harmonise their

interests and to launch a fruitful and comprehensive co-operation among them to

an extent which is probably without precedent in their history.

SSTTAATTIISSTTIICCAALL AANNAALLYYSSIISS OOFFTTHHEE TTIIBB JJEEPP AAPPPPLLIICCAATTIIOONNSS WWIITTHHHHUUNNGGAARRIIAANN PPAARRTTIICCIIPPAATTIIOONN IINN TTHHEEFFIIRRSSTT TTIIBB SSEELLEECCTTIIOONN PPEERRIIOODD

The aim of this analysis is to share the Hungarian experiences of the first TIB JEPselection period as a case study with all the stakeholders of institution building,from potential applicants in the academic and non-academic spheres to those incharge of the definition of the Phare and Tempus policy. This study examineshow the most important components of the Tempus Institution Building conceptwere realised in the first selection round in Hungary, focusing on the followingaspects: the co-ordinating institutions; European dimension with special regard tothe Phare IB sectors; twinning; target groups and other aspects.

TThhee CCoo--oorrddiinnaattiinngg IInnssttiittuuttiioonnss

In the selection period of the year 1998 thirty-five TIB JEP applications withHungarian participation were submitted by 19 different co-ordinating institu-tions.

The co-ordinating institution10 of a TIB project assumes the role of the centre ofexcellence. This entails developing, organising and delivering the courses. Theco-ordinating institution may preserve its function as a centre of excellence afterthe expiry of the project by continuing the delivery of the courses, the develop-ment of their curriculum, their integration into graduate education, as well as theinvolvement of new target groups. In this way co-ordinating institutions mayplay a major role in the integration process providing the necessary educationalbasis.

The following tables present the Hungarian co-ordinating institutions of the TIBJEP proposals according to their study profile (Table 1) and their proportion inthe capital versus the country (Table 2) respectively.

10 In the case of JEPs with Hungarian participation a special requirement stipulates the co-ordinationand contractorship of a Hungarian higher education institution (HEI).

Table 1 - shows the distribution of the co-ordinating institutions of the JEPproposals by type. The graph demonstrates that a wide range of HEIs ofdifferent profiles applied for a Tempus grant. This indicates the flexibili-ty and multidisciplina-rity of TIB.

Table 2 - one third of the applications were submitted by universities of the cap-ital. In view of the size and number of the HEIs of Budapest this can beconsidered as a well-balanced proportion.

EEuurrooppeeaann DDiimmeennssiioonn wwiitthh SSppeecciiaall RReeggaarrdd ttoo tthhee PPhhaarree IIBB SSeeccttoorrss

It follows from the very nature of the Tempus programme in general, and of TIBin particular, that a TIB JEP has to have a European dimension. Applicants shoulddefine the place of their project in the integration process e.g.: by making a spe-cific reference either to a running Phare IB project, to one of the objectives

1188

PPrrooppoorrttiioonn ooff CCoo--oorrddiinnaattoorrss iinn tthhee CCaappiittaall ttoo tthhoossee iinn tthhee CCoouunnttrryy

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn ooff CCoo--oorrddiinnaattoorr IInnssttiittuuttiioonnss,, IInnssttiittuuttiioonnaall UUnniittss

AAccccoorrddiinngg ttoo SSttuuddyy PPrrooffiillee

ccaappiittaall3344%%

tthhee ccoouunnttrryy6666%%

EEnngg

iinneeee

rriinngg

aanndd

TTeecc

hhnnooll

ooggiiee

ss

MMaann

aaggeemm

eenntt

aanndd

BBuuss

iinneess

ss

AAggrr

iiccuull

ttuurraa

ll aanndd

FFoooodd

SSccii

eennccee

ss

TTeeaa

cchheerr

TTrraa

iinniinn

gg

HHuumm

aanniitt

iieess

LLaaww

aanndd

PPuubb

lliiccAA

ddmmiinn

iissttrr

aattiioo

nn

NNaatt

uurraall

SScciiee

nncceess

SSooccii

aallSScc

iieenncc

eess

SSppoorr

ttss

112222

333333

6666

99

defined in the National Programme for the Adoption of the Acquis - NPAA orto the guidelines defined for the country in question in Agenda 2000. The appli-cation should include a detailed description of the parts of the acquis commu-nautaire addressed, its links with other European programmes and the othergrants applied for in its support. The aim of TIB is to prepare the participants ofthe training for active involvement in the integration process, as well as for effec-tive work and co-operation within the EU.

Out of the four Phare IB sectors defined by the European Commission for allPhare countries the most TIB JEP applications with Hungarian participation wereformed in the field of Environment (8), probably because this field concerns awide range of HEIs of different study profiles. There was an even distribution ofthe applications in the three other sectors: six in the field of Agriculture, fiveboth in the field of Finance and in that of Justice and Home Affairs (Cf. Table 3).There was no project submitted in the field of Internal Market, which is the fifth,country-specific Phare IB sector defined for Hungary. From the 35 applications11 cannot be directly linked with the key sectors supported by Phare but eventhese set in general the objective of training administrators at national or locallevel, as well as civil servants and professionals who are directly involved in theapproximation of legislation between Hungary and the EU.

Table 3 - expresses the distribution of applications according to Phare IB sectorsas a percentage. The diagram demonstrates that a relatively high propor-tion has no direct links with the Phare IB sectors.

From the applications submitted in the four key Phare sectors 18 can be linkeddirectly to running Phare IB projects in Hungary, 4 applications respond to theIB needs identified by the Commission and 4 contribute to achieving the objec-tives defined in the National Programme for the Adoption of the Acquis - NPAA.The activities planned in the frame of almost each project contribute to theimplementation of the pre-accession strategy in Hungary and are strongly relatedto the guidelines of Agenda 2000 respectively.

1199

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn ooff tthhee AApppplliiccaattiioonnss AAccccoorrddiinngg ttoo PPhhaarree IIBB SSeeccttoorrss

OOtthheerr AArreeaass3322%%

EEnnvviirroonnmmeenntt2233%%

AAggrriiccuullttuurree1177%%JJuussttiiccee aanndd

HHoommee AAffffaaiirrss1144%%

FFiinnaannccee1144%%

As a result of the selection 14 TIB applications were proposed for funding11 infields such as retraining representatives of the local administration in order toenable them to administer and utilise the EU Regional Funds, presentation of theCommon Agricultural Policy to the professionals working for the sectoral andlegal administration of Hungarian agriculture, training of border guards andpolice officers on the Schengen Agreement, etc. 11 of these can be linked torunning Phare IB projects: 4 in the sector of Finance, 3 in Justice and HomeAffairs and 2 both in the sectors of Environment and in that of Agriculture. Theremaining three projects deal with employment and social affairs, the EURegional Development & Cohesion Policy and sport administration respectively.Table 4 shows the distribution of the applications proposed for funding accord-ing to Phare IB sectors.

Table 4

TTwwiinnnniinngg

As regards the Phare idea of twinning the JEP consortia did not fully comply withthe TIB requirements. Though there were only two applications not fulfilling theprimary condition of the participation of at least one Hungarian non-academicpartner, there were already 12 consortia not meeting the other important criteri-on of involving at least one EU non-academic partner.

Due to the newness of the TIB priority the true essence of the twinning conceptis not reflected in most of the applications yet and this also explains the insuffi-cient number of EU non-academic partners (Cf. Table 5).

2200

11 With the entry of Phare countries into European programmes other than Tempus all applications aresubmitted to a so-called interservice consultation in order to examine whether they are not paralellyfunded from other EU grants, too. Depending on the results of the consultation the list of supportedapplications mentioned in this publication is therefore subject to alteration.

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn ooff TTIIBB JJEEPPss PPrrooppoosseedd ffoorr FFuunnddiinngg bbyy PPhhaarree IIBB SSeeccttoorrss

OOtthheerr AArreeaass2211%%

AAggrriiccuullttuurree1144%% EEnnvviirroonnmmeenntt

1144%%

FFiinnaannccee3300%%

JJuussttiiccee aannddHHoommee AAffffaaiirrss

2211%%

Table 5 - shows clearly that there are more than twice as many Hungarian non-academic partners as EU non-academic partners

The number of EU academic partners is at present much higher than that of thenon-academic partners (see Table 6) presumably as a result of the thriving co-operation between the Hungarian and EU HEIs established during the previousstages of the Tempus programme. Corresponding to the TIB JEP requirements itis indispensable to survey potential EU non-academic partners, in which the EUacademic partners can assist using their existing contacts.

