annual meeting swiss-latvian cooperation programme april 201 2 – march 201 3
DESCRIPTION
ANNUAL MEETING SWISS-LATVIAN COOPERATION PROGRAMME April 201 2 – March 201 3. Riga, 25 April 20 13. Agenda. Financial progress Work plan Risks and action plan Publicity Swissness Conclusions Questions and Answers – NCU/Donors/Executing Agencies. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
1
ANNUAL MEETING SWISS-LATVIAN COOPERATION
PROGRAMMEApril 2012 – March 2013
Riga, 25 April 2013
Agenda
1. Financial progress2. Work plan3. Risks and action plan4. Publicity5. Swissness6. Conclusions7. Questions and Answers
–NCU/Donors/Executing Agencies2
1.Financial progress: Committments (I)
3*Progress achieved during reporting period.
Priority sector
Financial allocation/ committed
grant, million CHF
%(project promoter’s
expenditure vs. committed
grant)till December 2012
% (reimbursements
received vs. committed
grant)till April 2013
1. Security, stability and support for reforms 28,15 75,4% (16,4%*) 72,1% (19,4%*)2. Environment and infrastructure 13 1,5% (0,2%*) 0,3% (0,3%*)3. Promotion of the Private Sector 9,46 77% (3,2%*) 76,5% (3,6%*)4. Human and Social Development 2,34 16,6% (7,7%*) 16,2% (7,4%*)5. Special allocations (excluding Swiss programme management) 3,77 93,1% (20,7%*) 85,7% (41,0%*)
Total allocation for projects 56,72 57,5% (10,4%*) 55% (13,3%*)Swiss programme`s and CRUS management/ Evaluation Committee costs 3,16
Total Swiss Programme’s allocation 59,88
1.Financial progress:Reimbursements (II)
4
Total: 50,4 million CHF*
*Excluding CRUS/Scholarship fund’’s planned reimbursements and 2nd tranche of Sarkandaugava project for which reimbursement plan will be specified after amendments in the Project Agreement in amount 6,3 mill. CHF
1.Financial progress:
Reimbursements for projects in 2012 (III)
5
2.Work plan: 2012/2013Implemented activities (I)
6
2.Work plan: 2012/2013
Delayed activities (II)
7
8
2.Work plan:2013 (III)
9
2.Work plan:2013 (IV)
10
3.Risks and action plan (I)
* Risks and mitigation of them will be presented by responsible Executing Agencies
Mitigation of risk– change of procurement procedure for the 2nd tranche from closed to open tender:1)requires less time (approximately 35 days shorter procedure)2)is more appropriate for competition where the possible range of applicants is known.
11
3. Risks and action plan (II)
Sarkandaugava
3. Risks and
action plan (III)CRUS Scholarships
12
Open Call No.
Available sum per
call
Utilized grant
after call
Utilized grant vs. available per call
Date of announcement -
submission date
Received applic.
Approved applic.
1. 886 233 337 167 38% Sept-Nov/2010 5 32. Sept-Nov/2011 5 2
3.-7. 990 187 500 250 51% Sept-Nov/2012 13 64.
1 001 912
Jan-Apr/2013 5 5. Sept-Nov/2013 6. Jan-Apr/2014 7. Sept-Nov/2014
Total: 1 839 329* 837 417 45,53% 28 11*excluding CRUS management and evaluation committee costs
3. Risks and
action plan (IV)CRUS Scholarships
Mitigation of risk:1)starting from 2013 – calls are launched biannually (previously once per year)2)some of EU Funded projects for researchers (with doctoral degree) in this area has been partly finished 3)information about calls actively provided via webpages, press release, publications in newspapers, e-mails, seminars
13
3. Risks and
action plan (V)Swiss researchers
No.Available sum per
call
Utilized grant after call
Utilized grant vs. available
Open call timing Received applic.
Approved applic.
1. 88 235 20 130 23% 01.03.-30.04.2012 9 9
2. 101 856 14 105 14% 04.09.-05.11.2012 8 73. 123 794 05.03.-06.05.2013
4.-6. 371 382
second half of 2013
till all grant will be used
Total: 529 411 34 235 6,5% 17 16
14
3. Risks and action plan (VI)
Swiss researchers
Mitigation of risk:1)further on – single call stays open on a permanent basis for the remaining period of the Block Grant until all funds are used 2)professors, researchers from Swiss higher education institutions can do lecturing not only in Latvian higher education and research institutions but also in colleges 3) information about calls actively provided via webpages, press releases, publications in newspapers, e-mails, seminars
15
4.Publicity:Attractive examples (I)
NGO Fund
11 best example subproject stories with pictures on SIF web page
16
Encouragement to a healthy lifestyle, Liepaja, in 2011 Health promotion in Limbazi, in 2012
4.Publicity :
Attractive examples (II)Fire safety project
Competition about firesafety issues for schoolchildren from 7th to 8th
grade
17Competition for children ofRiga region, in April 201317
4.Publicity :Attractive examples (III)
Scholarship Fund – Two experience stories from interviewed fellows published on SEDA web page;Swiss researchers – 13 informativeseminars during 2012/2013 for potentialapplicants in highereducation institutions andresearch institutions 18Informative seminar, Riga, 2012
4.Publicity:Attractive examples (IV)Modernization of courts
In Supreme Court of Latvia press conference was held demonstrating installed video/audio equipment in courts/prisons. Widely reflected in mass media, shown in largest Latvian TV channels (LTV1, TV3).
19Closing event, the Supreme Court of Latvia, on 28 June 2012
4.Publicity: Attractive examples (VI) Youth initiatives project
11 opening events of multifunctional youth centres were organized in all Planning Regions of Latvia. Representatives of the Embassy participated in order to emphasize the role played by the Swiss Contribution.
20
Opening of Rūjiena youth centre on 21 September 2013
Opening of Gulbene youth centre on 7 September 2013
5. Swissness (I)
21
NGO Fund– 18 (out of 62) subprojects promotedbilateral co-operation with organizations from Switzerland
Researchers’ positive experiencein Latvia improves future cooperationbetween educational institutions
In Latvia University of Agriculture, in October 2012
22
Sarkandaugava- one subcontractor of remediation works for the 1st
tranche is an enterprise from Switzerland
Fire safety project’sofficial partner – Institution of Fire Safetyand Natural Disasters ofthe Canton of Vaud ofSwitzerland (knowledge exchangevisit for public officialsto Switzerland took place)
5. Swissness (II)
In the Centre of Technics and Logistics in Romanel in the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland, in May 201222
6. Conclusions (I)
23
Swiss Programme is well perceived and highly appreciated in Latvia, especially at regional and local level:Youth centres,School busses,Fire safety systems,NGOs, Micro-lending projects
6. Conclusions (II)
Swiss programme made direct impact to rural and disadvantage areas of Latvia by implementing activities like:providing pupils’ transportation to remote schools and improving fire safety in schools, providing micro-loans,establishment of youth centres, as well as supported local NGO activities,high expectations from courts modernization project thus speeding up judicial procedures.Further co-operation with Switzerland is very important for Latvia and would be highly appreciated. 24
Questions and Answers – NCU/Donors/Executing Agencies
25