Our projects

The main objectives of this evaluation were to provide the relevant services of the European Union and the interested stakeholders with:

• an overall independent assessment of the past performance of the PACED, paying particular attention to its intermediate results measured against its expected objectives; and the reasons underpinning such results;
• key lessons learned, conclusions and related recommendations in order to improve current and future Actions.

In particular, this evaluation served to understand the performance of the Action, its enabling factors and those hampering a proper delivery of results in order to adjust its design or implementing modalities;

The main users of this evaluation were the EU Delegations, the NAO's, the Central Banks, the ministries of Finance and Plan and other relevant national partner institutions in PALOP/TL involved in the implementation of the Action evaluated.

The specific Evaluation Questions as formulated below were indicative. Based on the latter and following initial consultations and document analysis, the evaluation team discussed them with the Evaluation Manager and proposed in their Inception Report a complete and finalised set of Evaluation Questions with indication of specific Judgement Criteria and Indicators, as well as the relevant data collection sources and tools.

Once agreed through the approval of the Inception Report, the Evaluation Questions became contractually binding.

Relevance:

To what extent activities implemented, and to be implemented, were consistent with beneficiaries' requirements and country needs?

Effectiveness:

To what extent services provided have contributed to expected results making the best use possible of the available resources?

Efficiency:

To what extent outputs were achieved with the lowest possible use of resources/inputs (funds, expertise, time, administrative costs, etc.)?

Perspectives of impact:

To what extent activities implemented had the positive and durable expected impact? Can it be said that the activities and outputs logically allowed the objectives to be achieved?

Coherence of the Action:

Were there contradictions between the different levels of objective? Were there duplications between the activities/components of the Programme? Were there duplications between the PACED and other interventions (from the beneficiary or other donors)? Were complementarities between PACED and other interventions duly capitalized?

The questions coverd the following fields of analysis:

• a) Evaluation of the preliminary results of the action, including factors that have determined its success and failures;
• b) Assessment of the impact of the activities implemented within the beneficiary institutions;
• c) Assessment of the adequacy of the measures adopted to counter delays and deadlocks in the implementation of the action;
• d) Evaluation of the index of appropriation of the results of the action by the beneficiaries;
• e) Evaluation of the beneficiaries’ perception of the results of the action (methodology applied, successes, failures, solutions encountered, etc.); Identification of measures taken by beneficiaries to ensure the sustainability of the results of the action.

The overall objective of the Aid Programme of which this EU Infopoint is part is to facilitate efforts regarding a settlement of the Cyprus problem leading to the reunification of the island and to bring the Turkish Cypriot community closer to the European Union.

The EU Infopoint’s purpose was to improve the public knowledge, awareness and understanding of the European Union, its values, policies and programmes within the Turkish Cypriot community. This was achieved through organizing EU-related activities, interactions with the community and through giving information, advice, assistance and answers to questions about the EU.

In particular, the aim of the EU Infopoint was to inform about the values of the EU and promotion of both active citizenship and the EU Aid Programme for the Turkish Cypriot community. Regular outreach activities, cultural events and visits to remote rural communities and specific target groups in the northern part of Cyprus were organized so to reach a high number a people: youth, university students, teachers, academia, opinion leaders, the Turkish Cypriot leadership, CSOs and NGOs, local media, potential beneficiaries of EU assistance.

The EU InfoPoint public space has had a total of 6,689 visitors, including walk-in visitors, participants at mobile public space events and participants at workshops or events, well exceeding the set target of 4,750.

The InfoPoint’s website was launched and updated regularly with the latest news, calendar of events, past event news, press releases, latest publications, monthly newsletters and EU-related articles.

A total of 233 events were organized during the project, including a large-scale Europe Day with over 2000 participants.

To address the information gaps, the EU Infopoint produced and translated a number of EU publications and distributed nearly 25,000 information products during the implementation period.

The media relations activity of the EU Infopoint was successful, receiving very positive and extensive coverage in the Turkish Cypriot media, including 2,276 media articles and 244 TV spots which have significantly contributed to the amount and quality of information about the EU and its image among the Turkish Cypriot community.

The main objectives of this evaluation were to provide the relevant services of the European Union and the interested stakeholders with:

• an overall independent assessment of the past performance of the four Financing Decisions including its Actions, paying particular attention to its ‘intermediate’ and ‘final’ results measured against its objectives
• key lessons and recommendations in order to improve current and future Actions

In particular, this evaluation served to assess the contribution made by the IcSP (financial and political) to the EU's support to the Colombian Peace Process from 2015 until now, i.e. nearly two years after the signature of the final Peace Agreement, being the first two years critical for advancing in the implementation and contributing to sealing and protecting the gains achieved. The period of the evaluation therefore covered both the negotiation phase at its most difficult point in time and included the delicate period from the signature of the first Peace Agreement (26th September 2016), until the signature and ratification of the Final Agreement (24th November 2016) and its implementation.