Table 6

As mentioned above the great advantage offered by Tempus Institution Buildingis that the Hungarian institutions and organisations can design their own modelson the basis of their contacts and co-operation with partners from several EUMember States making use of their comparative evaluation of various experiences

2211

PPrrooppoorrttiioonn ooff HHuunnggaarriiaann ttoo EEUU NNoonn--aaccaaddeemmiicc IInnssttiittuuttiioonnss

PPaarrttiicciippaattiinngg iinn tthhee TTIIBB JJEEPP AApppplliiccaattiioonnss

PPrrooppoorrttiioonn ooff EEUU AAccaaddeemmiicc PPaarrttnneerrss ttoo EEUU NNoonn--aaccaaddeemmiicc PPaarrttnneerrss

EEUU aaccaaddeemmiiccppaarrttnneerrss

EEUU nnoonn--aaccaaddeemmiiccppaarrttnneerrss

7799

4466

HHuunnggaarriiaann nnoonn--aaccaaddeemmiicciinnssttiittuuttiioonnss

EEUU nnoonn--aaccaaddeemmiicciinnssttiittuuttiioonnss

110088

4466

and practices. The involvement of EU academic partners proved to be very versatile in the firstyear, since HEIs from all Member States with the exception of Luxemburg feature in the consor-tia. As far as non-academic partners are concerned it may be pointed out that connections havebeen established mainly with partners from those Member States that have traditionally closer rela-tionship with Hungary. Table 6 illustrates the distribution of academic and non-academic partnersby country:

Twinning arrangements can operate most effectively if the profiles and the competence of the cor-responding EU and Hungarian non-academic institutions are similar. The following tables showthe various activity profiles of the EU and Hungarian non-academic institutions participating inthe consortia.

2222

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn ooff EEUU PPaarrttnneerrss bbyy MMeemmbbeerr SSttaatteess

77

5566

5544

55

11

UUKK DD

NNLL

GGRR AATT BB FF

IIRRLL EE FFII SSEE DDKK II PP

55

88

55

3344

1122 22

11 11 11

33

11111100

1155

2200

EU academicpartners

EU non-academicpartners

1188

11441133

1122

1100 110099

77

33 33

99

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn ooff tthhee HHuunnggaarriiaann NNoonn--aaccaaddeemmiicc PPaarrttnneerr IInnssttiittuuttiioonnss AAccccoorrddiinngg ttoo tthheeiirr SSccooppee ooff

LLooccaa

llGG

oovveerr

nnmmeenn

ttss

MMiinn

iissttrr

iieess

EEnnttee

rrpprrii

sseess

CChhaa

mmbbee

rrss

OOrrgg

aanniiss

aattiioo

nnss oo

ffPPuu

bblliicc

AAddmm

iinniiss

--ttrr

aattiioo

nn

AArrmm

eedd FF

oorrccee

ss

RReell

iieeff

OOrrgg

aanniiss

aattiioo

nnss

HHeeaa

lltthh SS

eerrvvii

cceeOO

rrggaann

iissaatt

iioonnss

RReess

eeaarrcc

hhIInn

ssttiitt

uutteess

OOtthh

eerr

OOrrgg

aanniiss

aattiioo

nnss ff

oorrEEnn

vviirroo

nnmmeenn

ttPPrr

ootteecc

ttiioonn

//RReegg

iioonnaa

ll DD

eevveell

eeooppmm

eenntt

TTaabbllee 88

TTaabbllee 77

Table 9

Tables 8 and 9 show that the profiles of the EU and Hungarian organisations are almost alike buttheir proportions are different, and the above mentioned divergence in their number can also beobserved here.

TTaarrggeett GGrroouuppss

The 35 applications set as their objective to train nearly 6,000 persons (administrators at nationalor local level, civil servants and professionals involved in the approximation of legislation betweenHungary and the EU), which in average means target groups of 150-200 persons per project. The14 supported projects will assure the training of approx. 3,000 persons. Among the target groupsfeatured representatives of ministries and local governments; notaries, lawyers; politicians, mediaexperts, journalists; chamber members; social workers, doctors, nurses; teachers; policemen andborder guards; engineers; experts of sports administration; small investors, managers, businessmen,financial experts; smallholders, agricultural, nature conservation and environment protectionexperts, etc. It is clear from this list that applicants understood the idea of the European Commis-sion according to which the mission of TIB includes the development of civil society in the CE-10countries by promoting the integration of various social spheres and developing the relations ofEU institutions with citizens.

OOtthheerr AAssppeeccttss

The Hungarian JEP applications received in the first TIB selection round tried to comply with thecriteria detailed above. In some cases, however, insufficient information was provided on the

2233

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn ooff tthhee EEUU NNoonn--aaccaaddeemmiicc PPaarrttnneerr IInnssttiittuuttiioonnss AAccccoorrddiinngg ttoo tthheeiirr SSccooppee ooff AAccttiivviittyy

2200

77

5544

22 22 22 2211 11

EEnnttee

rrpprrii

sseess

EEdduucc

aattiioo

nnaall//

EEmmppll

ooyymm

eenntt

OOrrgg

aanniiss

aattiioo

nnss

RReell

iieeff

OOrrgg

aanniiss

aattiioo

nnss

LLooccaa

llGG

oovveerr

nnmmeenn

ttss

AArrmm

eeddFFoo

rrcceess

MMiinn

iissttrr

iieess

TTrraa

ddee UU

nniioonn

ss

CChhaa

mmbbee

rrss

RReess

eeaarrcc

hhIInn

ssttiitt

uutteess

OOrrgg

aanniiss

aattiioo

nnss ff

oorrEEnn

vviirroo

nnmmeenn

ttPPrr

ootteecc

ttiioonn

//RReegg

iioonnaa

llDD

eevveell

ooppmm

eenntt

delivery of the courses though the detailed presentation of the courses, the num-ber of trainers and trainees, the length and timing of the courses and the teach-ing methodology applied weighs heavily in favour of an application during theevaluation.

Besides the vocational courses the language training of the participants is alsovery important. Through the involvement of universities, university departmentsor recognised language schools the teaching of at least one Community languagehas to be assured with emphasis laid on the special vocabulary of the field inquestion. Not all the applications incorporated language training but there wereseveral detailed and thoughtfully planned projects formulated in this field, too.

The presentation of EU management, PR and marketing practices were not suf-ficiently stressed.

In order to facilitate the work of the professionals the training may be complet-ed with the teaching of computing skills necessary for their activities. This train-ing component appeared only in a limited number of applications.

◆

In our analysis we examined to what degree the most important components ofthe Tempus Institution Building idea were realised in the TIB JEPs with Hun-garian participation of the first selection round. It has been demonstrated thatsome elements of the TIB concept have been assimilated properly by the appli-cants - active engagement of the HEIs in the pre-accession strategy as centres ofexcellence; recruiting professionals directly involved in the integration process astarget groups of the training and specification of the parts of the acquis commu-nautaire addressed by the project. Clearly there are aspects of the Tempus Insti-tution Building philosophy that should gain more emphasis in the future, such asinvolving non-academic twin partners from the EU; integrating language andcomputer modules, as well as the presentation of EU management, PR and mar-keting practices into the training.

The first TIB JEP selection in Hungary was preceded by intensive informationand consultation activities on the part of the Hungarian Tempus Office in orderto introduce the potential applicants to the new Tempus priority. As a result, theapplications generated were very satisfactory both in terms of quality and quan-tity according to the experiences of the European Commission. Nevertheless ithas been shown that there is still plenty of room for improvement in the case ofHungarian TIB JEPs, too.

It lies with the National Tempus Offices that the Tempus Institution Buildingidea should come across to the HEIs and to the sectors of society in need of train-ing so that this tool can be used effectively in the construction of a new Europe.

