Manual To Prepare An EDULINK Application V2

ACP-EU Cooperation Programme in Higher Education
M A N U A L F O R P R E PA R I N G A N E D U L I N K A P P L I C AT I O N
VERSION 2.0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Background: EDULINK in 2 pages
What’s new in the 3rd Call for Proposals?
Before starting to complete the Application Form

Some criteria for a successful application
Forming an eligible partnership based on a sound project idea
Completing the Application Form
Front page and first page of the Application Form

The Logical Framework Matrix
The Concept Note
The Full Application Form
I The Action
1 Description
2 Budget for the action
3 Expected sources of funding
4 Experience of similar actions
II The Applicant
III Partners of the applicant participating in the action
IV Associates of the applicant participating in the action
V Checklist
VI Declaration by the applicant
VII Assessment grid
The last steps
The evaluation process
A final word
INTRODUCTION
Version 1.0 of this Manual was published in July 2007 to assist Higher Education
Institutions (HEIs) intending to respond to the 2nd Call for Proposals in completing the
Application Form. The very positive response the PMU received showed that the
initiative was appreciated and found useful.
Still, the evaluation of proposals received under the 2nd call indicates that even more
detailed explanations may be needed regarding certain parts of the Application Form.
Also, the 3rd Call for Proposals introduces a number of new elements that it may be
necessary to explain further. Hence, the present v. 2.0 of the EDULINK Manual.
The Manual should be read in conjunction with the ‘Guidelines for Applicants’ for the
3rd call, which were published on 18 March on the EDULINK and EuropeAid
websites. It cannot and does not attempt to answer all the questions applicants may
have. Many of the questions the EDULINK Programme Management Unit (PMU)
received under the 1st and 2nd Calls for Proposals were not of general interest, being
specific to the situation of particular applicants. We therefore encourage you to
address questions you don’t find answered in this Manual to the PMU and also to
regularly check the FAQ section on the EDULINK website.
EDULINK Programme Management Unit

c/o GOPA-Cartermill
45 rue de Trèves, B-1040 Brussels
Belgium
Email: info@acp-edulink.eu
Fax: +32-2-280 1406
Tel: +32-2-234 3720
This Manual has been prepared by the EDULINK Programme Management Unit
(PMU), which has sole responsibility for its contents. It can in no way be taken to
reflect the views of the ACP Secretariat or the European Union. In case of
discrepancies between information given in this Manual and in the Guidelines for
Applicants, the English version of the latter is the binding document.
BACKGROUND: EDULINK IN 2 PAGES
EDULINK is the first ACP-EU Cooperation Programme in Higher Education. It is open to all
countries of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP) and to the 15 EU
Member States that are signatories to the 9th European Development Fund (EDF).
EDULINK's overall objective is to foster capacity building and regional integration in the field of
higher education through institutional networking, and to support a quality higher education system
that is relevant to the needs of the labour market and consistent with ACP socio-economic
development priorities.
EDULINK is a programme funded by the European Commission and implemented by the ACP
Secretariat with a view to improving the effectiveness and the impact of ACP-EU cooperation in the
field of higher education.
PURPOSE • Provide recognised qualifications and

diplomas that are accredited by the
The Programme’s purpose is to strengthen the capacity competent authority in their own country.
of ACP higher education institutions (HEIs) at their
three constitutive levels: Applications will be considered for funding if submitted
by networks of HEIs working around a joint project.
• Institutional / administrative
• Academic • For trans-national projects a network must
• Research and technology involve at least three HEIs from at least two
different ACP States.
WHO CAN APPLY • For trans-regional projects a network must
involve HEIs from all 6 ACP Regions.
Applicants can be HEIs or legal entities within such • The participation of EU HEIs is not
institutions, with their headquarters in any of the ACP or imperative, but will be welcomed.
eligible EU Member States shown in the table below. • HEIs from Cuba, South Africa and Overseas
HEIs are institutions that: Countries and Territories (OCTs) may
participate in projects but cannot be direct
• Provide courses at the undergraduate beneficiaries of EDF funds.
and/or graduate level of higher education;
European Union Africa / Caribbean / Pacific

Austria Eastern Africa Western Africa South Africa Pacific
Belgium Burundi Benin Swaziland Cook Islands
Denmark Comoros Burkina-Faso Zambia Fiji
Finland Djibouti Cape Verde Zimbabwe Kiribati
France Eritrea Côte d'Ivoire Marshall Islands
Germany Ethiopia Gambia Caribbean Micronesia
Greece Kenya Ghana Antigua and Barbuda Nauru
Ireland Madagascar Guinea Bahamas Niue
Italy Mauritius Guinea Bissau Barbados Palau
Luxembourg Rwanda Liberia Belize Papua New Guinea
Netherlands Seychelles Mali Commonwealth of Samoa
Portugal Somalia Mauritania Dominica Solomon Islands
Spain Sudan Niger Cuba Timor Leste
Sweden Tanzania Nigeria Dominican Republic Tonga
United Kingdom Uganda Senegal Grenada Tuvalu
Sierra Leone Guyana Vanuatu
Central Africa Togo Haiti
Cameroon Jamaica
Central African Republic Southern Africa Saint Lucia
Chad Angola Saint Kitts and Nevis
Congo Botswana Saint Vincent and
Dem. Rep. of Congo Lesotho Grenadines
Equatorial Guinea Malawi Suriname
Gabon Mozambique Trinidad and Tobago
Sao Tome & Principe Namibia
PROJECTS AND EXPECTED RESULTS PROCEDURES
Joint projects submitted by networks of ACP (and The period 2006-2008, includes 3 calls for proposals:
European HEIs) will be identified through open calls for
proposals. • The first call served as a test call to enable an
evaluation of the quality of the call and of the
Proposals must aim at increasing the institutional proposals submitted.
capacity of the participating HEIs and promote the
transfer of know-how at three levels: • Funding for the 1st call was EUR 5 million
At the institutional level: • Funding for the 2nd call was EUR 9 million
Institutional capacity building of ACP HEIs in support of
policy, management, planning and administrative
capacity. • Funding for the 3rd call is EUR 9 million
For each call for proposals the Guidelines for

At the academic level: Applicants and the Application Form for submitting a
Institutional cooperation in order to maximise academic proposal are available through the EDULINK website
relevance in the regional or sub-regional context. (www.acp-edulink.eu).
At the research and technology level:

Research and technology capacity building to improve Duration
academic and teaching excellence.
The duration of proposed projects must be a minimum
The EDULINK Programme aims at achieving the of 1 and a maximum of 3 years.
following results:
Financing
• Enhanced contribution to existing or
emerging national and/or regional policies
• Selected projects will be awarded a grant
between a minimum of EUR 200 000 and a
and implementation plans for regional co-
maximum of EUR 500 000.
operation in higher education;
• Increased inter-institutional networking • The 3rd Call for Proposals foresees grants with
between HEIs in the ACP regions and with a minimum of EUR 500 000 and a maximum of
institutions in the EU; EUR 1000 000 under specified conditions.
• Creation of better regional conditions for • The EDF contribution may cover up to a
effective networking of higher education maximum of 85% of the total cost of the
centres in research, science and technology project. The remaining part must be covered
innovation; by the HEIs’ own contribution.
• Enhanced management and financial

administration capacity of HEIs; Evaluation and selection
• ACP HEIs become regional and/or Proposals are evaluated with regard to their quality and
international poles of attraction as they relevance by an Evaluation Committee selected by the
deliver labour-market orientated study ACP Secretariat.
programmes, which satisfy quality
standards; The final decision on selection of projects for grant
financing is the responsibility of the ACP Secretariat,
• A suitable institutional framework is created subject to the approval of the European Commission.
to pursue academic excellence in higher
education.
The EDULINK Programme Management Unit (PMU) supports the ACP Secretariat in the day-to-day
management of the Programme. It can be reached by email: info@acp-edulink.eu or fax: +32 2 280 14 06.
New developments and information on the Programme are regularly published on the EDULINK website:
www.acp-edulink.eu in English, French and Portuguese.
EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 4

WHAT’S NEW IN THE 3RD CALL FOR PROPOSALS?
NEW: Two types of projects
In the 3rd Call for Proposals, distinction is made between 2 types of projects:
Trans-national projects
This is the type of projects you have known from the 1st and 2nd Calls for Proposals:
the same rules apply for the composition of partnerships and for the amount of EDF
contribution the selected projects can receive (from EUR 200,000 to EUR 500,000).
Trans-regional projects
To qualify for this type of project, partnerships must include HEIs from all 6 ACP
Regions (eastern, western, central and southern Africa, Caribbean and Pacific) and
the scope of the action should be more ambitious than for the trans-national type.
Here, the EDF contribution can range from EUR 500,000 to EUR 1,000,000.
You will find the details on pp. 9 – 12 of the Guidelines for Applicants.
NEW: Sectoral Priorities
In the 1st and 2nd calls for proposals, there was a notable predominance of proposals
in certain sectors: agriculture, health, ICTs …. while other sectors were only
marginally or not at all represented. For this 3rd Call for Proposals, the ACP
Secretariat has identified a number of sectors, in which it would like to see a larger
number of proposals.
Read p. 9 of the Guidelines for Applicants for details.
NOT ENTIRELY NEW: Macros
As for the 1st Call for Proposals (but not for the 2nd) the Application Form for the 3rd
call contains macros that guide you through the form and oblige you to respect the
limitation to a certain number of pages, wherever such a limitation is indicated (a
macro is a series of Word commands and instructions that are grouped together as a
single command to accomplish a task automatically). It is essential that you should
enable the macros when completing the Application Form, as this will also facilitate
and speed up its evaluation later on. An explanation how to do so is provided
together with the Application Form on the EDULINK website.

BEFORE STARTING TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION FORM ….
Familiarise yourself with the EDULINK Programme
Read the information provided on the EDULINK website. Here you will find
answers to frequently asked questions from previous calls for proposals,
which may answer some of your own questions. If possible, attend the
Information Day for applicants the ACP Secretariat will organise. The date will
be communicated in due time.
Make sure that you are familiar with the objective and purpose of the
EDULINK Programme
Read the leaflet ‘EDULINK in 2 Pages’ in the chapter ‘Background’. It

explains in a few sentences the objective and purpose of the programme and
the results EDULINK hopes to achieve. They should be reflected in your
proposal.
Read the Guidelines for Applicants carefully
Where to find the Guidelines?

