Grant to Study Roma Inclusion in New EU States

Making the Most of European Union Funds for Roma (MtM) aims to develop recommendations for the use of pre-accession funds for Roma inclusion. As part of this, MtM plans to analyse the lessons of pre-accession countries as well as new member states. The objective of this study is to critically analyse  lessons of new member states: both how they used and how they could have used pre-accession funds for Roma inclusion. The objective is not to give an assessment on new member states but to develop  recommendations for pre-accession countries, especially those with large Roma population.

The assessment should answer the following questions:

• What are the general lessons of new member states for pre-accession countries for using pre-accession funds for Roma inclusion, covering planning and implementation?
• What are examples of using pre-accession funds for Roma inclusion where the project reached the expected results? What were the main factors behind the success?
• What are examples of using pre-accession funds for Roma inclusion where the project  could have reached the expected results with certain modification? What should have been modified? What were the main factors behind the partial success and the partial failure?
• What are examples of challenges of Roma inclusion that were not targeted but could have been effectively targeted by pre-accession funds? How could these have been effectively targeted? Why were these not targeted?
• How was the development of the equal opportunities understanding of managers addressed, and how should it be addressed?
• How was the involvement of Roma employees in the management of the EU funds addressed, and how should it have be addressed?
• Which stakeholders had biggest influence on  programming  of pre-accession funds? To what extent could the Commission, national authorities and NGOs including Roma NGOs influence the process?
• What are the  limitations of the relevance of lessons of new member states for current pre-accession countries? To what extent do these limit the relevance of lessons? Please, differentiate according to stages of introduction of the decentralised implementation system.

Answers should include as much as possible quantified data and thorough justification.

In order to answer the above questions, the grant recipient(s) should

• review relevant documents, especially internal project reports and external assessment reports,
• complete interviews with relevant people, especially people who were responsible for the use of EU funds for Roma inclusion at national authorities in the pre-accession period and afterwards,
• consult with the leader of the team analysing lessons of using pre-accession funds for Roma inclusion in Macedonia, Serbia and Croatia (at least by phone or Skype).

The assessment should cover at least:

• one new member state with large Roma population that joined the EU in 2004 (Hungary or Slovakia)
• one new member state with large Roma population that joined the EU in 2007 (Bulgaria or Romania).

The expected outcome of the study is an assessment report answering the above questions, in English, including

• 2-3 pages executive summary,
• 30-40 pages analytical text with chapters on findings, conclusions and recommendations for the national authorities and the European Commission,
• 8-10 slides for a 15-20 minutes presentation based on the assessment report,
• further annexes if needed.

Applicant Specifications:

MtM is looking for an expert or a team of experts with the following characteristics:

• has a clear concept for the assessment,
• has strong references in analytical works, including assessment of EU funded programmes,
• has strong experiences with the EU funding system, including pre-accession funds and cohesion policy funds (ERDF+ESF),
• has understanding of specific challenges of using EU funds for Roma inclusion,
• contributes to the capacity building of Roma also when carrying out the assessment, e.g. by involving Roma expert or trainee,
• submits a proposal with reasonable budget and timing.

How to Apply:

Applicants should submit the following documents to Radomir Šovljanski, Advocacy Program Coordinator, at rsovljanski@osieurope.org by 15 October 2012:

• brief concept for the assessment, including new member states to be assessed, main documents to be reviewed (existing assessment reports), main people to be interviewed (names, positions and roles), with justification (2-3 pages),
• brief description of 1-2 most relevant references, including the assessed programme, methods and findings (1/2 page per reference),
• list of team members, brief description of most relevant knowledge and skills for each team member (1 page altogether),
• budget, broken down at least by the following categories: personnel (for experts employed), consultants (for experts contracted), travel, supplies (e.g. translating, printing), administration (7%). The budget of the assessment should be less than 12,000 USD.
• planned timing (submitting draft assessment report and final assessment report).

Contracting can be done 1 month after submitting proposals. The draft assessment report should be submitted in 1,5 months from contracting (around end of December). The draft assessment report is a full report that answers all questions and that is done after all activities were carried out. MtM will give feedback on the draft assessment report in 10 working days from submission (around mid-January). The final assessment report should be submitted in 10 working days after the feedback (around end of January).

Find the Call for Proposals HERE with more details.

See the ORIGINAL SITE HERE.