◆

2244

AANNNNEEXX

2266

*ac

cord

ing

to t

he E

TF

data

base

CCoouu

nnttrryy

::BBUU

LLGGAA

RRIIAA

NNuumm

bbeerr

ooff JJ

EEPPss

ssuubbmm

iitttteedd

**68

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff pp

rroojjee

ccttss

bbeettww

eeeenn

CCDD

,, UUMM

,, TTIIBB

**N

atio

nal p

roje

cts:

13 T

IB, 1

6 U

M, 3

3 C

DR

egio

nal p

roje

cts:

0 T

IB, 0

UM

, 6 C

D

MMaaii

nn ttaa

rrggeett

ggrroo

uuppss

ooff ss

uubbmm

iitttteedd

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff TT

IIBB JJ

EEPPss

ppeerr

PPhhaarr

ee IIBB

sseecc

ttoorrss

A

gric

ultu

re: 8

%OO

tthheerr

aarree

aass::

Envi

ronm

ent:

16%

publ

ic a

dmin

istra

tion

Fina

nce:

8%

stan

dard

s on

qua

lity

cont

rol

Just

ice

and

Hom

e A

ffair

s: 0%

Euro

pean

Law

“Oth

er”

Phar

e IB

sec

tor:

0%

Euro

pean

Stu

dies

Oth

er a

reas

: 68%

impr

ovem

ent

of le

gisla

tion

and

stru

ctur

e of

the

BG

HE

syst

em

TThhee

aapppp

rrooxxii

mmaatt

ee nnuu

mmbbee

rr ooff

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss ttoo

bbee

ssuupppp

oorrttee

dd**8

CCoomm

mmeenn

ttss oo

nn tthh

ee qquu

aalliittyy

ooff TT

IIBB aa

pppplliicc

aattiioo

nnss◆

mix

ed C

D a

nd T

IB e

lem

ents

◆no

t cl

early

def

ined

or

miss

ing

targ

et g

roup

◆th

e ne

eds

of t

he t

arge

t gr

oup

not

wel

l def

ined

◆fa

ilure

to

spec

ify t

he r

espo

nsib

ility

of e

ach

part

ner

in t

he p

roje

ct◆

failu

re t

o fin

d th

e ap

prop

riat

e no

n-ac

adem

ic p

artn

er in

stitu

tion

from

BG

◆fa

ilure

to

find

the

coun

terp

art

from

the

EU

◆la

ck o

f str

ong

and

activ

e pa

rtic

ipat

ion

of t

he n

on-a

cade

mic

par

tner

s in

the

pro

ject

◆th

e “a

cqui

s” d

imen

sion

miss

ing

or n

ot c

lear

ly d

efin

ed

◆no

link

age

with

the

pre

-acc

essio

n st

rate

gy in

a g

iven

are

aTT

hhee oo

vveerraa

llll iimm

pprreess

ssiioonn

ooff tt

hhee NN

TTOO

The

qua

lity

of th

e su

bmitt

ed T

IB a

pplic

atio

ns a

s a w

hole

is sa

tisfa

ctor

y. A

ver

y po

sitiv

e fe

atur

e is

that

in a

gre

at n

umbe

r of

TIB

app

licat

ions

the

BG

uni

vers

ities

succ

eede

d in

red

irec

ting

thei

ref

fort

s to

war

ds t

he r

eal n

eeds

of t

he B

G s

ocie

ty in

the

pre

-acc

essio

n pe

riod

. The

pro

ject

s w

ere

initi

ated

and

pre

sent

ed in

impo

rtan

t IB

are

as s

uch

as fi

nanc

e an

d ta

x po

licy,

EU

sta

ndar

ds a

ndqu

ality

con

trol

, env

iron

men

tal p

rote

ctio

n, fo

od c

ontr

ol a

nd p

rodu

ct li

abili

ty, p

ublic

adm

inist

ratio

n . A

noth

er p

ositi

ve p

oint

of t

he T

IB p

roje

cts

is th

e pr

esen

ce o

f 6 B

G m

inist

ries

and

3 o

ther

natio

nal a

utho

ritie

s, as

wel

l as

6 m

unic

ipal

ities

and

13

NG

Os.

The

EU

cou

nter

part

s ar

e m

ainl

y as

soci

atio

ns, t

rain

ing

inst

itutio

ns, c

onsu

ltanc

y ag

enci

es e

tc. T

he p

rese

nce

of in

dust

rial

par

tner

sbo

th fr

om B

G a

nd E

U is

not

sat

isfac

tory

. T

he p

reva

iling

num

ber

of T

IB a

pplic

atio

ns w

ere

in t

he p

ublic

adm

inist

ratio

n se

ctor

, ad

dres

sing

targ

et g

roup

s fr

om d

iffer

ent

gove

rnm

enta

l in

stitu

tions

at

natio

nal,

regi

onal

and

loc

al l

evel

,N

GO

s an

d pr

ivat

e co

mpa

nies

.

RReegg

iioonnaa

ll aanndd

llooccaa

ll aaddmm

iinniisstt

rraattiioo

nnth

e m

unic

ipal

ities

of

6

BG

to

wns

,re

gion

al a

dmin

istra

tion

unit

NNGG

OOss

Nat

iona

l Ass

ocia

tion

of M

unic

ipal

ities

; Nat

iona

l Ass

ocia

tion

of G

ener

alSe

cret

arie

s in

the

Rep

ublic

of

BG

; Eu

rope

an P

olic

y Fo

rum

; R

egio

nal

Info

rmat

ion

Cen

tre

and

Euro

pean

Doc

umen

tatio

n C

entr

e; C

entr

e fo

rEu

rope

an S

tudi

es;

Inte

rnat

iona

l B

anki

ng I

nstit

ute;

Bul

gari

an I

ndus

tria

lA

ssoc

iatio

n; S

cien

tific

and

Tec

hnic

al U

nion

of

Text

iles;

Agr

icul

tura

lC

redi

t; A

ssoc

iatio

n of

Pri

vate

Far

mer

s; U

nion

of

Taxp

ayer

s, U

nion

of

Priv

ate

Com

pani

es; A

lben

a To

urist

; BG

Red

Cro

ss

MMiinn

iissttrrii

eess aa

nndd oo

tthheerr

ggoovv

eerrnnmm

eennttaa

ll iinnss

ttiittuutt

iioonnss

Min

istry

of

Educ

atio

n an

d Sc

ienc

e; M

inist

ry o

f En

viro

nmen

t an

dW

ater

s; M

inist

ry

of

Fore

ign

Affa

irs,

Euro

pean

In

tegr

atio

n D

ept.;

Min

istry

of

Fore

ign

Affa

irs,

Pers

onne

l Dep

t.; M

inist

ry o

f A

gric

ultu

re,

Fore

stry

an

d A

grar

ian

Ref

orm

; M

inis

try

of

Fina

nce;

T

axA

dmin

istra

tion;

M

inist

ry

of

Urb

anisa

tion;

N

atio

nal

Aud

it O

ffice

,N

atio

nal E

mpl

oym

ent S

ervi

ce a

t the

Cou

ncil

of M

inist

ers;

Com

mitt

eefo

r St

anda

rdisa

tion

and

Met

rolo

gy

2277

*ac

cord

ing

to t

he E

TF

data

base

CCoouu

nnttrryy

::CC

ZZEECC

HH RR

EEPPUU

BBLLII

CC

NNuumm

bbeerr

ooff JJ

EEPPss

ssuubbmm

iitttteedd

**54

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff pp

rroojjee

ccttss

bbeettww

eeeenn

CCDD

,, UUMM

,, TTIIBB

**N

atio

nal p

roje

cts:

26 T

IB, 1

1 U

M, 9

CD

Reg

iona

l pro

ject

s: 1

TIB

, 1 U

M, 6

CD

MMaaii

nn ttaa

rrggeett

ggrroo

uuppss

ooff ss

uubbmm

iitttteedd

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ssMM

iinniisstt

rriieess

::M

inist

ry fo

r R

egio

nal D

evel

opm

ent;

Min

istry

of E

nvir

onm

ent;

Min

istry

of A

gric

ultu

re;

Min

istry

of E

duca

tion,

You

th a

nd S

port

LLooccaa

ll AAuutt

hhoorrii

ttiieess::

Inst

itute

of L

ocal

Adm

inist

ratio

n; m

unic

ipal

ity; u

nder

- an

d po

stgr

adua

te s

tude

nts;

civi

l ser

vant

s

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff TT

IIBB JJ

EEPPss

ppeerr

PPhhaarr

ee IIBB

sseecc

ttoorrss

A

gric

ultu

re: 7

%OO

tthheerr

aarree

aass:: b

usin

ess,

biot

echn

olog

y, s

port

, inf

orm

atio

n te

chno

logy

Envi

ronm

ent:

19%

Fina

nce:

0%

Just

ice

and

Hom

e A

ffair

s: 48

%“O

ther

” Ph

are

IB s

ecto

r: 0

%O

ther

are

as: 2

6%

TThhee

aapppp

rrooxxii

mmaatt

ee nnuu

mmbbee

rr ooff

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss ttoo

bbee

ssuupppp

oorrttee

dd**7

CCoomm

mmeenn

ttss oo

nn tthh

ee qquu

aalliittyy

ooff TT

IIBB aa

pppplliicc

aattiioo

nnss◆

Gen

eral

ly t

he q

ualit

y w

as lo

w in

com

pari

son

with

CD

or

UM

JEP

s. ◆

Mor

e T

IB J

EPs

aim

ed t

o de

velo

p ne

w c

urri

cula

for

exist

ing

degr

ee p

rogr

amm

es o

r ne

w p

ostg

radu

ate

cour

ses

inpu

blic

adm

inist

ratio

n th

an t

o de

velo

p co

urse

s fo

r ci

vil s

erva

nts.