1 - Go to www.acp-edulink.eu
2 – Choose your language
3 - Click on the section ‘How to apply?’
From the very beginning, be aware of the deadline for submission
Prepare a work plan for the completion of your proposal, where you plot the
essential activities to be undertaken and the milestones to be achieved
against a time schedule. Be sure to include some slack – unforeseen things
will inevitably happen!
Also Take Into Account ……
…that the evaluators are the first target group for your proposal
Bear in mind that the evaluators are the persons who will read and assess
your application. Although carefully selected, they have different backgrounds
and may not be specialists on the topic of your proposal. So put yourself in
the evaluators’ position: while everything in your proposal is so obvious for
you as the author, it is not necessarily so for the evaluators, who will see only
the information you provide!
…that the evaluation will not be carried out under “luxury” conditions
Evaluators have to work their way through a large number of proposals under
strong time pressure. They will not have the time to read your proposal more
than once – so make sure that this one reading is enough for them to
correctly understand it!

…that the evaluators have to make their choice among many
excellent proposals
A call for proposals and its evaluation is a competitive process. Only the
best 10 – 15% will finally be selected, because of the limited amount of
funding available. This does not mean that the remaining 85% are poor
proposals – they are just less good. Therefore you cannot afford any
weakness in your proposal: ALL parts of it must be of excellent quality!

SOME CRITERIA FOR A SUCCESSFUL APPLICATION
☺ Strictly follow the rules and provisions of the Call for Proposals
In filling in the Application Form, strictly respect the rules as explained in the
Guidelines for Applicants and in this Manual. Don’t leave out or add any
chapters or change their sequence. Above all, respect the limitations to a
certain number of pages that are indicated for some sections.
The Application Form is not specifically designed for EDULINK; the European
Commission uses the same form for many different types of projects. At
certain points you may therefore not be entirely sure how to complete it. In
this case, if you don’t find an explanation in this Manual, first consult the
Frequently Asked Questions on the EDULINK website and if you still don’t
find an explanation there, you can always ask the EDULINK PMU.
☺ Find a good title for your project

The title of your project should be concise and self-explanatory in view of the
proposed action.
☺ Draft a convincing Concept Note

We cannot stress it enough: Overcoming the first hurdle on the way to
success of your proposal depends on the quality of your Concept Note. You
have to convince the evaluators on just 4 pages to recommend you
application for further evaluation – so what you say must be well-structured,
concise, and complete!
☺ Make a thorough analysis of the background of your project

This analysis will lay the foundation for the action you propose. It must identify
the essential problem areas; define target groups and stakeholders, and links
and complementarities with other initiatives in such a way that the activities
you plan to undertake and the solutions you propose follow logically from the
analysis. If you start the preparation of your proposal with the Logical
Framework, as we strongly suggest, you will automatically be led to
performing this background analysis.
☺ Identify clear objectives, methods, results

Show that you have a clear idea of your project; that you know exactly what to
do, how to do it and why. Again the Logical Framework Analysis will help you
structure your ideas and check their logic.
☺ Develop a well-structured work plan

Show in your work plan that you have a realistic view of the sequence and
timing of the activities to be undertaken in the performance of the project, the
inputs required at each point and the results you expect to achieve. Be honest
about possible constraints; and make appropriate provision for them in the
work plan.
☺ Make sure to have an appropriate project cycle management

As a consequence of poorly defined verifiable indicators (OVIs), many of the
applications received under the 1st and 2nd calls were unimpressive regarding
their provisions for Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E), even in otherwise high-
quality proposals. Remember that, if your project is selected for funding, you

will have to report regularly on its progress. M&E should therefore be
embedded as an essential activity into the very fabric of the work plan.
☺ Calculate a realistic budget

The budgeted project costs must be reasonable and realistic. In many of the
applications received under the 1st and 2nd calls, the requested EC
contribution was practically identical with the upper grant limit of EUR 500,000
– creating the impression that this figure was taken as the starting point in
formulating the project and then filled with activities to justify the amount.
However, it is unlikely that this approach will lead to an optimally designed
project. When you prepare the budget it is more logical to start from realistic
considerations regarding the activities needed to successfully carry out the
action and then translate them into cost. Avoid the impression that your
budget was “artificially inflated” in order to obtain the maximum possible
grant!
☺ Have a clear text structure

The text of your proposal must be clear and concise for easy reading. It
should have precise headings and sub-headings and use short paragraphs to
structure it. The information you provide should be limited to what is essential
for describing your proposed action and should show a logical sequence.
Avoid redundancies and don’t use acronyms without explanation. Little credit
will be given for sweeping claims such as “this project will be entirely
sustainable”. Under the 1st and 2nd calls, some applications were so poorly
structured, and their content so poorly substantiated as to raise doubts about
their authors’ grasp of the subject – let alone their ability to manage the
project. Don’t forget that an EDULINK proposal is not a scientific paper. Look
at it from a pragmatic point of view: You want to obtain funding to do a certain
well-defined work within a clear timeframe that will result in tangible outputs.
This is much more like a business proposal!
Within a partnership, it is common practice that each partner will make a

contribution to the proposal, in particular the text segments related to its
designated role in the project. However, this implies the risk that the final
product will not be homogeneous with regard to style, detail of content,
presentation etc. It is therefore advisable that one person should do the final
editing of the proposal to ensure the homogeneity of all texts. This person
should also be responsible for doing a last check of the completeness of the
application and its compliance with all the provisions of the Call for Proposals.
☺ Use good quality language

It goes without saying that the use of good “standard” English or French is an
asset for your application. In the 1st and 2nd calls, in many instances it was just
not possible to understand correctly what the applicants were trying to say. In
about every university in ACP and EU States there will be one or several staff
members around whose mother tongue is English or French. A few hours of
such a person’s time will go a long way towards transforming an impenetrable
application into a readable – and possibly winning – one. So when you have
finished writing it, make sure that a native speaker does a spell and language
check of your proposal. A proposal must not be formulated in a sophisticated
way, but it should be easy to read and – more important – to understand. How
else will the evaluators be in a position to assess your proposal?

MAJOR REASONS FOR THE REJECTION OF APPLICATIONS UNDER THE
1ST AND 2ND CALLS FOR PROPOSALS
The application arrived after the deadline (1st call) or was posted after
the deadline (2nd call)
This is the most annoying reason of all for having your proposal rejected after
all the effort it took to prepare it, so be absolutely sure to respect the deadline.
Rejection of late proposals is automatic and there will be no exceptions!
The application failed to pass the administrative check

• The compulsory format of the Application Form was not respected;
• Essential documents were missing (budget, logical framework …);
• Partnership not eligible (no partners at all, not enough partners ….);
• Requested EDF contribution exceeds the limit.
Quality of the content

• The relevance of the project (to needs and constraints of the
country/region and to those of the target groups and final beneficiaries)
is not convincing;
• Proposal shows no clear relation to the objectives of EDULINK;
• Goals too ambitious and not plausibly substantiated by the proposed
activities;
• Objectives, methodology and results are insufficiently elaborated and
explained;
• Text is not clearly structured, lacking internal logic;
• Text is obviously written by “cut and paste”; poor final editing;
• Poor Logical Framework (internal logic, indicators, sources of
verification)
• Costs appear exaggerated in relation to proposed activities and inputs.
Impact
• Target group(s) not clearly identified or negligible in quantitative terms;
• Proposal does not elaborate on tangible outputs and results;
• Sustainability of the project not sufficiently substantiated.
Implementation
• Insufficient management experience of the project coordinator;
• Inadequate knowledge of Project Cycle Management.

FORMING AN ELIGIBLE PARTNERSHIP BASED ON A SOUND PROJECT
IDEA
There are two possible approaches to the constitution of your partnership:
• Either you develop your project idea first and then look for eligible Higher
Education Institutions that might be interested in the subject and in working
with your institution;
• Or, if your institution already has well-established and tested relations with
other eligible HEIs, you can build on this experience and jointly develop a
project idea of common interest.
You can also make use of the ‘Search Partner’ facility on the EDULINK website by
advertising your institution and your specific interests there. Please note that the
EDULINK PMU’s role is limited to placing your search request on the website; it will
not get involved as a broker between the different parties.
Whichever approach you choose the selection of partners and the constitution of the
partnership must be based on clear ideas and perceptions about the project. The
consortium should bring together all competences relevant for the successful
execution of the project and should be committed to the action and its target groups.
It is important that all partners have a high level of mutual trust – “the chemistry
should be good among the partners!”
How many members of the partnership?
There are minimum rules that you find explained in the Guidelines for Applicants, but
there is no upper limit to the number of members the partnership may comprise.
However, there is no point in adding partners just for the sake of it – the optimum is a
partnership that combines all the required competences, where each partner has a
well-defined role and where partners share project activities and benefits in a
balanced way. And remember: the more partners are involved, the more complex
and difficult managing the project will become!
Choosing the lead institution
One member of the partnership must be designated as the lead institution and then
becomes ‘the applicant’. Where a partnership includes both, ACP and EU institutions,
this may raise the question whether there is a tactical advantage in designating an
ACP HEI as lead institution. There can, indeed, be a situation, where this is the case:
If at a certain stage of the evaluation process several applications receive identical
scores, applications submitted by networks where the lead institution is an ACP HEI
or by networks composed exclusively of ACP HEIs will be given priority over
networks not fulfilling these criteria. However, the more relevant consideration in
choosing the lead institution of the consortium should be project management
experience and capacity. This is an important criterion in the evaluation process and
should therefore be the outstanding qualification of the lead institution - whether it
comes from an ACP or from an EU State.