The evaluation served to measure the impact, timeliness and pertinence of the IcSP interventions and their results.

The objectives of the evaluation were as follow:

• Draw lessons learned from the implementation of the FBSA from the results observed in terms of food security with its 4 dimensions (summative evaluation).
• Assess the measures that have been taken to integrate the issue of agriculture and food security into Belgian cooperation.
• Assess the specificity and added value of the multi-stakeholder and multi-dimensional approach for Belgian Cooperation in the field of food security.

Thus, the evaluation is i) backward-looking, covering the implementation of the BFFS in its multidimensional approach based on the four pillars of food security (FAO) and its multi-actor approach; and ii) forward-looking, covering the food security dimension of the new programming of Belgian cooperation. The temporal scope extends from 2010, the year of the creation of the BFFS, to the time of the evaluation in 2019.

The evaluation team conducted 6 country case studies, notably for the five countries in which a BFFS multi-actor programme was carried out from 2012 to 2019: Mali, Mozambique, Burundi, Tanzania and Benin. A sixth case study was carried out on Guinea where a new bilateral programme had been launched, in order to meet the second objective which is to assess the measures taken to integrate agriculture and food security into the new programming of Belgian cooperation. In addition, an online survey was conducted among all actors involved in the implementation of the BFFS programmes.

The published report can be found here: https://diplomatie.belgium.be/sites/default/files/downloads/fbsa-fr-digital-complet.pdf

The Global objective of the present assignment is to reinforce the decision-making process on conservation and natural resource management & governance.

The Specific objective is to support the development of the Regional Reference Information System (RRIS) within the BIOPAMA2 Observatories, in particular of Central and Western Africa, to build on the lessons learnt from BIOPAMA1 and on the key recommendations of the BIOPAMA Mid Term Review (MTR) on the development and use of support tools for PAs management.

The goal of the project entails improvement of the tools elaborated in BIOPAMA1 and development of ad hoc tools on planning, monitoring (self-) evaluation, scaling-up analysis on governance and management enhancement of the PAs.

The overall objective of the project is to support DEVCO, DG NEAR and FPI in migrating data over period 2014-2020 (MIPs indicators, Logframes across projects and programmes).

The project team consists of non-key experts and serves the purposes of this contract set as follows:

Purpose:

• Establish the strategy of migration across DEVCO, DG NEAR and FPI;
• Establish lists of indicators and logframes to be migrated and collect logframes;
• Implement the migration.

A) as a first step into an excel template which corresponds to the needs of OPSYS and the business rules which have been developed

B) as a second step into OPSYS from excel and through a dedicated IT application which will be developed by DIGIT

The purpose of this contract was to develop / complete the design of the new mechanism for dialogue and coordination, identify an appropriate designation, develop a roadmap with objectives and key milestones for the mechanism to be operational. Additionally, this project encompased an estimation of resources needed for establishing the NDC Mechanism secretariat for the first year of operations and the development of its terms of reference.

The new mechanism ++furthered the implementation of Viet Nam’s NDC by creating enabling conditions for NDC planning, coordination and implementation at the level of LMs and provinces++. Expected effects were among others, the acceleration of implementation and the ++enhanced quality of action++.

On 3 February 2019, El Salvador entered a new phase of its political history by electing the first president not originating from any of the two camps that fought the civil war (1980-1992). The EU

deployed Electoral Observation Missions (EOMs) to the 2018 legislative and municipal elections and to the

2019 presidential elections. Both missions found the elections to be inclusive, whilst delivering several

recommendations for future improvement. Political parties within the National Assembly, the Supreme

Electoral Court, the Sanchez Ceren administration, and civil society have expressed their support for

electoral reform and EU EOM recommendations, which are largely viewed as important and timely.

Following these EOMs, the EU issued a total of 45 recommendations, including several requiring changes in the legal framework. Key areas of improvements are the structure of the electoral body, the voter register, campaign finance, electoral justice and sanctions, the democratization of temporary electoral bodies, representation of women, media, and the rights of minorities.

The overall objective of this assignment was to contribute to improving the electoral and democratic

framework during the inter-election period and raising awareness and understanding of the EU EOM

recommendations and technical issues related to their implementation.