◆T

he J

EP c

o-or

dina

tors

ver

y of

ten

mix

ed d

iffer

ent t

arge

t gro

ups

– th

e co

urse

s w

ere

part

ly p

repa

red

for

univ

ersit

yst

uden

ts, p

artly

for

publ

ic a

dmin

istra

tors

and

civ

il se

rvan

ts.

◆T

he JE

P re

sults

wer

e no

t cle

ar a

nd m

easu

rabl

e. I

n m

any

proj

ects

nob

ody

from

the

targ

et g

roup

took

par

t act

ivel

yin

the

pro

ject

(m

ainl

y in

the

cas

e of

TIB

JEP

s de

velo

ping

cou

rses

for

civi

l ser

vant

s an

d pu

blic

adm

inist

rato

rs).

TThhee

oovvee

rraallll

iimmpprr

eessssiioo

nn ooff

tthhee

NNTT

OO

Gen

eral

ly t

he a

pplic

atio

ns f

ulfil

led

the

TIB

req

uire

men

ts.

The

tra

inin

g of

app

rox.

2,5

00 p

rofe

ssio

nals

is fo

rese

en d

urin

g th

e lif

etim

e of

the

pro

ject

s an

d in

the

maj

ority

of

proj

ects

goo

dst

rate

gies

for

diss

emin

atio

n ar

e w

orke

d ou

t. T

he t

win

ning

con

cept

was

rea

lised

onl

y in

a fe

w p

roje

cts.

If t

he m

inist

ries

or

gove

rnm

enta

l aut

hori

ties

have

a c

lear

con

cept

of t

he p

re-a

cces

sion

stra

tegy

and

of t

he c

ontin

uing

edu

catio

n of

thei

r em

ploy

ees

then

it is

eas

ier

for

univ

ersit

ies

to e

stab

lish

new

con

tact

s w

ith th

em a

nd to

app

ly fo

r a

gran

t tog

ethe

r. T

he c

urre

nt p

robl

em is

the

lack

of

gove

rnm

enta

l sup

port

for

the

tra

inin

g of

pub

lic a

dmin

istra

tors

. In

this

situa

tion

the

univ

ersit

ies

mus

t in

itiat

e co

-ope

ratio

n w

ith t

hese

org

anisa

tions

or

inst

itutio

ns t

hem

selv

es a

nd t

here

sult

is a

very

vag

ue a

nd w

ide

obje

ctiv

e fo

r co

-ope

ratio

n. F

or t

hat

reas

on u

nive

rsiti

es p

refe

r to

dev

elop

und

er-

or p

ostg

radu

ate

curr

icul

a, w

hich

is a

cle

ar a

nd t

angi

ble

obje

ctiv

e.

2288

*ac

cord

ing

to t

he E

TF

data

base

CCoouu

nnttrryy

::EESS

TTOO

NNIIAA

NNuumm

bbeerr

ooff JJ

EEPPss

ssuubbmm

iitttteedd

**17

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff pp

rroojjee

ccttss

bbeettww

eeeenn

CCDD

,, UUMM

,, TTIIBB

**N

atio

nal p

roje

cts:

4 T

IB, 3

UM

, 2 C

DR

egio

nal p

roje

cts:

2 T

IB (

Bal

tic r

egio

nal),

1 U

M, 5

CD

MMaaii

nn ttaa

rrggeett

ggrroo

uuppss

ooff ss

uubbmm

iitttteedd

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss

NNaatt

iioonnaa

ll pprroo

jjeecctt

ss::BB

aallttiicc

rreegg

iioonnaa

ll pprroo

jjeecctt

ss::ci

vil e

ngin

eers

; civ

il se

rvan

ts a

t lo

cal a

nd r

egio

nal l

evel

; jud

ges;

jour

nalis

tsju

dges

; var

ious

gro

ups

rela

ted

to a

gric

ultu

re (

acad

emic

sta

ff of

agr

icul

tura

l uni

ts, s

taff

ofag

ricu

ltura

l res

earc

h in

stitu

tes,

cons

ulta

nts

in t

he fi

eld

of a

gric

ultu

re, e

tc.)

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff TT

IIBB JJ

EEPPss

ppeerr

PPhhaarr

ee IIBB

sseecc

ttoorrss

A

gric

ultu

re: 1

7%OO

tthheerr

aarree

aass::

Envi

ronm

ent:

17%

jour

nalis

mFi

nanc

e: 0

%ci

vil e

ngin

eeri

ngJu

stic

e an

d H

ome

Affa

irs:

33%

“Oth

er”

Phar

e IB

sec

tor:

0%

Oth

er a

reas

: 33%

TThhee

aapppp

rrooxxii

mmaatt

ee nnuu

mmbbee

rr ooff

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss ttoo

bbee

ssuupppp

oorrttee

dd**3

CCoomm

mmeenn

ttss oo

nn tthh

ee qquu

aalliittyy

ooff TT

IIBB aa

pppplliicc

aattiioo

nnss◆

in g

ener

al th

e qu

ality

of a

pplic

atio

ns w

as ra

ther

low

pro

babl

y du

e to

the

very

vag

ue u

nder

stan

ding

of T

IB c

once

pt

and

philo

soph

y◆

in s

ome

appl

icat

ions

tar

get

grou

ps in

clud

ed u

nive

rsity

tea

chin

g st

aff a

nd r

egul

ar s

tude

nts

as w

ell (

CD

)◆

appl

ican

ts c

ould

not

qua

lify

thei

r ap

plic

atio

ns a

ccor

ding

to

TIB

cod

es b

ut u

sed

acad

emic

cod

es fo

r T

IBs,

too.

TThhee

oovvee

rraallll

iimmpprr

eessssiioo

nn ooff

tthhee

NNTT

OO

Out

of

the

four

nat

iona

l TIB

app

licat

ions

onl

y on

e ha

d a

min

istry

as

part

ner,

two

appl

icat

ions

sub

mitt

ed s

uppo

rtin

g le

tter

s fr

om e

.g. M

inist

ry o

f Fo

reig

n A

ffair

s, St

ate

Cou

rt, e

tc. b

ut t

hese

wer

e no

t in

volv

ed a

s pa

rtne

rs.

2299

*ac

cord

ing

to t

he E

TF

data

base

CCoouu

nnttrryy

::HH

UUNN

GGAA

RRYY

NNuumm

bbeerr

ooff JJ

EEPPss

ssuubbmm

iitttteedd

**96

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff pp

rroojjee

ccttss

bbeettww

eeeenn

CCDD

,, UUMM

,, TTIIBB

**N

atio

nal p

roje

cts:

34 T

IB, 2

1 U

M, 3

2 C

DR

egio

nal p

roje

cts:

1 T

IB, 0

UM

, 8 C

D

MMaaii

nn ttaa

rrggeett

ggrroo

uuppss

ooff ss

uubbmm

iitttteedd

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss::T

he f

ollo

win

g pprr

ooffeess

ssiioonnaa

ll ggrroo

uuppss

feat

ured

as

targ

et g

roup

s: re

pres

enta

tives

of

min

istri

es a

nd lo

cal g

over

nmen

ts;

nota

ries

, la

wye

rs;

polit

icia

ns,

med

ia e

xper

ts,

jour

nalis

ts;

cham

ber

mem

bers

;so

cial

wor

kers

, do

ctor

s, nu

rses

; te

ache

rs;

polic

emen

and

bor

der

guar

ds;

engi

neer

s; ex

pert

s of

spo

rt a

dmin

istra

tion;

sm

all

inve

stor

s, m

anag

ers,

busin

essm

en,

finan

cial

exp

erts

; sm

allh

olde

rs,

agri

cultu

ral,

natu

re c

onse

rvat

ion

and

envi

ronm

ent

prot

ectio

n ex

pert

s, et

c. ((

appr

ox. 6

,000

peo

ple)