Formalising the partnership
The constitution of the partnership is formalised through the so-called ‘partnership

statements’, included in section III pt. 2 of the Application Form. Each partner must
sign, date (and stamp) such a statement and in principle they should all be included
as originals in your application. Faxed copies will be accepted but you may be asked
to provide the original at a later time. Assembling the partnership statements should
therefore be one of the very first activities to be undertaken once the partnership has
been agreed, since experience shows that it may take considerable time to obtain
them all. The signature on the partnership statement must be that of a person
authorised to legally represent the institution.
An additional instrument to formalise your partnership is an internal agreement

(‘consortium agreement’, ‘teaming agreement’) that describes the purpose of the
partnership, broadly defines the role and responsibilities of each partner, confirms
their commitment to the joint undertaking etc. It is entirely up to you whether and how
you draw up such a document; it is not part of your application nor is it a condition for
its validity. If you application should be selected for a grant, you can then replace this
initial (and more informal) agreement by a more precise and detailed one that is
legally binding on its signatories.

COMPLETING THE GRANT APPLICATION FORM
What to submit:
Concept Note
3 sections: (1) Relevance of the action

(2) Description of the action and its effectiveness
(3) Sustainability of the action
Full Application Form
7 sections: (I) The Action

(II) The Applicant
(III)The Partners
(IV) The Associates
(V) Checklist
(VI) Declaration by Applicant
(VII) Assessment Grid
+ The following annexes

• Budget + Budget justification
• Logical Framework
Please note:
• Annex D (Legal entity sheet) and
• Annex E (Financial ID Form)
will only be requested if your proposal is provisionally selected.
• Annex F (Standard Grant Contract) and

• Annex G (Daily per diem rates)
are provided for information purposes only and should not be returned.
Do not send any additional documents – they will be disregarded. In particular, do not
send at this time any of the documents listed in section 2.4 of the Guidelines for
Applicants (statutes, balance sheets …..). You will be requested to submit them if
and when you application should be selected for funding.

FRONT PAGE AND FIRST PAGE OF THE APPLICATION FORM
Name of applicant:
Give here the exact title of your action, including the acronym, if
Title of the action: there is one.
This line is new!

Sector: Insert here the sector that best describes your action (e.g.
Health, Renewable energies, Institutional development ….)
Indicate here where the proposed action will take place, e.g.
Location(s) of the action: Burkina Faso, West Africa, Ouagadougou, Benin, West Africa,
Cotonou, France, EU, Montpellier
Total eligible cost of the Amount requested (B) % of total eligible cost of
action (A) action (B/Ax100)
In EUR. The amount you enter In EUR. The amount you enter In % This percentage must be
here must be the same that here must be the same that ≤85%. If it exceeds 85%, even
appears in the bottom line of appears in Annex III – by decimals, you must either
Annex III - Budget for the Action Expected sources of funding in increase the figure for ‘total
(11.Total eligible costs (9+10) the line ‘EDF contribution eligible cost’ or reduce the
All Years). sought in this application’. It figure for ‘amount requested’.
must be an amount between €
Please calculate the
200,000 and € 500,000 for
percentage precisely (for
‘trans-national projects’ and
exemple 75,48%). Don’t
between € 500,000 and €
round up or down!
1,000,000 for ‘trans-regional
projects’.
Total duration of the Must be a minimum of 12 and a maximum of 36 months

action:
Do not write here. This is the

Dossier No number that will be attributed to
your application.
Contact details for the purpose of this action:

It is essential that you indicate the complete postal address of your
Postal address: institution so that the letters of the ACP Secretariat regarding the
status of your proposal in different stages of the evaluation process
will reach you. The ACP Secretariat will not be held responsible in
case it cannot contact an applicant.
Along with the fax number below, this is the number that will be used
Telephone number: Country to contact you in case of need for any additional information or
code + city code + number clarifications regarding your application. Make sure that both
numbers are correct and inform the PMU of any changes.
Fax number: Country code +
See above
city code + number

Contact person for this Please indicate the surname and first name of the person to whom
action : any requests for clarification or further information can be addressed.
Indicate a valid email address, preferably a professional email; yahoo
or hotmail addresses are not as reliable. This is important as the
email address will be used to contact you in case of need for any
Contact person’s email additional information or clarifications regarding your application. This
address email address is also the one to which letters of the ACP Secretariat
regarding the status of your proposal in different stages of the
evaluation process will be sent. Please inform the PMU of any
changes.
Please note the explanations given above for the boxes ‘Total eligible cost of the
action’ and ‘Amount requested’. A few applicants under the 1st and 2nd Calls for
Proposals obviously had a misunderstanding at this point!
To repeat: € 500,000 for ‘Trans-national projects’ and € 1,000,000 for ‘Trans-

regional projects’ are the maximum limits for the possible EDF contribution and
not for the ‘Total eligible cost’ of the proposed action!

THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
In Part B, section I, heading 1.11 the Application Form requires you to produce a so-
called ‘Logical Framework Matrix’ after you have described your project in detail
under headings 1.4 – 1.10.
However, we suggest that the Logical Framework Matrix should best be developed
before you start writing the texts of headings 1.4 – 1.10. Going first through the
different steps of the Logical Framework Approach as described below will naturally
lead up to identifying the contents of these texts. Doing it the other way around –
writing your texts first and then ‘filling in’ the Logical Framework Matrix - defeats the
very philosophy of the approach.
The process of going through the steps of the Logical Framework Approach should
ideally be carried out by representatives of the applicant and its partners sitting
together in a workshop situation, and assisted by a qualified moderator. It requires
the group to address issues that may have appeared self-evident, or whose
importance was not fully realised before. The process exposes previously un-stated
assumptions and hypotheses, and forces the group to analyse carefully what it is
planning to do and to think about the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of the project. The overall result
is that the project you will then describe in the Application Form will be clearly
thought out and present a feasible and consistent solution to the problem(s) you
propose to address.
The Logical Framework Matrix looks deceptively simple, but in fact a properly done
matrix is not a stand-alone document that can be completed in isolation. Rather, it is
the end result of a series of interlinked analytical planning steps called the Logical
Framework Approach (LFA). If you feel that you are sufficiently familiar with it, you
can skip this chapter; if not, please read it carefully, as this will help you to
significantly improve the overall quality of your proposal and thereby your evaluation
scores.
The Logical Framework Approach
The way in which projects are planned and implemented follows a sequence that is
known as the project cycle:
programming → identification → formulation → funding decision → implementation

→ evaluation.
Project Cycle Management (PCM) is a set of project design and management tools,
adopted by the European Commission in 1992, and based on the Logical Framework
Approach (LFA).
The LFA must not be confused with the Logical Framework Matrix. LFA is a project
preparation methodology, whereas the Logical Framework Matrix is a document with
a special structure, produced at the end of the LFA process.
The LFA fulfils several functions:
It develops a structured set of project ideas by clarifying objectives and

outputs.
It provides a clear, brief and logical description of the proposed project.
It helps to identify possible risks to project implementation.

It provides a useful basis for evaluation during and at the end of the project.
The LFA process can be divided into the following five steps:
Situation analysis;
Stakeholder analysis;
Problem analysis
Objectives analysis;
Analysis of alternatives;
Activity planning.
Only you have gone through these steps, you can prepare the Logical Framework
Matrix.
Ideally, the logical framework analysis should be undertaken in a workshop situation

which includes representatives of the applicant and its partners and is facilitated by a
qualified moderator. If this is not possible for cost reasons, the applicant may form a
working group to perform the exercise and then discuss and share the result with its
partners. A situation where the logical framework is developed in isolation by an
individual staff member or even by an external consultant should definitely be
avoided.
Situation Analysis
As a first step, you need to analyse the situation and context of the envisaged
project. This will require you to answer questions of the following type:
What are the general areas of concern, or themes, that the project will focus
on?
What is the historical background of issues relating to the proposed project?
What is the project aiming to achieve?
At what spatial levels will the project focus, in terms of subject and/or
geography?
Within what political, socio-economic, technological and biophysical
environment will the project operate?
Who will/should be involved in the process of design, implementation,
monitoring, evaluation and reporting?
Who is working on the issues already? What are they doing?
Who will implement the project?
What is the intended duration of the project?
What is the anticipated level of funding?
Who will fund the project?
The information sources for answering the above questions could be a feasibility
study, a pre-appraisal report, a compilation of documents prepared specifically for the
LFA, or simply the professional knowledge of the participants to the planning
process.
Stakeholder Analysis
The Stakeholder Analysis will produce a document, where you give a detailed
analysis of the people, groups, or organisations that may influence or be influenced
by the problem area addressed by the proposed project or by the potential solution to
the problem. The objective of this step is to identify and discuss the interest and
expectations of these groups and organisations, how they can be involved in the
implementation of the project, how it can be assured that they will actually benefit
from it etc.

Problem Analysis
The Problem Analysis is undertaken by developing a ‘problem tree’ for your project
through an analysis of cause and effects.
Identifying the main problems

You may use brainstorming techniques to identify the main problems your project
proposed to address. The facilitator should explain the process and the rules for
brainstorming.
Brainstorming rules
All ideas are accepted without argument;
Aim for quantity rather than quality;
No debate about whether ideas are accepted or not, only
about whether the idea has already been listed;
No evaluation at this time; concentrate on getting a full
cross-section of ideas first.
For maximum efficiency, a brainstorming group should be no more than around ten
people. If more persons participate, it is better to split them into smaller groups. The
brainstorming exercise commences by asking participants to identify the main
problems that the project will address. They will be written on cards, and stuck on the
wall, in no particular order to begin with. When the participants feel that all essential
problems are displayed, they should cluster them into groups of similar issues. At this
stage a ‘weeding’ exercise can be undertaken with the aim of discarding problems
that duplicate each other and removing those that can clearly not be addressed by
the project.
Developing the problem tree

The problem tree is then developed by arranging the problems cards on the wall in a
cause – effect hierarchy, possibly adding new ones that emerge as the tree is built
up. The tree should end up with one main problem at the top and a series of lower
order problems that branch out below the main problem.
The easiest way to develop the problem tree is to begin with a ‘starter’ problem and
progressively add the other problem cards above or below it. It does not really matter
which problem is chosen as the ‘starter’ but it is best if it is a problem that participants
agree is of major importance. The problem tree is constructed by successively
relating your problem cards to the starter problem using the cause-effect rationale:
If the problem is a cause of the ‘starter’ problem it is placed below it;

If the problem is an effect of the starter problem it goes above;
If it is neither a cause nor effect it goes to the same level.
On the next screen we show an example of a problem tree that may be drawn up by
a restaurant owner, who analyses the reasons for his core problem – that his
business is unprofitable (we have deliberately chosen an example totally unrelated to
EDULINK!).
Objectives Analysis (the objectives tree)

The next step is to reformulate all elements in the problem tree into positive,
desirable conditions – these are the objectives.