The specific ojectives of the mission were the following:

• Generate additional impetus for – or contribute to ongoing debates on – electoral reform;
• Identify areas of agreement and disagreement on EU EOM recommendations among the stakeholders and any political, technical, financial obstacles to electoral reform;
• Propose actions to overcome obstacles to electoral reform, including measures to develop support for and national ownership of the recommendations;
• Identify which EOM recommendations are most relevant to the prevailing country situation and the current phase of the electoral cycle;
• Assess any electoral reforms adopted since the last EOM or which are under consideration (e.g. draft

legislation) or which are planned and the degree to which these reflect EOM recommendations and their

alignment with international standards for democratic elections;

• Suggest any other possible EU actions that could contribute to strengthening the implementation of the

recommendations and/or to the overall improvement of the electoral framework

The overall objective of this assignment is to conduct a final evaluation of 2014/355-412 Gender-sensitive Transitional Justice.

The final evaluation will provide the European Commission, the implementing partners, and other relevant stakeholders with:

• an independent assessment of the overall intervention, paying particularly attention to the

design of the tool, the set-up of the agreement, and results achieved against its objectives; and

• key lessons and recommendations in order to improve current and future actions financed under the IcSP in this sector of intervention.

The specific objectives of this final evaluation are:

• to assess the performance of the project, including type of intervention, design and execution of assignment as well as its results;
• to assess if and to what extent the project has contributed to strengthen the capacities of the implementing partners to engage in transitional justice at international, regional or local levels;
• to assess the relevance of the project in this context and sector of intervention, and in comparison to other transitional justice related initiatives;
• to make an assessment of the project’s visibility, information and communication;
• to identify and document good practices and key lessons learned on mainstreaming gender-

sensitivity into transitional justice processes;

• to produce a set of recommendations that will assist the EU in designing and implementing future actions in the area of transitional justice, in applying gender-sensitive approaches to a specific thematic area, and in managing multi-country projects.
• to assess the extent to which the project has contributed to strengthen EU-UN relations in the field of transitional justice

The objective of the Framework Contract (FWC) Beneficiaries 2013 Humanitarian Aid was to provide, via individual assignments defined and contracted through Specific Contracts, short-term technical assistance which can be mobilised at very short notice (normally within about 3 weeks).

The quality of this technical assistance had to be guaranteed by the selected Framework Contractors disposing of the appropriate internal or external technical skills. The technical assistance was provided for the exclusive benefit of those receiving the external aid. Technical assistance was required at any stage of the project cycle (except financial audits of programs) and covered any sector(s) within the below mentioned technical fields:

• Humanitarian aid needs assessment (medical and health-related matters, nutrition, water and sanitation, shelter…)
• Mediation, conflict prevention, conflict resolution and reconciliation
• Emergency/post emergency support needs assessment (including psycho-social, physical and economic damage assessment, reconstruction/rehabilitation planning and assessment of local implementation capacity and structure; socio-political situation among the population - “peace dividend”)
• Monitoring/observing cease-fire/peace accords and agreements
• Information/media support in crisis/emergency situations
• Demobilisation, disarmament and reintegration (DDR of armed forces, including child soldiers)
• Small Arms and Light Weapons; arms disseminated within civil populations;
• Clearance of mines and unexploded ordnance and related activities (including mine awareness, marking of minefields, impact survey, training and research)
• Repatriation and/or resettlement of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) and support to host communities (including information, administrative preparation, transport, reception and short- and long-term reintegration)
• Linking relief, rehabilitation and development (LRRD) including the rehabilitation of social and economical infrastructures and the strengthening of institutions, deemed necessary for the improvement of the minimal living - social - standards in post-crisis situation. Rehabilitation also includes economic measures permitting a long-term economical reintegration of crisis-affected populations.)
• Damage assessment and reconstruction planning (Post Conflict Needs Assessments, Post-Disaster Needs Assessments)
• Post-conflict transition plans, including employment generation, transitional justice and security measures and Security Sector Reform
• Logistical support to operations (including planning of complex missions, transport, provision of security, telecommunications)
• Disaster preparedness (natural and man-made)
• Civil protection
• Exploratory missions for EU Election Observation Missions

The beneficiaries of the short-term technical assistance available via this FWC Beneficiaries 2013 Humanitarian Aid are exclusively third countries benefiting from the Commission’s External aid programmes. The FWC has no overall contractual amount or maximum budget. The implementation duration (not exceeding 730 days) and the contractual amount (not exceeding € 300,000) are fixed for each individual assignment. These maxima include the possible addenda.

The various assignments are financed from the different budget lines for external aid (the European Communities general budget) and the European Development Fund (EDF).