. Em

ploy

er o

rgan

isatio

ns:

MMiinn

iissttrrii

eess aa

nndd GG

oovveerr

nnmmeenn

ttaall

IInnsstt

iittuuttiioo

nnssM

inist

ry o

f Agr

icul

ture

; Min

istry

of E

nvir

onm

ent a

nd R

egio

nal P

olic

y; M

inist

ryof

Cul

ture

and

Edu

catio

n; M

inist

ry o

f Hom

e A

ffair

s; M

inist

ry o

f Ind

ustr

y, T

rade

and

Tour

ism; G

over

nmen

t C

ontr

ol O

ffice

; Env

iron

men

tal C

omm

ittee

of t

heH

unga

rian

Par

liam

ent

LLooccaa

ll AAuutt

hhoorrii

ttiieess

regi

onal

and

loca

l aut

hori

ties,

coun

cil o

f loc

al g

over

nmen

t as

soci

atio

nsAA

rrmmeedd

FFoorr

cceess

polic

e, b

orde

r gu

ards

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff TT

IIBB JJ

EEPPss

ppeerr

PPhhaarr

ee IIBB

sseecc

ttoorrss

Agr

icul

ture

: 17%

OOtthh

eerr aa

rreeaass

::En

viro

nmen

t: 23

%tr

aini

ng o

f civ

il se

rvan

ts o

n EU

pol

icy

mat

ters

and

ada

ptat

ion

of E

urop

ean

stan

dard

sFi

nanc

e: 1

4%Ju

stic

e an

d H

ome

Affa

irs:

14%

“Oth

er”

Phar

e IB

sec

tor:

0%

Oth

er a

reas

: 32%

TThhee

aapppp

rrooxxii

mmaatt

ee nnuu

mmbbee

rr ooff TT

IIBB JJEE

PPss ttoo

bbee

ssuupppp

oorrttee

dd**14

CCoomm

mmeenn

ttss oo

nn tthh

ee qquu

aalliittyy

ooff TT

IIBB aa

pppplliicc

aattiioo

nnss◆

few

or m

issin

g EU

non

-aca

dem

ic p

artn

ers

◆no

act

ive

co-o

pera

tion

betw

een

twin

ning

par

tner

s◆

role

and

resp

onsib

ilitie

s of n

on-a

cade

mic

par

tner

s not

spec

ified

◆ta

rget

gro

up n

ot c

lear

ly d

efin

ed◆

pres

enta

tion

of c

ourse

s not

det

ailed

eno

ugh

◆ex

agge

rate

d bu

dget

◆fo

rmal

requ

irem

ents

not f

ulfil

led

- e.

g.: e

ndor

sem

ent l

ette

rs m

issin

g◆

insu

ffici

ent e

mph

asis

on th

e fo

llow

ing

aspe

cts:

langu

age

train

ing;

pre

sent

atio

n of

EU

man

agem

ent,

PR a

nd m

arke

ting

prac

tices

; com

pute

r tra

inin

g◆

plan

s for

diss

emin

atio

n, fu

rther

func

tioni

ng o

f the

net

wor

k m

issin

g

TThhee

oovvee

rraallll

iimmpprr

eessssiioo

nn ooff

tthhee

NNTT

OOT

he T

IB a

pplic

atio

ns w

ere

of g

ood

qual

ity g

ener

ally

, whi

ch is

ref

lect

ed in

the

fact

tha

t 14

out

of 3

5 ap

plic

atio

ns w

ere

prop

osed

for

fund

ing.

The

Hun

gari

an c

o-or

dina

ting

HEI

s m

anag

ed t

oin

volv

e su

ffici

ent

Hun

gari

an n

on-a

cade

mic

par

tner

s in

the

con

sort

ia in

acc

orda

nce

with

the

spe

cial

TIB

req

uire

men

ts. T

he m

inist

ries

, gov

ernm

enta

l aut

hori

ties,

trad

e un

ions

, and

cha

mbe

rsm

ade

out

abou

t ha

lf of

the

Hun

gari

an p

artn

ers

(see

list

abo

ve).

The

est

imat

ed n

umbe

r of

pro

fess

iona

ls to

be

trai

ned

amou

nts

to 3

,000

. Alm

ost

all T

IB a

pplic

atio

ns h

ad E

urop

ean

dim

ensio

n,i.e

.: th

e ap

plic

ants

form

ulat

ed t

heir

obj

ectiv

es r

efer

ring

to

the

rele

vant

EU

reg

ulat

ions

and

tri

ed t

o de

fine

the

plac

e of

the

ir p

roje

ct in

the

inte

grat

ion

proc

ess.

The

tw

inni

ng c

once

pt w

as n

ot fu

lly r

ealis

ed -

the

num

ber

of E

U n

on-a

cade

mic

par

tner

s w

as m

uch

low

er t

han

that

of t

he H

unga

rian

non

-aca

dem

ic p

artn

ers.

The

EU

non

-aca

dem

ic p

artn

ers

wer

e m

ainl

y en

terp

rise

s (a

lmos

t ha

lf of

the

m).

CChhaa

mmbbee

rrss ((

aatt nn

aattiioo

nnaall,,

rreeggii

oonnaall

,, lloocc

aall llee

vveell))

cham

ber

of a

gric

ultu

re, c

ham

ber

of c

omm

erce

and

indu

stry

, pro

fess

iona

l cha

mbe

r of

eng

inee

rsNN

GGOO

ssH

unga

rian

Aca

dem

y of

Sci

ence

s, N

atio

nal C

onfe

dera

tion

of H

unga

rian

Tra

de U

nion

s, H

unga

rian

Empl

oyer

s’ A

ssoc

iatio

n, H

unga

rian

Fou

ndat

ion

of E

nter

prise

Dev

elop

men

t, H

unga

rian

Ins

titut

efo

r U

rban

and

Reg

iona

l Pla

nnin

g, N

atio

nal O

ffice

of P

hysic

al E

duca

tion

and

Spor

t, Fe

dera

tion

ofH

unga

rian

Foo

d In

dust

ry,

Hun

gari

an H

ortic

ultu

ral

Cou

ncil,

Nat

iona

l In

stitu

te f

or A

gric

ultu

ral

Qua

lity

Con

trol

, Po

lluti

on

Prev

enti

on

Cen

tre,

N

atio

nal

Wat

er

Man

agem

ent

Aut

hori

ty,

Fede

ratio

n of

Hun

gari

an N

otar

ies

3300

*ac

cord

ing

to t

he E

TF

data

base

CCoouu

nnttrryy

::LLAA

TTVV

IIAA

NNuumm

bbeerr

ooff JJ

EEPPss

ssuubbmm

iitttteedd

**19

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff pp

rroojjee

ccttss

bbeettww

eeeenn

CCDD

,, UUMM

,, TTIIBB

**N

atio

nal p

roje

cts:

2 T

IB, 4

UM

, 6 C

DR

egio

nal p

roje

cts:

2 T

IB (

Bal

tic r

egio

nal),

1 U

M, 4

CD

MMaaii

nn ttaa

rrggeett

ggrroo

uuppss

ooff ss

uubbmm

iitttteedd

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss◆

min

ister

ial a

nd m

unic

ipal

offi

cial

s◆

judg

es◆

jour

nalis

ts◆

agri

cultu

ral s

cien

tists

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff TT

IIBB JJ

EEPPss

ppeerr

PPhhaarr

ee IIBB

sseecc

ttoorrss

A

gric

ultu

re: 2

5%OO

tthheerr

aarree

aa::jo

urna

lism

Envi

ronm

ent:

0%Fi

nanc

e: 0

%Ju

stic

e an

d H

ome

Affa

irs:

50%

“Oth

er”

Phar

e IB

sec

tor:

0%

Oth

er a

reas

: 25%

TThhee

aapppp

rrooxxii

mmaatt

ee nnuu

mmbbee

rr ooff

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss ttoo

bbee

ssuupppp

oorrttee

dd**3

CCoomm

mmeenn

ttss oo

nn tthh

ee qquu

aalliittyy

ooff TT

IIBB aa

pppplliicc

aattiioo

nnss◆

50%

wer

e of

goo

d qu

ality

◆no

n-ac

adem

ic p

artn

ers

miss

ing

or in

suffi

cien

t◆

lack

of p

rope

r co

mm

itmen

t at

gov

ernm

enta

l lev

el (

for

publ

ic a

dmin

istra

tion)

or a

t th

e go

vern

ing

bodi

es o

f pro

fess

iona

l ass

ocia

tions

TThhee

oovvee

rraallll

iimmpprr

eessssiioo

nn ooff

tthhee

NNTT

OO

For

the

first

TIB

sel

ectio

n pe

riod

the

act

ion

can

be c

onsid

ered

suc

cess

ful,

how

ever

, it

shou

ld b

e no

ted

that

TIB

con

cept

s ar

e no

t qu

ite c

lear

to

the

cons

ortia

. Thu

s tw

inni

ng b

etw

een

prof

essio

nal b

odie

s or

gov

ernm

enta

l bod

ies

in E

ast

and

Wes

t ar

e m

issin

g. P

roje

cts

tend

to

emph

asise

tra

inin

g w

ithou

t co

ncre

te li

nks

to “

stru

ctur

e bu

ildin

g” a

ctiv

ities

nee

ded

for

civi

lso

ciet

y.