The problem tree is transformed into an objectives tree by restating the problems as
a positive condition. In that sense, the objectives tree is the positive mirror image of
the problem tree. It can also be considered as an ‘ends - means’ diagram. The top of
the tree is the end that you desire to achieve with your project and the lower levels
are the means to achieving it.
The following example shows the objectives tree corresponding to the previously
shown example of a problem tree. As you can see, it’s a mirror image – what has
been stated before as a problem is now presented as a positive, desirable situation,
i.e. as an objective to be achieved.

Low-quality range of Use of canned
suppliers ingredients
Menu is undistinguished
EDULINK Manual v. 2.0

attractive
Customers don’t find food
Inexperienced kitchen
staff
Salaries are not

Example of a Problem Tree
attractive
Untrained staff
No recruitment policy
slow service
Waiters are inattentive

No return customers
Customers complain about
Cutlery and china is worn

and old-fashioned
Unattractive table
presentation
Tables have no
distinguishing features
Furniture and interior

decoration is outdated
Business is not profitable
Customers don’t find

atmosphere attractive
Windows offer no noise High street noise level

insulation
Restaurant not known

even in neighbourhood
No advertisement or
publicity
No special incentives
Too few customers
Restaurant is not well-known
Uninviting façade and

entrance area
Unattractive exterior
Menu display does not

20
attract passers-by
High-quality suppliers Use of fresh ingredients
Attractive choice of
menu
EDULINK Manual v. 2.0

Good quality of food
Qualified cook
Attractive salaries
Example on an Objectives Tree
Well-trained staff
Recruitment through
specialised agency
Good service
Prompt attention to
Satisfied customers
customers
Good quality cutlery and

china
Good table presentation

Fresh flowers and linen
Modern and pleasing

Business is profitable
decor
Pleasant atmosphere
Double-glazed windows No disturbing outside

noise
Direct mail-drops in
neighbourhood
Advertisement in Yellow
Pages
Special rates for parties

More customers
Restaurant is well-known
Renovated façade and

entrance area
Improved outdoor
presentation
Visible outdoor display of

menu
21
Alternatives Analysis
Looking at your objectives tree you may realise that several possible strategies can
be envisaged to achieve the objectives it describes and you will have to select the
one that appears most feasible. You may also find that it will not be possible to
achieve all the objectives in the context of a single project, given the limits of the
resources that can be applied. In this case, you may have to reformulate your project
to address only a certain section of the objectives tree. In our example of an
objectives tree, the restaurant owner may decide to concentrate only on the left-hand
part of the tree as a first step, since for the moment his financial situation does not
allow costly renovation and advertising activities.
Activity Planning
After defining the objectives and selecting a solution from a set of alternatives, the
detailed planning phase starts by defining the activities that are required to achieve
each objective – and this is where we finally come to the Logical Framework Matrix.
The Logical Framework Matrix
As we have explained earlier, the Matrix is a document, which summarizes the

results of the LFA process we have described so far in four columns and four rows.
Let’s see first in a general way, what information goes into the different boxes and
then explain in more detail the different column and row headings.

Objectively Verifiable Sources and means of
Intervention logic Assumptions
Indicators of achievement (OVI) verification (MOV)
What is/are the overall What are the quantitative ways of
What sources of information What external factors are
broader objective(s), to measuring, or qualitative ways of
Overall objective(s) exists, or can be provided in a necessary for sustaining objectives
which the project aims judging, whether these broad
cost-efficient manner? in the long run?
to make a contribution? objectives are being achieved?
What sources of information

What are the quantitative What conditions external to the
What is the specific exists or can be provided in a
measures or qualitative evidence project are necessary if
objective the project cost-efficient manner? Must
Specific objective by which achievement and achievements of the specific
expects to achieve by provision for collection be made
distribution of impacts and benefits objective is to contribute to
its own efforts? under activities (and in the
can be judged reaching the overall objective(s)?
budget)?
Expected results What are the various What are the factors not within the
Indicate each of the results (outputs) that control of the project which, if not
What kind and quantity of results,
results that are to be must be produced, What are sources of present, are liable to restrict
and by when will they be
produced by the which, taken together, information? progress from results to
produced? (quantity, quality, time)
project in order to will allow to achieve the achievements of the specific project
achieve the specific project’s specific objective?
project objective objective?
1) What external factors must be

realised to obtain planned results
Activities Try to show OVI’s for all activities.
What activities must be on schedule?
Indicate each of the This is essential for later reporting What are sources of
carried out to achieve 2) What kind of decisions or
activities that must be and monitoring against the Logical information?
each of the expected actions outside the control of the
undertaken in order to Framework.
results? project are necessary for inception
accomplish the results.
of the project?

Column Headings
Intervention logic
This is the text that "narrates" or describes the objectives, results or activities.
Objectively Verifiable Indicators of achievement (OVIs)

OVIs define the evidence that will show that objectives, results, activities have been
achieved, produced, or implemented. They should meet the following criteria:
Be measurable An indicator must be able to be measured in either

quantitative or qualitative terms
Be feasible An indicator should be feasible in terms of finances,
equipment, skills and time available
Be relevant and accurate An indicator should reflect what we are trying to
measure in an accurate way
Be sensitive An indicator should be capable of picking up changes
over the time period that we are interested in
Be timely An indicator should be able to provide information in a
timely manner
There is often a tendency to include large numbers of indicators on the assumption

that more information is better than less. This is not necessarily so - one well-chosen
indicator can be better than several less precise ones.
Sources and means of verification (MOVs)

MOVs show where to find the information that can be used to measure or verify the
indicators. They should specify:
The format in which the information should be made available (e.g. reports,
records, research findings, publications);
Who should provide the information;
How regularly it should be provided
MOVs should allow obtaining the required information with a reasonable input of
time, money and effort. For example, official statistics are a cheap and readily
accessible MOV, but they will often have a time lag of a year or more against the
actual situation. A targeted survey will give you precise and up-to-date information,
but may be quite expensive to undertake.
Assumptions
These are external factors outside the control of the project, but which are critical for
the achievement of its objective. Assumptions should be stated in terms of the
desired situation, e.g.:
Budget allocations are made available in a timely manner;

Local institutions collaborate in planning activities;
Suitable staff are identified and recruited on time;
New laboratory building is operational according to schedule.

In formulating your assumptions, you should apply the following logic:
Is the external factor important?
YES NO
Will it be realised? Almost certainly Do not include in logframe
Likely Include as an assumption
Unlikely Is it possible to redesign the

project in order to influence
the external factor?
YES NO
Redesign the project: The assumption is a ‘killer’

add activities or results; or assumption. The project is
reformulate the project purpose technically not feasible.
Row Headings
Overall Objective(s)
This is/are the higher-level objective(s) to which the project is expected to; it is/are
the objective(s) based upon the “focal problem” identified during the LFA. The word
"contribute to' implies that the project by itself cannot be expected to achieve the
overall objective(s).
Specific Objective
The anticipated effect your project will achieve by delivering the planned results.
Expected Results
The tangible results that the project management team should be able to
guarantee. Results must generally be delivered within a specified time frame and
budget.
Activities
The activities that must be undertaken by the project partners in order to produce the
results. The activities take time to perform and consume financial and material inputs.
Vertical and Horizontal Logic within the Logical Framework Matrix
The matrix functions on two dimensions, vertical and horizontal.
The vertical logic connects the levels of the matrix – activities,

results, specific objective, and overall objective(s). This means that:
Completion of the activities should lead to delivery of the results;

Delivery of the results should lead to achievement of the specific project
objective;

Achievement of the specific project objective should contribute to the overall
objective
If your project has good causality, the vertical logic should be correct and
demonstrable. Testing the vertical logic will help you to correct logical inconsistencies
when formulating your project proposal.
Intervention Logic Assumptions

Assumptions for sustaining the
Overall objective(s) overall objective in the long
term
THEN are valid

IF Specific objective is achieved and assumptions for achieving the
overall objective(s)
THEN are valid

IF Results are achieved and assumptions for achieving the
specific objective
THEN are valid

IF Activities are carried out and assumptions for achieving the
results
Important Assumptions
The horizontal logic of the matrix considers how to determine the status of activities,
results, achieving the specific project objective and contributing to the overall
objective by listing the indicators and means of verification and the assumptions
overarching the project implementation, e.g.:
Intervention Logic OVIs MOVs Assumptions

IF THEN AND AND
this is one of the this will measure this is where to find if these assumptions
expected results whether it has been the information that are valid, the result
achieved will tell us will lead to achieving
the specific project
objective
Some basic rules you should keep in mind when completing the Logical Framework
Matrix:
Begin with the left columns and work towards the right (Intervention Logic to
Assumptions)
Work from the top to the bottom - never the other way.
Leave the ‘Assumptions’ column for last
If difficult, leave the ‘Assumptions’ cell for the ‘Overall objective’ blank

PART A: THE CONCEPT NOTE
The Concept Note is one of the most important parts of your application. As the first
step of the evaluation process after the administrative check, only the Concept Note
will be evaluated and if it does not receive the required minimum score, the rest of
your application will not even be looked at.
It is therefore important that you should give a great deal of attention to the
formulation of the Concept Note. Though limited to 4 pages, it must give a clear and
comprehensive overview of all essential aspects of your proposal in relation to the
criteria applied to its evaluation. Do not refer to explanations given in later parts of
the proposal – the evaluators will not see these when they are looking at the Concept
Note. Also, do not make references to other literature or documents; only what is
actually written in the Concept Note will be taken into consideration.
For the presentation of your Concept Note, you must strictly follow the structure
shown on p. 4 of the Application Form. To save space, you don’t have to repeat the
individual points shown under each section; just follow the order of numbering of the
section titles:
1. Relevance of the action

YOUR TEXT
2. Description of the action and its effectiveness

YOUR TEXT
3. Sustainability of the action

YOUR TEXT
Make sure that everything that can be said in relation to a certain section is said at
this point and not in another section. The evaluators will find it difficult to attribute a
correct score if the information on a certain issue is spread all over the Concept Note.
It is up to you to decide how much space you want to devote to each section. If you
think you can describe the relevance of the action (section 1) on half a page, but you
need 2 pages to sufficiently describe the action (section 2), this is perfectly
acceptable. It is the total of the Concept Note that must not exceed 4 pages.
Please explain any acronyms you use if they are essential for the understanding of
the text!
Finally, if the author(s) of the Concept Note is/are not fully proficient in the language
in which it is written, you should have it checked by a competent person – preferably
a native speaker. It would be unfortunate if your Concept Note does not receive the
score it merits because it cannot be properly understood for reasons of poor linguistic
quality.

PART B: THE FULL APPLICATION FORM
I. The Action
If you have followed our advice and gone through the Logical Framework Analysis
before you come to this point, you will already have in hand most of the elements you
need to complete this section of the Application Form. It will now be a matter of
elaborating them in detail.
Description
Items 1.1 – 1.3 repeat the information you have already given on the cover page of
the Application Form.
1.1 Title
Give here the exact title of your action, including the acronym, if there is one.
1.2 Location(s)
Indicate here where the proposed action will take place, e.g. Burkina Faso, West
Africa, Ouagadougou; Benin, West Africa, Cotonou; France, EU, Montpellier
1.3 Cost of the action and amount requested
Total eligible cost of the action

The amount you enter here must be the same that appears in the bottom line of
Annex III - Budget for the Action (11.Total eligible costs (9+10) All Years).
Amount requested
The amount you enter here must be the same that appears in Annex III – Expected
sources of funding in the line ‘EDF contribution sought in this application’. It must be
an amount between € 200,000 and € 500,000 for ‘trans-national projects’ and
between € 500,000 and € 1,000,000 for ‘trans-regional projects’.
% of total eligible cost of action

This percentage must be ≤85%. If it exceeds 85%, even by decimals, you must either
increase the figure for ‘total eligible cost’ or reduce the figure for ‘amount requested’.
1.4 Summary (max. 1 page)
The macros built into the Application Form will automatically oblige you to respect
this limitation. Don’t worry, you will have more space for detailed explanations later.
Total duration of the action:

Give the number of months you foresee for implementing the action. It must be a
minimum of 12 and a maximum of 36 months.
Objectives of the action:

The overall and specific objectives you list here in a few lines must be the same you
will describe in detail in the following section 1.5 of the Application Form.
Partners:

In this box, enter the name, country and location of all the partners for the action, but
not of the applicant or the associates (if any). They must be the same for which you
will be requested to provide partner descriptions and signed partnership statements
in Chapter III of this Application Form.
Be sure that the number and nationality of partners respect the rules explained in
sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 of the Guidelines for Applicants. Under the 1st and 2nd
Calls for Proposals, a significant number of applications had to be rejected after
the administrative check, because this was not the case!
Target group(s):
These are the direct beneficiaries of the action you propose. Examples of ‘target
groups’ could be: administrative staff of the participating institutions, teaching staff
and professionals in the veterinary sector, postgraduate students, etc.
Final beneficiaries:
“Final beneficiaries” are defined as “ …. those who will benefit from the project in the
long term at the level of the society or sector at large”. In that respect, they are the
indirect beneficiaries of the action you propose. Examples of ‘final beneficiaries’
could be: rural populations in small villages, primary school children, public
administrations involved in urban planning, etc.
Estimated results
These are the results that will be achieved through the action if all planned activities
are carried out. They are therefore results that you can control and that do not
depend on other peoples’ activities, over which you have no or only limited control.
Main activities:
In section 1.7 of the Application Form, you will have 14 pages for a detailed
description of the activities foreseen to carry out the proposed action. At this point,
just give a short summary of the major ones.
1.5 Objectives (max. 1 page)
Overall objective(s)
Explain the general objective(s), to which the action will make a contribution – in fact,
there should be just one such objective! Also describe what other developments
outside the project must take place so that the overall objective will be achieved. An
example of an overall objective could be “Reduction of the incidence of epidemic
diseases in the African Great Lakes Region”.
Specific objective(s)
There must be at least one, but there can be several specific objectives, which can
and will be achieved, if the project is implemented as planned. So contrary to the
overall objective, you control the specific objective(s). They should address the core
problem identified in the Logical Framework analysis, and be defined in terms of
sustainable benefit for the target groups. An example for a specific objective, related
to the above example of an overall objective could be “Strengthen the capacity of the
partner institutions in delivering mutually recognised post-graduate courses on Public
Health problems in the African Great Lakes Region”.
1.6 Relevance of the action (max. 3 pages)

Describe in this section the relevance of the project to the objectives/priorities of the
EDULINK Programme and the perceived needs and constraints of the sector or
geographical area your action addresses. It should also explain how you arrived at
the identification of the target group(s) and final beneficiaries.
This is a very important part of your application. In the evaluation, you must reach
a total average score of at least 20 points (out of 25) for the section ‘Relevance’,
otherwise the Evaluation Committee will reject the proposal (see p. 23 of the
Guidelines for Applicants). That is a very high threshold, and in the 2nd Call for
Proposals a considerable number of otherwise good applications failed to pass it!
This analysis of the current and the pre-project situation should set the background
for the action you propose. The need and justification for the action, the description of
its effectiveness and the methodology applied must therefore follow logically from it.
A major weakness of a number of applications received under the 1st and 2nd Calls
for Proposals was that the analysis of the relevance of the action appeared to be
largely detached from the activities proposed for implementation. In other words, it
was not clear why and in what way the action would be (part of) a solution to the –
correctly identified - needs and constraints. Avoid this!
Wherever possible, try to quantify: What is the size of the group of your final
beneficiaries? What is the timeframe in terms of years for expected impacts to show?
etc.
Since your action should normally cover several countries, the needs analysis should
preferably be done by the respective local partners (however, remember what we
said about ensuring the homogeneity of style and presentation!). You can also refer
to country strategy and sectoral priority papers found for example at
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external relations/sp/index.htm
1.7 Description of the action and its effectiveness (max 14 pages)
Overall Objective and the Purpose of the Action (max 1 page)

This complements what you have said under 1.5., but gives you the
opportunity to elaborate further on it if you found the space allowed before too
limiting. Consider the term ‘Purpose of the Action’ as synonymous with the
term ‘Specific Objective(s)’.
Outputs and expected results (max 4 pages)

While describing the concrete results expected from the action, be specific
and quantify wherever possible. Keep in mind that the outputs must be in line
with objectively verifiable indicators and sources of verification defined in the
Logical Framework.
Present and describe outputs and expected results in a logical time sequence
as they accrue over the duration of the project. Some outputs may be
produced in the early stages of the project and be a precondition for
producing subsequent ones – this should be clearly shown so that the internal
logic of your project becomes apparent to the evaluators.
In this section you must also show that the project is likely to have multiplier
effects including the scope for replication and extension of the outcome of the
action and dissemination of information. This can include potential for
strengthening policies (recognition of degrees, mobility for students and staff

etc.), sharing of best practices with an audience as wide as possible (internal
and external communication strategy, production of brochures, website,
participation in conferences and workshops, etc).
The proposed activities and their effectiveness (max 9 pages)

Use a step by step approach for all tasks: activity 1, activity 2, etc. and
include the title for each activity. Again, make sure that the activities are
presented and described in their logical sequence.
Explain in detail who will carry out the activities (applicant, which partner,
which associate), where and when they will be carried out, what are the
necessary inputs (persons involved, materials,) and link the activities to the
outputs you have described above. Show and demonstrate clearly the cross-
cutting issues between components of each activity which adds value to the
project and distinguish, where appropriate, between critical and supportive
activities.
It is important that this section correspond to the indicative action plan (see
section 1.9) and allows for cross-check with the budget.
1.8 Methodology (max 4 pages)
“Methodology” means the ‘how’ of project implementation and management. It must

be appropriate, practical, and demonstrably conducive to achieving the objectives
and expected results - not a ‘scientific’ methodology!
In particular:
Describe the management structures put into place, how the activities of the
different actors will be coordinated, how an adequate information flow is
guaranteed, how decision-making processes will be organised.
The partners' level of involvement and participation in the action must be

balanced. It is important that the role of each partner be clearly defined and a
participatory approach is demonstrated.
Elaborate on procedures for monitoring and evaluation: That means in

particular monitoring of actual versus planned activities (use the OVIs in the
Logical Framework), reporting (internal and to the ACP Secretariat) and
arrangements for internal and/or external evaluation of project achievements.
Describe the team proposed for implementation of the project in terms of

number, role and status of persons (no names are necessary). Please note
that the project coordinator must be a member of staff of the applicant HEI
and that there should be work package/task managers at partners’ level!
If the project builds on previous activities, show how it will be ensured that
they are integrated into the project design.
If the project is part of a larger programme, show how it fits into and is
coordinated with this programme. Describe potential synergies that may be
gained from this approach.

1.9 Duration and indicative action plan for implementing the action
• Complete according to the template provided;

• Do not mention actual dates: use ‘month 1’ as the starting month, then ‘month 2’
etc.;
• Ensure that ALL activities from the description in section 1.7 appear here for the
first year; for the following year(s) you may list only the major ones;
• Ensure that activity titles correspond to those in section 1.7;
• Foresee a certain amount of slack in the timetable as a precaution;
• Identify the implementing body for each activity.
1.10 Sustainability (max 3 pages)
In this section you must show that the action is likely to have a tangible impact on its
target group(s) and final beneficiaries and that the expected results are sustainable,
i.e. that they will be continued when the grant funding ends.
Distinguish between the financial sustainability (how will the activities be financed
after the grant ends?), the institutional sustainability (will structures allowing the
activities to continue be in place at the end of the project? Will there be local
“ownership” of project outcomes?) and the sustainability on policy level (what will be
the structural impact of the project? Will it lead to improved legislation, codes of
conduct, methods etc?).
1.11 Logical Framework
This is Annex C to the Guidelines for Applicants. Though it appears in the Application
Form at this point, we have dealt with it before for the reasons we have explained. If
you have preferred not to follow our advice, read the chapter on the Logical
Framework Approach now!