3311

*ac

cord

ing

to t

he E

TF

data

base

CCoouu

nnttrryy

::LLII

TTHH

UUAA

NNIIAA

NNuumm

bbeerr

ooff JJ

EEPPss

ssuubbmm

iitttteedd

**28

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff pp

rroojjee

ccttss

bbeettww

eeeenn

CCDD

,, UUMM

,, TTIIBB

**N

atio

nal p

roje

cts:

7 T

IB, 7

UM

, 7 C

DR

egio

nal p

roje

cts:

2 T

IB (

Bal

tic r

egio

nal),

1 U

M, 4

CD

MMaaii

nn ttaa

rrggeett

ggrroo

uuppss

ooff ss

uubbmm

iitttteedd

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss◆

civi

l ser

vant

s (o

ffici

als

of m

inist

ries

, reg

iona

l org

anisa

tions

, mun

icip

aliti

es)

◆ju

dges

◆jo

urna

lists

◆pr

ofes

siona

ls fr

om t

he p

riva

te s

ecto

r◆

adm

inist

rato

rs o

f Lith

uani

an s

port

and

rec

reat

ion

syst

em

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff TT

IIBB JJ

EEPPss

ppeerr

PPhhaarr

ee IIBB

sseecc

ttoorrss

A

gric

ultu

re: 1

1%OO

tthheerr

aarree

aass::

Envi

ronm

ent:

0%jo

urna

lism

Fina

nce:

0%

spor

t an

d re

crea

tion

Just

ice

and

Hom

e A

ffair

s: 22

%he

alth

car

e“O

ther

” Ph

are

IB s

ecto

r: 0

%tr

aini

ng o

f civ

il se

rvan

ts a

nd p

rofe

ssio

nals

from

the

pri

vate

sec

tor

Oth

er a

reas

: 67%

TThhee

aapppp

rrooxxii

mmaatt

ee nnuu

mmbbee

rr ooff

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss ttoo

bbee

ssuupppp

oorrttee

dd**2

CCoomm

mmeenn

ttss oo

nn tthh

ee qquu

aalliittyy

ooff TT

IIBB aa

pppplliicc

aattiioo

nnss◆

the

qual

ity o

f som

e pr

ojec

ts is

rat

her

good

◆

low

invo

lvem

ent

of g

over

nmen

tal i

nstit

utio

ns, e

spec

ially

from

the

EU

◆lo

w c

omm

itmen

t of

LT

HEI

s◆

mor

e ac

tiviti

es a

re c

once

ntra

ted

insid

e un

iver

sitie

s an

d le

ss a

re t

arge

ted

on t

he s

ocia

l env

iron

men

t

TThhee

oovvee

rraallll

iimmpprr

eessssiioo

nn ooff

tthhee

NNTT

OO

The

ove

rall

impr

essio

n is

very

goo

d, h

owev

er, w

ith p

rese

nt T

EMPU

S fu

ndin

g po

ssib

ilitie

s in

Lith

uani

a, g

ood

TIB

pro

ject

s ca

nnot

be

fund

ed fo

r bu

dget

ary

reas

ons.

Goo

d ex

ampl

es a

re T

IBpr

ojec

ts w

ith E

U m

inist

ries

invo

lved

, and

the

se r

ealis

e in

dire

ct t

win

ning

of a

utho

ritie

s by

mea

ns o

f aca

dem

ic n

etw

orks

.

3322

*ac

cord

ing

to t

he E

TF

data

base

CCoouu

nnttrryy

::PPOO

LLAANN

DD

NNuumm

bbeerr

ooff JJ

EEPPss

ssuubbmm

iitttteedd

**11

5

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff pp

rroojjee

ccttss

bbeettww

eeeenn

CCDD

,, UUMM

,, TTIIBB

**N

atio

nal p

roje

cts:

20 T

IB, 5

8 U

M, 2

6 C

DR

egio

nal p

roje

cts:

3 T

IB, 1

UM

, 7 C

D

MMaaii

nn ttaa

rrggeett

ggrroo

uuppss

ooff ss

uubbmm

iitttteedd

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

sslo

cal a

nd r

egio

nal a

dmin

istra

tion,

mem

bers

of s

elf-

gove

rnm

ents

, min

istry

offi

cial

s, ad

min

istra

tors

of j

ustic

e, b

orde

rgu

ards

, ed

ucat

ion

adm

inis

trat

ors,

cu

stom

s of

ficer

s,

polic

e of

ficer

s,

urba

n pl

anne

rs,

post

al

staf

f, te

ache

rs,

entr

epre

neur

s, so

cial

ser

vice

offi

cers

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff TT

IIBB JJ

EEPPss

ppeerr

PPhhaarr

ee IIBB

sseecc

ttoorrss

A

gric

ultu

re: 4

%OO

tthheerr

aarree

aass::

Envi

ronm

ent:

17%

Euro

pean

inte

grat

ion

for

civi

l ser

vant

sFi

nanc

e: 9

%Eu

rope

an S

tudi

esJu

stic

e an

d H

ome

Affa

irs:

26%

com

mun

icat

ion

“Oth

er”

Phar

e IB

sec

tor

(Eco

nom

ic A

ffair

s,W

ork

& S

ocia

l Affa

irs,

Con

sum

er P

rote

ctio

n): 1

3%O

ther

are

as: 3

1%

TThhee

aapppp

rrooxxii

mmaatt

ee nnuu

mmbbee

rr ooff

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss ttoo

bbee

ssuupppp

oorrttee

dd**13

CCoomm

mmeenn

ttss oo

nn tthh

ee qquu

aalliittyy

ooff TT

IIBB aa

pppplliicc

aattiioo

nnss◆

aver

age

qual

ity -

med

ium

, gen

eral

ly lo

wer

tha

n in

cas

e of

pre

viou

s JE

P ap

plic

atio

ns◆

targ

et g

roup

not

def

ined

◆ta

rget

gro

up d

efin

ed b

ut e

ndor

sem

ent

lett

er(s

) fr

om t

arge

t in

stitu

tion(

s) m

issin

g◆

only

pre

para

tory

pha

se w

ithin

pro

ject

life

time;

tra

inin

g fo

rese

en a

fter

two

year

s◆

area

s/su

bjec

t of

tra

inin

g no

t de

fined

(Eu

rope

an in

tegr

atio

n, E

U a

cces

sion)

◆ex

agge

rate

d bu

dget

, mai

nly

for

mob

ility

and

adm

inist

rativ

e st

aff c

osts

(th

e la

tter

hig

hly

infla

ted

even

in p

roje

cts

with

Pol

ish c

o-or

dina

tor/

cont

ract

or)

TThhee

oovvee

rraallll

iimmpprr

eessssiioo

nn ooff

tthhee

NNTT

OO

PPoossiitt

iivvee

aassppee

ccttss

A n

umbe

r of s

ubm

itted

pro

ject

s inv

olve

d lo

cal a

nd re

gion

al a

dmin

istra

tion

and

self-

gove

rnm

ents

, inc

ludi

ng a

pplic

atio

ns w

ith g

ood-

qual

ity e

ndor

sem

ent l

ette

rs fr

om ta

rget

inst

itutio

ns. I

n so

me

proj

ects

trai

ning

fore

seen

con

cern

s mid

dle-

leve

l offi

cial

s/st

aff o

f a g

iven

are

a fr

om th

e w

hole

cou

ntry

, whi

le in

oth

ers t

he st

aff f

rom

com

mun

es/t

owns

of o

ne re

gion

. In

both

cas

es th

e ex

pect

edim

pact

is

stro

ng.