2 Budget for the action
This is Annex B to the Guidelines for Applicants and consists of 2 worksheets plus
the budget justification.
Worksheet 1
General information regarding the budget:
The budget for the action has to be presented in Euros (European format =
XX.XXX,XX) and must respect the template provided (Excel Format).
The budget must show the total eligible costs of the project, i.e. the sum of the
requested EDF contribution plus the own contribution! The figure that appears in
the bottom line (11 Total eligible costs (9+10), All Years) must be the same as the
figure you have entered on the cover page of the Application Form and again on
p. 5 (Part B, I.,1.3). Under the 1st and the 2nd Calls, many applicants made the
mistake of showing in the budget only the EDF contribution and had to be
requested to present a new and correct budget. You do not have to show, which
items will be financed from the EDF contribution and which from the own
contribution.
Please respect the main headings provided and add lines under each of them as
necessary. The budget does not have to be split equally between the partners
(though there should be a balanced involvement of all partners). It is up to the
applicant and its partners to divide the budget according to actual costs and in the
most appropriate way.

• All Years/Year 1
Present the budget in an overall way for the total duration in the left-hand part of the
template. Be specific and provide details for the first 12 months in the right-hand part
of the template.
• 1. Human Resources
Subdivide the heading “salaries” according to staff profiles (see example). Normally,
there is no differentiation between “local” and “expats/int.” In the profiles specify the
percentage of time. The unit rate for salaries should be realistic local market rates
and you may be requested to substantiate the rates you apply by supporting
documents.
Example:
# of Unit rate (in Costs (in
1. Human resources Unit
units EUR) EUR)
1.1 Salaries (gross amounts, local staff)
1.1.1 Technical
1.1.1.1 One half-time Research Associate,
Per month 18,00 4.000,00 72.000.00
Applicant – 50% of time
1.1.1.2 One half-time Project Coordinator Per month 18,00 3.750,00 67.500,00
1.1.1.3 Project Leader Per day 80,00 319,05 25.524,00
1.1.2 Administrative/support Staff: Secretary
Per month 3,60 2.000,00 7.200,00
10% of her capacity
1.1.3 Administrative/support Staff, Head of
Financial Management for Research 5% of her Per month 1,80 3.300,00 5.940,00
capacity
• Per month
Standard month = 22 working days.
• Unit rate (in EUR)

Unit rates cannot be higher than gross salaries (employees) or qualifications and
experience (independents). In case of part-time work, please adapt the number of
units and not the unit rate.
• 1.3 Per diems for missions/travel

Include per diem rates by country of destination. Current per diem rates are
available on: http://europa.eu.int/comm/europeaid/perdiem/index_en.htm. For long
periods, monthly allowances may be considered.
• 2. Travel
Indicate the place of departure and arrival.
• 2.3 Participation in stakeholders’ meetings

You can enter a lump sum of € 5,000 to cover the costs of participation in an
EDULINK stakeholders’ meeting. This meeting will be organised for
representatives of the successful partnerships to explain the financial and
administrative rules and procedures for project implementation. In case your
project is selected for funding, you will have to pay for your participation in the
meeting from your own resources, if you have not made provision for it in the
budget.
• 4. Local Office
In case a local office is established in one of the partner countries (or if special
costs arise) otherwise, costs are covered by item 8 “administrative costs”.

• 5.3 Auditing costs
If your project is selected, an audit carried out by a recognised external audit firm
is compulsory at the end of the implementation period for receiving the final
payment. You may select an audit firm of your choice and make provision for the
estimated costs in the budget. If you do not make that provision you will have to
finance the cost of the audit from your own resources!
• Footnotes
Despite the clarifications given here, please read carefully the information in the
footnotes.

3 Expected sources of funding (Worksheet 2)
• EDF contribution sought In this application

The EDF contribution shown in line 10 cannot be more than 85% of the total
project cost shown in line 25, while not exceeding € 500,000 for ‘trans-national
projects’ and € 1,000,000 for ‘trans-regional projects’.
• Own contribution
The own contribution must be a minimum of 15% of the total project cost shown
in line 25. It is the sum of
Applicant’s financial contribution shown in line 8, which includes contributions
of the partners. Associates (if any) may also make a financial contribution to
the project.
Contribution(s) from other European Institutions or EU Member States
Contributions from other organisations (must be listed individually)
• Overall total
The overall total corresponds to the total eligible costs for the action. It must be
the same as the figure you have entered on the cover page of the Application
Form and again on p. 5 (Part B, I.,1.3)
When you compile your application, please pay attention to printing out both
worksheets of the budget. Worksheet 2 will not print out automatically when you
print worksheet 1!

Budget justification
All budget items must be further explained in the Budget Justification. There is no
specific template for this document. It should be provided on a separate sheet and it
is up to the applicant to choose a format that will explain and justify the budget in a
clear and transparent way.
Please justify each budget item with respect to:
o the necessity for the item (eg: flight, computer, etc.);

o the number of units proposed and;
o the choice of the unit rate applied.
The justification should make reference to the activities foreseen in your proposal.
The unit rates for staff involved in the action must be actual local market rates and
must also be explained in the budget justification. Please note that the Contracting
Authority is entitled to ask for salary slips to verify the accuracy of the rates
presented in the budget.
Example:
Budget item 1.3.1.1 – 25 days per diem: 4 missions of 5 days each to Angola by
coordinator to participate in 2 Advisory Group Meetings and 2 Training of the
Trainers sessions (see activities 2.1 and 4 for detail). EC per diem rate applied.
Please do not forget to provide this document (as many applicants under
the 1st and 2nd Calls for Proposals did). It is essential for processing your
application!

4 Experience of similar actions
The intention of this section is to establish your management experience by providing

references of similar actions, in which you have participated either as the applicant or
as a partner. Please use the provided template, one for each action not exceeding 1
page. You can give as many references as you like, but we suggest you limit yourself
to projects that are ongoing or have been completed within the last 3 years.
Location of the action: State all the locations, where the action has taken place
(countries/regions) and underline the location of the part, for which you were directly
responsible.
Cost of the action: Give the total cost and in brackets the cost of the part for which
you were directly responsible.
Lead manager of partner: State the role of your organisation.
Dates: If the action is still ongoing, state dd/mm/yyyy – present
Objects and results of the action: Show briefly overall objectives and results and then
in more detail your organisation’s role, describing in particular management and
coordination activities.

II THE APPLICANT
EuropeAid ID number You have to provide this information only if your institution is
registered in the European Commission’s online PADOR
registration service (accessible through
http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/onlineservices/pador)
Please note that registration to the PADOR is not

compulsory.
It is important that you indicate the full name of the institution.

In cases where the applicant is a legal Entity within an
Name of the organisation: institution, indicate the full name of the Entity followed by the
full name of the institution, e.g. Faculty of Applied Sciences,
Kenyatta University.
1. Identity
You have to provide this number only in case your institution

Legal Entity File number has already signed a contract with the European Commission.
Check the previous contract to find the number.
Abbreviation If applicable, provide the abbreviation or the commonly used
acronym of your institution.
Registration Number (or This is the number that your institution is registered under for
equivalent) official purposes.
Indicate here the date on which your institution was first

Date of Registration
officially registered.
Official address of This is the legal address under which your institution is
Registration registered. It may be different from the postal address.
Do not use acronyms like UK, RDC. Spell out the name of
Country of Registration
the country in full.
E-mail address of the Indicate here a general email address for your institution if
Institution there is one.
Telephone number:
Indicate here a general telephone number for your institution if
Country code + city code +
there is one.
number
Fax number: Country code Indicate here a general fax number for your institution if there
+ city code + number is one.
If applicable, indicate the link to the website of your institution
Website of the Institution
for information purposes.

2. Profile
This section is aimed at identifying the nature of your institution, the sector(s) in
which it is active and the related target groups. Please remember that this Application
Form is also used for all other types of programmes and projects, so the following
tables include options that may not be appropriate for EDULINK, but may apply in
other cases.
Legal status of your institution or, if the applicant

Legal status is an entity within the institution, of this entity
If your answer is ‘yes’, please note the
□ Yes
Profit-Making explanation given in pt. 2.1.1 of the Guidelines for
□ No Applicants
□ Yes Your answer must be ‘no’, as NGOs can only
NGO have the status of an associate in the action
□ No
□ Political Tick as appropriate
□ Religious
Value based
□ Humanistic
□ Neutral
□ Yes, parent entity: The case of a ‘controlled entity’ would be relevant
Is your institution if you apply as a legal entity within an institution
(please specify its EuropeAid ID)
linked with another
□ Yes, controlled entity(ies)
entity?
□ No, independent
Table 2.1 ‘Category’:

Please note that only one choice may be made. Normally, your choice should be one
of the following:
Public Private
University/Education University/Education
Research Institute Research Institute
Foundation Foundation
Association Association
Network/Federation Network/Federation
Other Non State Actor
Table 2.2. ‘Sector(s)’:

Here, you can tick off as many boxes as judged relevant and appropriate; however,
normally your choice should be only ‘Post-secondary education’ if your whole
institution is the applicant. If you apply as a legal Entity within the institution, e.g. the
Faculty of Agriculture, you may in addition tick ‘Agriculture’.
Table 2.3 ‘Target Group(s)’:

Again, you can tick off as many boxes as judged relevant and appropriate. ‘Target
group(s)’ should be understood to include both, immediate (direct) and final (indirect)
ones. For the first, the boxes ‘Educational organisations’, ‘Research
organisations/Researchers’ or ‘Students’ may fit your case; for the second, you can
chose among the proposed options and, if you find none of them relevant, specify in
the box ‘Other’

3. Capacity to manage and implement actions
Table 3.1 ‘Experience by Sector’:

In this table you must complete as many rows as you have ticked boxes in table 2.2.
If, for example, you have ticked ‘Post-secondary Education’ in 2.2, this is the
description you must enter in the first column (Sector).
In the next box to the right (Year(s) of Experience) tick the box that corresponds to
the years of your institution’s experience in post-secondary experience – this would
probably be the number of years your institution exists.
The next box to the right (Experience in the last 3 years) you have to tick only if in the
previous one you have given your experience as being 3 years or less.
In the next box to the right (Number of Projects) give an estimate of the number of
projects your institution as a whole has carried out over the period you have
described in the ‘Years of Experience’ box. We can define a ‘Project’ as “A planned
undertaking of related activities to reach an objective. It has a defined beginning and
end and typically its own funding, accounting, and delivery schedule.” If, for example,
your EDULINK application should be selected and receive funding, this would be a
project in the sense of this definition.
Finally, in the last box (Estimated Amount) try to put a value – expressed in ‘000 € –
to the total number of projects you have defined in the previous box.
Then continue on the next row, if you have ticked other sectors in Table 2.2.
Table 3.2 ‘Experience by Geographical Area’:

In this table you have to translate the information given in table 3.1 into geographical
terms. If all your experience is in your own country, then you have to fill in only one
row and the information you give in the boxes ‘Year(s) of Experience’, ‘Number of
Projects’ and ‘Estimated Amount’ is the same you have given in the corresponding
boxes of table 3.1. If your experience is in several countries or geographical areas
(e.g. East Africa, Caribbean), then you must fill one row for each and break down the
information given in 3.1 regarding ‘Number of Projects’ and ‘Estimated Amount’
between these countries or areas. To note that the ‘Years of Experience’ you indicate
will not necessarily be the same for different countries or areas.
The next table ‘Cross-reference of experience by Sector and by Geographical area’

combines the information you have provided in tables 2.2 and 3.2.
Table 3.3.1 ‘Financial data’:

Here you are requested to provide certain financial information. Depending on the
legal status of your institution, this information may be available in different or only
equivalent form. You should interpret the table accordingly and add explanatory
footnotes as necessary. ‘N’ is the last year for which the information is available –
this should be 2007. ‘N-1’ is 2006 etc.
Table 3.3.2 ‘Financing Source(s):

Indicate sources of funding for your institution for the last 3 years, where year ‘N’ is
the same as year ‘N’ in table 3.3.1.
Table 3.3.3 ‘Number of Staff’:

EU applicants will find the first row most appropriate to indicate the number of staff of
their institution. If some of their staff are (temporarily) seconded to institutions or

projects in ACP countries, they may also make a corresponding entry in the second
row. For ACP applicants, the third row of the table is the most appropriate one.
Please note that you are requested to express the number of staff of your institution
in full-time equivalents. If, for example, you have 20 staff members working for 50%
of their time, this would convert into 10 full-time equivalent staff members.
4. List of the Management Board/Committee of your organisation
List here the members of the supreme decision-making body responsible for your
institution (or, if you are applying as a legal entity within an institution, for that entity).
You don’t have to list members of secondary bodies.

III PARTNERS OF THE APPLICANT PARTICIPATING IN THE ACTION
1 Description of the partners
The following table must be filled in for each partner and numbered (Partner 1,
Partner 2 ….). The information should be provided by the partners to ensure it is
complete and correct.
Partner 1
You have to provide this information only if your institution is
EuropeAid ID number: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/onlineservices/pador)
compulsory.
Indicate the full legal name of the institution. In cases where

the applicant is a legal Entity within an institution, indicate the
Full legal name full name of the Entity followed by the full name of the
institution, e.g. Faculty of Applied Sciences, Kenyatta
University.
Indicate here the date on which the institution was first

Date of Registration
officially registered.
Legal status of the institution or, if applicable of the entity

Legal status
within the institution that acts as a partner.
This is the legal address under which the institution is

Official address of
registered for official purposes. It may be different from the
Registration
postal address.
Indicate the surname and the first name of the person within
Contact person
the institution responsible for its participation in the action.
Telephone number:
Indicate here a general telephone number for the institution if
country code + city code +
there is one.
number
Fax number: country code Indicate here a general fax number for the institution if there is
+ city code + number one.
Indicate a valid email address, preferably a professional

email; yahoo or hotmail addresses are not as reliable. This is
E-mail address important as the email address will be used in case of need
for any additional information or clarifications regarding the
partner’s participation in the application.
Number of employees Please give number in full-time equivalents.

If applicable, please describe any relevant human, financial
Other relevant resources or material resources the institution can mobilise for the
implementation of the action.
Experience of similar
actions, in relation to the Give title, funding agency and amount of funding,
role in the beginning/end, and names of other institutions participating
implementation of the in such actions.
proposed action
History of cooperation If applicable, briefly describe previous cooperation, both

with the applicant formal and informal.
Role and involvement in This regards the institution’s involvement in the preparation
preparing the proposed of the application.
action
Role and involvement in
The description given here must correspond to the one given
implementing the
in section I of the Application Form (The Action).
proposed action
2. Partnership Statement
This statement must be filled in and signed by each of the partners. It is a very
important document as it is the formal proof of the existence of the partnership. The
signature on the partnership statement must be that of a person authorised to legally
represent the institution.
The partnership statement must not be signed by the applicant.
The application must contain the statements of all partners, preferably bearing an
original signature. Faxed copies will be accepted but you may be asked to provide
the original at a later time. Assembling the partnership statements should therefore
be one of the very first activities to be undertaken once the partnership has been
agreed, since experience shows that it may take considerable time to obtain them all.

IV. ASSOCIATES OF THE APPLICANT PARTICIPATING IN THE ACTION
Associates play a real role in the action but may not receive funding from the grant
with the exception of per diem or travel costs. Conversely, they may make a financial
contribution to the project that will be included in the own contribution. Associates do
not have to meet the eligibility criteria set out in section 2.1.1. of the Guidelines for
Applicants.
The following table must be filled in for each associate and numbered (Associate 1,
Associate 2 ….).
Associate 1
Full legal name Indicate the full legal name of the institution.
You have to provide this information only if your institution is
EuropeAid ID number: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/onlineservices/pador)
compulsory.
Legal status Legal status of the institution.
This is the legal address under which the institution is

Official address registered for official purposes. It may be different from the
postal address.
Indicate the surname and the first name of the person within
Contact person
the institution responsible for its participation in the action.
Telephone number:
Indicate here a general telephone number for the institution if
there is one.
number
Fax number:
Indicate here a general fax number for the institution if there is
one.
number
Indicate a valid email address, preferably a professional

email; yahoo or hotmail addresses are not as reliable. This is
E-mail address
important as the email address will be used in case of need
for any additional information or clarifications.
Number of employees Please give number in full-time equivalents.
If applicable, please describe any relevant human, financial

Other relevant resources or material resources your institution can mobilise for the
implementation of the action.
Experience of similar Give title, funding agency and amount of funding,

actions, in relation to the beginning/end, and names of other institutions participating
role in the in such actions.
implementation of the
proposed action
History of cooperation If applicable, briefly describe previous cooperation, both

with the applicant formal and informal.
Role and involvement in This regards the institution’s involvement in the preparation
preparing the proposed of the application.
action
Role and involvement in
The description given here must correspond to the one given
implementing the
in section I of the Application Form (The Action).
proposed action

V. CHECKLIST
Having completed sections II (The Applicant) and III (Partners of the Applicant) you
already have all the information you need to fill in the first table of the Checklist.
Make sure that all the partners appear in the table.
The second table allows you to check once whether your application includes all
essential elements, before you pack and dispatch it. Tick the boxes in the right-hand
columns - they must all be ‘yes’!
VI. DECLARATION BY THE APPLICANT
This declaration must be signed by person authorised to do so on behalf of the

applicant (i.e. the lead institution) and of the consortium (i.e. all the partners). It must
be included in the application as an original – no fax copies will be accepted.
Please read the declaration carefully. In particular, take note of the 5th bullet point,
which refers you to a list of documents in the Guidelines for Applicants that you will
be required to produce within 15 working days, if your application advances to the
final stage of the evaluation process. You will find this further explained in this
Manual in the chapter ‘The Evaluation Process’.
The list of actions you are requested to insert (if applicable) you will largely be able to
produce from the information you have been asked to provide in section I.4
(Experience of similar actions).
VII. ASSESSMENT GRID
This page is added for your information only; do not tick any of the boxes. It will be
completed by the EDULINK PMU, as the evaluation of proposals proceeds and
according to the decisions of the Evaluation Committee. It shows you the different
steps of the evaluation process, which is explained in detail in the following chapter.

THE LAST STEPS
Binding your proposal…
All elements of the proposal should be put together in the precise sequence of the
Application Form and bound in an A4-size binder,
but:
The Checklist (section V of the Application Form) and

The Declaration by the Applicant (section VI of the Application Form)
must be stapled and enclosed separately in the envelope.
Please follow this rule strictly. Non-compliance may not lead to the rejection of your
proposal, but it will complicate the administrative check and the following steps of the
evaluation process. Above all, it will raise doubts as to your management capabilities
and the evaluation of your proposal starts with a burden. Avoid this!
…and sending it!
What to send:
1 original and 1 copy of the paper version of your proposal separately

bound
An electronic version
It must contain exactly the same information as the paper copy and can be
provided in the form of a floppy disc or CD-Rom.
The three components of the application (Application Form, Budget and Logical
Framework) must be submitted in a separate and unique electronic file. Please
provide the Concept Note as a separate file, but otherwise do not split the
Application Form.
Do not sent the electronic copy in pdf format, as this will considerably complicate the
process of entering your application into the EDULINK database! Please use Word
and Excel formats - if you wish, you can add a second electronic pdf copy.
If you submit more than one proposal, each one must be sent separately and
conform to the above instructions.
How, when and where to send your proposal:
You can submit your proposal either by sending it by post or courier service or by
hand-delivering it to the EDULINK Programme Management Unit.
In the first case, please note that the deadline for the 3rd call (18 June 2008) is your
deadline for sending it, not for receipt in Brussels.

In case of hand delivery, you must arrive at the PMU address before 16:00 on the
day of the deadline and you will be given an acknowledgement of receipt to prove it.
Make sure to use the right address, i.e. the address of the EDULINK Programme
Management Unit. Do not use any other address, such as the ACP Secretariat or the
European Commission.
Send your proposal in a sealed envelope labelled as below:
TO: EDULINK Programme Management Unit

c/o Gopa-Cartermill
Rue de Trèves 45
1040 Brussels
BELGIUM
ACP- EU Cooperation Programme in Higher Education (EDULINK)

Call for Proposals name: Open Call for Proposals 2008
Call for Proposals N°3
Publication number: EuropeAid/126851/D/ACT/Multi
FROM:
[ Insert full name and address of the APPLICANT… ]
“Not to be opened before the opening session”
If you use a courier service:
make sure the address on the courier envelope is not only correct, but legible
and includes the PMU telephone number (+32 2 234 37 20);
inform the PMU by email of fax of the sending indicating

o the date of sending
o the name of the courier service
o the courier service’s registration number of the shipment
In any case, keep some documentary proof of having sent your application within the
deadline so that there can be no doubt about it!

THE EVALUATION PROCESS
The Evaluation Committee
Proposals are evaluated by an Evaluation Committee appointed by the ACP

Secretariat. It consists of a non-voting Chairperson, a non-voting Secretary and 3
voting members.
The detailed evaluation will be carried out by a team of independent assessors and
the Evaluation Committee will conduct its deliberations on the basis of their
assessments.
The task of the assessors consists of carrying out a written assessment of the
concept notes and of the full proposals on the basis of the respective evaluation
grids. At least two assessors will assess each concept note and each full proposal,
working independently of each other.
The Evaluation Process
The evaluation process consists of a series of successive steps; each undertaken

only after the previous one has been completed. These steps are:
Publication of Call for Proposals
Receipt and registration of proposals
Opening session and administrative check
Evaluation of Concept Notes
Evaluation of Full Application Forms
Verification of eligibility
Conclusions of the Evaluation Committee
Preparation and signing of contracts

Project implementation

Receipt and registration of proposals
Upon receipt, proposals will be registered and for those delivered by hand a receipt
will be issued. The envelopes remain sealed and in a safe place until the opening
session.
Opening session and administrative check

All proposals received will be opened in an opening session at which the registration
details will be checked and the proposals numbered. Proposals not submitted before
the specified deadline (as evidenced by the postmark or the date of the deposit slip)
will be disqualified at this time. The secretary of the Evaluation Committee supervises
the opening session.
Proposals that have been submitted within the deadline are then subject to an
administrative check, which assesses whether they satisfy all the criteria mentioned
in the checklist shown in section V of the grant Application Form.
Incomplete proposals will be disqualified from the further evaluation process.

However, if only minor inconsistencies are found, the Evaluation Committee may
decide to invite the applicant to submit a clarification within a fixed deadline.
Following the opening session and the administrative check, the Evaluation
Committee meets to decide on any contentious case and signs the Proposal Opening
Session and Administrative Check report.
A standard letter will then be sent to all applicants informing them whether their
application was found to be submitted within the deadline, whether it has satisfied all
the criteria mentioned in the checklist and whether their concept note has been
recommended for further evaluation. The letter will also inform applicants of the
reference number allocated to their proposal that must be used in all further
correspondence.
Evaluation of the Concept Note

In the next phase of the evaluation process, the concept notes of applications
submitted before the deadline and having satisfied the administrative criteria will
undergo an evaluation of the relevance of the action, its effectiveness, as well as of
its feasibility and sustainability on the basis of the evaluation grid shown in the
Guidelines for Applicants. The overall assessment is based on the scores obtained
under each subheading, added up by heading. The final score is the arithmetical
average of the scores given by the two assessors.
The secretary of the Evaluation Committee will then prepare a list of all evaluated
concept notes, ranked by score. At a first step, only the concept notes, which have
been given a score of at least 12 points in the category "Relevance" as well as a
minimum total score of 30 points will be considered for pre-selection.
In a second step, counting in descending order of the total scores, only the concept
notes for which the cumulative sum of grant requests totals no more than twice the
amount available for the Call for Proposals (i.e. 2 x 10 million EUR = 20 million EUR
for the lot 1 et 2 x 6 million EUR = 12 million EUR for the lot 2) will be considered for
pre-selection.
A standard letter will then be sent to the applicants, whose concept notes have been
evaluated, informing them whether their full applications will be evaluated in the next
step of the evaluation process or not. For those applications that will not pass to the

next phase, the letter will include the scores attributed to each section and sub-
section of the concept note.
Evaluation of the Full Application Form

The quality of the full applications forms will be assessed on the basis of the
evaluation grid shown in the Guidelines for Applicants, containing the selection and
award criteria. Comments are made for each heading on the basis of the questions
and criteria used for that heading and, in particular cases, for specific subheadings.
The overall assessment is based on the scores obtained under each subheading,
added up by heading. The final score is the arithmetical average of the scores given
by the two assessors.
Applications not having reached the minimum average score of 20 (out of 25) in the
‘Relevance’ section will be excluded at this point.
The Secretary of the Evaluation Committee will then prepare a list of all the
proposals, ranked by score.
A standard letter will be sent to the applicants, stating whether or not their proposal
has been provisionally selected according to its score, and inviting those whose
proposals have been provisionally selected to supply the supporting documents listed
in the Guidelines for Applicants.
The Committee will furthermore draw up a reserve list comprising a limited number of
proposals having obtained the best scores after those selected for financing. The
proposals included in that list are likely to receive a grant if funds become available
under the call for proposals (decrease of the eligible costs of the selected proposals,
impossibility to sign a contract with a selected applicant, etc). These applicants will
also be invited to supply the supporting documents listed in the Guidelines for
Applicants.
Verification of eligibility
This assessment will be carried out using the Declaration by the Applicant shown in
section VI of the grant Application Form and the criteria set out in the Guidelines for
Applicants.
• Is the Declaration by the Applicant in conformity with the supporting

documents requested?
Any missing supporting document or any incoherence between the
Declaration and the supporting documents will lead to the rejection of the
proposal on that sole basis.
• Eligibility: are the applicant, the partners and action eligible?
Even though the verification of eligibility is foreseen to be carried out only for the
provisionally selected applicants at the end of the evaluation process, the Evaluation
Committee may decide to verify this point at any previous step of the procedure.
Taking into account Good Administrative Practices, the Evaluation Committee can
exclude an applicant at any stage of the evaluation process whenever it is obvious
that the latter does not meet the eligibility criteria.
The Secretary of the Evaluation Committee will draw up a list containing the
proposals which are found to be ineligible. For each entry on the list, the grounds for
ineligibility must be identified.

Conclusions of the Evaluation Committee
The Evaluation Committee will ultimately draw up a list of the proposals selected for
financing. This list is made up of the proposals obtaining the best scores, ranked by
order, within the limits of the funds available under the call for proposals.
However,
• The Committee may not allocate all the available funds if it finds that there are
too few proposals of the quality required to receive a grant.
• The Committee may reject a proposal if it has selected another, which is of a

similar nature but has been awarded a higher score.
• If several proposals submitted by the same applicant are selected for

financing, but the applicant is judged not to have the financial and operational
capacity required to implement the actions all together, the Committee may
reject the proposal(s) which has (have) been awarded a lower score, and
select the proposal(s) that the applicant has the capacity to implement.
The final Evaluation Report, covering the eligibility verification, is drawn up following
the final meeting of the Evaluation Committee. It comprises the evaluation grids, the
minutes of the evaluation sessions and will be signed by all members of the
Evaluation Committee.
Once the approvals have been given, the ACP Secretariat will commence awarding
the grants. The award decision contains the subject and overall amount of the
decision, the approved evaluation report and, where appropriate, the grounds for the
decision by the ACP Secretariat to depart from the recommendations made by the
Evaluation Committee in the report in respect of a particular proposal.
The entire procedure, from the drawing-up of the call for proposals to the selection of
successful applicants, is confidential. The Evaluation Committee's decisions are
collective and its deliberations must remain secret.

A FINAL WORD
In this Manual, which is based on the experience of the 1st and 2nd Calls for
Proposals, we have tried to give you guidance on how to prepare and present your
proposal for the 3rd Call. As we have pointed out in the Introduction, it is not possible
to cover all the questions that YOU may have in YOUR specific situation. Don’t
hesitate therefore to ask the EDULINK Programme Management Unit any question,
to which did not find an answer in this Manual or in the Guidelines for Applicants. The
PMU will do its best to give you a quick and complete reply. However, we once more
point out that the PMU may and will answer only to questions related to the formal
aspects of your proposal. For reasons of impartiality the PMU is not allowed to
answer questions related to the content of a proposal.

Manual To Prepare An EDULINK Application V2

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Manual To Prepare An EDULINK Application V2

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

ACP-EU Cooperation Programme in Higher Education

Background: EDULINK in 2 pages

What’s new in the 3rd Call for Proposals?

Before starting to complete the Application Form

Completing the Application Form

Front page and first page of the Application Form

The Full Application Form

The last steps

The evaluation process

EDULINK Programme Management Unit

PURPOSE • Provide recognised qualifications and

European Union Africa / Caribbean / Pacific

For each call for proposals the Guidelines for

At the research and technology level:

• Enhanced management and financial

EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 4

NEW: Two types of projects

NEW: Sectoral Priorities

Read p. 9 of the Guidelines for Applicants for details.

NOT ENTIRELY NEW: Macros

EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 5

Familiarise yourself with the EDULINK Programme

Read the leaflet ‘EDULINK in 2 Pages’ in the chapter ‘Background’. It

Read the Guidelines for Applicants carefully

Where to find the Guidelines?

From the very beginning, be aware of the deadline for submission

Also Take Into Account ……

EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 6

EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 7

☺ Find a good title for your project

☺ Draft a convincing Concept Note

☺ Make a thorough analysis of the background of your project

☺ Identify clear objectives, methods, results

☺ Develop a well-structured work plan

☺ Make sure to have an appropriate project cycle management

EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 8

☺ Calculate a realistic budget

☺ Have a clear text structure

Within a partnership, it is common practice that each partner will make a

☺ Use good quality language

EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 9

The application failed to pass the administrative check

Quality of the content

EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 10

How many members of the partnership?

Choosing the lead institution

EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 11

The constitution of the partnership is formalised through the so-called ‘partnership

An additional instrument to formalise your partnership is an internal agreement

EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 12

3 sections: (1) Relevance of the action

Full Application Form

7 sections: (I) The Action

+ The following annexes

will only be requested if your proposal is provisionally selected.

• Annex F (Standard Grant Contract) and

EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 13

This line is new!

Total duration of the Must be a minimum of 12 and a maximum of 36 months

Do not write here. This is the

Contact details for the purpose of this action:

EDULINK Manual v. 2.0 14