Estim

ated

num

ber

of t

rain

ees

amou

nts

to s

ever

al h

undr

eds.

Visi

ts t

o EU

par

tner

ins

titut

ions

for

esee

n (t

houg

h in

freq

uent

ly).

Som

e un

iver

sitie

s pl

an t

o es

tabl

ish p

erm

anen

ttr

aini

ng c

entr

es.

Diss

emin

atio

n fo

rms

are

som

etim

es i

nteg

ral p

art

of t

he p

roje

ct,

with

med

ia i

nvol

ved

also

as

part

ners

; m

oder

n di

ssem

inat

ion

tool

s, e.

g. C

D R

OM

s, ho

mep

ages

to

be u

sed.

Seve

ral p

roje

cts

are

wel

l pre

pare

d w

ith v

ery

mod

est

and

reas

onab

le b

udge

t.

NNeegg

aattiivv

ee aass

ppeecctt

ssIn

gen

eral

, th

e ex

pect

atio

ns w

ere

not

all m

et.

The

num

ber

of T

IB J

EPs

subm

itted

was

less

tha

n ex

pect

ed i

n sp

ite o

f an

ext

ensiv

e in

form

atio

n/en

cour

agem

ent

cam

paig

n. T

he le

vel o

f th

ese

proj

ects

was

low

er t

han

expe

cted

, in

spi

te o

f tr

aini

ng s

essio

ns f

or p

oten

tial a

pplic

ants

(se

e “C

omm

ents

” ab

ove)

. T

he r

espo

nse

from

min

istri

es a

nd p

rofe

ssio

nal a

ssoc

iatio

ns w

as r

athe

r w

eak.

The

idea

of t

win

ning

was

not

fully

rea

lised

thou

gh th

e PL

NT

O w

as in

the

posit

ion

to h

elp

iden

tifyi

ng tw

in in

stitu

tions

(due

to m

uch

help

from

the

NC

Ps);

the

dem

and

from

app

lican

ts w

as,

how

ever

, lim

ited.

Thi

s is

due

to t

he fa

ct t

hat

the

idea

of n

etw

ork

build

ing

is no

t w

ell u

nder

stoo

d.T

he a

cqui

s co

mm

unau

tair

e w

as t

oo r

arel

y re

ferr

ed t

o, w

hich

coi

ncid

ed w

ith m

issin

g de

tails

abo

ut t

he c

onte

nts

of t

he t

rain

ing

cour

ses.

In s

ome

proj

ects

the

rel

atio

n of

cos

ts t

o ou

tput

s is

hard

ly a

ccep

tabl

e (t

oo lo

ng p

repa

rato

ry p

hase

; too

sho

rt t

rain

ing

even

t).

Gen

eral

ly, u

nive

rsiti

es s

eem

to

be b

ette

r pr

epar

ed fo

r T

IB a

nd m

ore

flexi

ble

than

the

tar

get

inst

itutio

ns t

houg

h th

is w

ill b

e ve

rifie

d du

ring

fiel

d m

onito

ring

.A

num

ber

of n

on-a

ccep

ted

proj

ects

, afte

r sli

ght

mod

ifica

tions

, cou

ld b

e su

bmitt

ed n

ext

year

.

3333

*ac

cord

ing

to t

he E

TF

data

base

CCoouu

nnttrryy

::RR

OOMM

AANN

IIAA

NNuumm

bbeerr

ooff JJ

EEPPss

ssuubbmm

iitttteedd

**12

0

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff pp

rroojjee

ccttss

bbeettww

eeeenn

CCDD

,, UUMM

,, TTIIBB

**N

atio

nal p

roje

cts:

16 T

IB, 1

6 U

M, 7

6 C

DR

egio

nal p

roje

cts:

0 T

IB, 0

UM

, 12

CD

MMaaii

nn ttaa

rrggeett

ggrroo

uuppss

ooff ss

uubbmm

iitttteedd

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ssac

adem

ic s

taff,

stu

dent

s, SM

E an

d N

GO

sta

ff, c

ivil

serv

ants

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff TT

IIBB JJ

EEPPss

ppeerr

PPhhaarr

ee IIBB

sseecc

ttoorrss

A

gric

ultu

re: 0

%OO

tthheerr

aarree

aass::

Envi

ronm

ent:

6%so

cial

wel

fare

: 1Fi

nanc

e: 1

3%pu

blic

adm

inist

ratio

n: 2

Just

ice

and

Hom

e A

ffair

s: 13

%m

anag

emen

t an

d bu

sines

s ad

min

istra

tion

(incl

. rel

atio

n w

ith S

MEs

): 2

“Oth

er”

Phar

e IB

sec

tor:

0%

Euro

pean

Stu

dies

: 2O

ther

are

as: 6

8%

com

patib

ility

with

EU

sta

ndar

ds (

EU q

ualit

y st

anda

rds,

ECT

S): 2

lang

uage

s: 1

harm

onisa

tion

of c

urri

cula

in E

U r

egul

ated

pro

fess

ions

: 1

TThhee

aapppp

rrooxxii

mmaatt

ee nnuu

mmbbee

rr ooff

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss ttoo

bbee

ssuupppp

oorrttee

dd**7

CCoomm

mmeenn

ttss oo

nn tthh

ee qquu

aalliittyy

ooff TT

IIBB aa

pppplliicc

aattiioo

nnss◆

TIB

/UM

/CD

ele

men

ts m

ixed

with

in o

ne p

ropo

sal

◆ta

rget

gro

up: l

imite

d to

or

mix

ed w

ith s

tude

nts

and

teac

hers

◆th

e EU

dim

ensio

n w

as n

ot s

peci

fic e

noug

h to

EU

legi

slatio

n or

dir

ectiv

es fo

r a

prec

ise s

ecto

r◆

redu

ced

impa

ct o

n pr

e-ac

cess

ion

soci

ety

(tra

inin

g lim

ited

to t

each

ers

for

CD

, and

onl

y af

ter

the

end

of t

he T

IBof

fere

d to

the

TIB

tar

get

grou

p)◆

redu

ced

netw

ork

dim

ensio

n (s

peak

ing

of t

he n

umbe

r an

d ty

pe o

f EU

par

tner

s an

d of

ten

only

EU

uni

vers

ities

)

Add

ed v

alue

for

TIB

s:◆

evid

ence

of l

angu

age

and/

or c

ompu

ter

trai

ning

◆

the

open

soci

ety

dim

ensio

n (e

.g. t

rain

ing

for

NG

O e

xper

ts sp

ecia

lised

in c

hild

ren

prot

ectio

n; tr

aini

ng th

e ex

pert

sin

SM

E iss

ues

to im

prov

e th

e bi

late

ral E

U-R

O p

riva

te b

usin

esse

s; tr

aini

ng m

anag

eria

l sta

ff of

env

iron

men

tal

prot

ectio

n,

gove

rnm

enta

l and

NG

O a

genc

ies

of e

colo

gica

l man

agem

ent)

◆tr

aini

ng o

f hig

h-le

vel p

ublic

ser

vant

s, lo

cal a

utho

ritie

s on

EU

pol

icy

issue

s◆

the

netw

ork

dim

ensio

n of

TIB

s (e

.g. c

reat

ion

of n

etw

orks

for

Euro

pean

Stu

dies

)TT

hhee oo

vveerraa

llll iimm

pprreess

ssiioonn

ooff tt

hhee NN

TTOO

Two

type

s of

TIB

s w

ere

iden

tifie

d: “

real

” T

IBs

and

acad

emic

pro

ject

s w

ith “

TIB

” in

gred

ient

s.A

“re

al”

TIB

pro

ject

hav

ing

as e

lem

ents

: ◆

targ

et g

roup

: pub

lic s

erva

nts

from

loca

l/re

gion

al/n

atio

nal a

utho

ritie

s an

d/or

sta

ff fr

om t

rade

uni

ons/

civi

l soc

iety

◆fo

cus

on t

rain

ing

the

abov

e ta

rget

gro

up, i

n co

nsul

tatio

n w

ith r

elev

ant

Rom

ania

n au

thor

ities

(e.

g. m

inist

ries

)◆

wel

l dev

elop

ed E

U a

spec

t (fo

cuse

d on

spe

cific

are

as r

elev

ant

to p

re-a

cces

sion)

◆vo

catio

n-or

ient

ed c

urri

culu

m (

cour

ses

on E

U is

sues

, with

focu

s on

EU

dir

ectiv

es, p

olic

ies

and

prog

ram

mes

dir

ectly

link

ed t

o th

e pr

e-ac

cess

ion

proc

ess)

◆la

ngua

ge a

nd c

ompu

ter

trai

ning

◆

good

net

wor

k di

men

sion

(invo

lvem

ent

of d

iffer

ent

leve

ls of

soc

iety

)

An

acad

emic

pro

ject

with

“IB

ingr

edie

nts”

com

bine

s cu

rric

ulum

dev

elop

men

t or

tea

cher

tra

inin

g w

ith t

rain

ing

cour

ses

for

civi

l ser

vant

s.

3344

*ac

cord

ing

to t

he E

TF

data

base

CCoouu

nnttrryy

::SSLL

OOVV

AAKK

RREEPP

UUBB

LLIICC

NNuumm

bbeerr

ooff JJ

EEPPss

ssuubbmm

iitttteedd

**42

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff pp

rroojjee

ccttss

bbeettww

eeeenn

CCDD

,, UUMM

,, TTIIBB

**N

atio

nal p

roje

cts:

16 T

IB, 1

2 U

M, 8

CD

Reg

iona

l pro

ject

s: 2

TIB

, 0 U

M, 4

CD

MMaaii

nn ttaa

rrggeett

ggrroo

uuppss

ooff ss

uubbmm

iitttteedd

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss◆

NG

Os

(env

iron

men

tal p

rote

ctio

n, s

ocia

l wor

k, p

oliti

cal p

artie

s, lib

rari

es)

◆lo

cal g

over

nmen

ts (

regi

onal

mai

nly)

◆en

terp

rise

s (E

U s

tand

ards

and

nor

ms)

◆tr

ade

unio

n (s

ecur

ity o

f wor

k)◆

civi

l ser

vant

s (m

inist

ries

- D

epar

tmen

t of

Eur

opea

n In

tegr

atio

n)

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff TT

IIBB JJ

EEPPss

ppeerr

PPhhaarr

ee IIBB

sseecc

ttoorrss

A

gric

ultu

re: 6

%OO

tthheerr

aarree

aass::

Envi

ronm

ent:

19%

soci

al w

ork

Fina

nce:

0%

secu

rity

of w

ork

Just

ice

and

Hom

e A

ffair

s: 0%

tele

com

mun

icat

ions

“Oth

er”

Phar

e IB

sec

tor:

0%

Euro

pean

inte

grat

ion

Oth

er a

reas

: 75%

TThhee

aapppp

rrooxxii

mmaatt

ee nnuu

mmbbee

rr ooff

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss ttoo

bbee

ssuupppp

oorrttee

dd**11

CCoomm

mmeenn

ttss oo

nn tthh

ee qquu

aalliittyy

ooff TT

IIBB aa

pppplliicc

aattiioo

nnssM

ore

than

50%

of t

he a

pplic

atio

ns w

ere

of g

ood

qual

ity, t

he o

ther

s di

d no

t un

ders

tand

the

“co

ncep

t” o

f TIB

(m

ixtu

re o

f all

prio

ritie

s, m

oder

nisa

tion

of u

nive

rsiti

es a

nd t

rain

ing

acad

emic

sta

ff, t

oo m

any

activ

ities

- u

nrea

l ob

ject

ives

…)

TThhee

oovvee

rraallll

iimmpprr

eessssiioo

nn ooff

tthhee

NNTT

OO

The

hig

h pr

opor

tion

of th

e Sl

ovak

non

-aca

dem

ic p

artn

ers

in th

e pr

opos

als

and

thei

r w

illin

gnes

s to

co-

oper

ate

and

part

icip

ate

in th

e tr

aini

ng o

rgan

ised

by th

e un

iver

sitie

s in

the

fram

e of

TIB

proj

ects

was

rat

her

impr

essiv

e. N

ot o

nly

min

istri

es b

ut a

lso m

any

loca

l gov

ernm

ents

, NG

Os,

trad

e un

ions

and

eve

n po

litic

al p

artie

s ex

pres

sed

thei

r in

tere

st in

the

app

licat

ions

.

3355

*ac

cord

ing

to t

he E

TF

data

base

CCoouu

nnttrryy

::SSLL

OOVV

EENNIIAA

NNuumm

bbeerr

ooff JJ

EEPPss

ssuubbmm

iitttteedd

**20

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff pp

rroojjee

ccttss

bbeettww

eeeenn

CCDD

,, UUMM

,, TTIIBB

**N

atio

nal p

roje

cts:

4 T

IB, 3

UM

, 12

CD

Reg

iona

l pro

ject

s: 0

TIB

, 0 U

M, 1

CD

MMaaii

nn ttaa

rrggeett

ggrroo

uuppss

ooff ss

uubbmm

iitttteedd

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss◆

civi

l ser

vant

s fo

r Eu

rope

an a

ffair

s an

d st

ruct

ural

fund

s◆

gove

rnm

ent

offic

ers

and

utili

ty s

taff

in e

lect

ric

ener

gy◆

gove

rnm

ent o

ffici

als,

prof

essio

nal a

ssoc

iatio

ns a

nd jo

urna

lists

dea

ling

with

EU

affa

irs (

secu

rity

issu

es, i

nter

natio

nal

rela

tions

, soc

ial p

olic

y, m

anag

emen

t of

pub

lic in

stitu

tions

)◆

envi

ronm

enta

l pro

tect

ion

and

ener

gy is

sues

for

civi

l ser

vant

s, en

viro

nmen

tal h

ealth

eng

inee

rs, c

ivil

engi

neer

s and

arch

itect

s ◆

grad

uate

s in

art

s, hu

man

ities

and

EU

lang

uage

s

DDiisstt

rriibbuutt

iioonn

ooff TT

IIBB JJ

EEPPss

ppeerr

PPhhaarr

ee IIBB

sseecc

ttoorrss

A

gric

ultu

re: 0

%OO

tthheerr

aarree

aa::En

viro

nmen

t: 25

%en

ergy

Fina

nce:

25%

Just

ice

and

Hom

e A

ffair

s: 25

%“O

ther

” Ph

are

IB s

ecto

r: 0

%O

ther

are

as: 2

5%

TThhee

aapppp

rrooxxii

mmaatt

ee nnuu

mmbbee

rr ooff

TTIIBB

JJEEPP

ss ttoo

bbee

ssuupppp

oorrttee

dd**1

CCoomm

mmeenn

ttss oo

nn tthh

ee qquu

aalliittyy

ooff TT

IIBB aa

pppplliicc

aattiioo

nnssIn

gen

eral

the

qua

lity

of T

IB a

pplic

atio

ns w

as g

ood;

the

mos

t fr

eque

nt m

istak

es w

ere

that

som

e T

IB a

pplic

atio

nsw

ere

not w

ritt

en in

TIB

pri

ority

are

as b

ut r

athe

r ge

nera

l cur

ricu

lum

dev

elop

men

t pro

ject

s in

area

s cov

ered

by

TIB

.In

one

cas

e th

ere

was

a T

IB a

pplic

atio

n w

ith a

co-

ordi

nato

r fr

om a

n EU

cou

ntry

.

TThhee

oovvee

rraallll

iimmpprr

eessssiioo

nn ooff

tthhee

NNTT

OO

Gen

eral

ly, t

he c

rite

ria

requ

ired

for

a T

IB p

roje

ct w

ere

resp

ecte

d w

ith r

egar

d to

the

twin

ning

con

cept

, par

ticip

atio

n of

min

istri

es a

nd o

ther

gov

ernm

enta

l ins

titut

ions

, pro

fess

iona

l ins

titut

ions

,ch

ambe

rs o

f com

mer

ce, e

tc.

3366

Tempus Public Foundation/Hungarian TEMPUS Office

Editors: Attila Hilbert, György Ispánki, Éva Kellermann, Lívia Ruszthy,

Szilvia Besze, Valéria Holczheim

Graphic design: László Restyánszki

Printed by: Galartusz Print

Manager: Rezsô Nemes

© Hungarian TEMPUS Office, 1998

Published by the Hungarian TEMPUS Office

Responsible for publication: Attila Hilbert, director

The publication is funded by the Phare programme

of the European Union.

Prepared by theHungarian TEMPUS Office with thesupport of the European Commission

Hungarian TEMPUS Office

H-1143 Budapest, Ida u. 2.H-1438 Budapest 70. POB. 508. HungaryPhone: (36-1) 343-0012, 343-0013.Fax: (36-1) 343-0164tempus@tpf.hu www.tpf.iif.hu