Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111 Office: BU 5 3/176 - Tel. direct line +32 229-+32/2/2962017 http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/

EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL REGIONAL AND URBAN POLICY 2014-2020 Policy and Legislation Inter-institutional relations

Brussels, REGIO.DDG1.01/

CALL FOR TENDERS BY OPEN PROCEDURE

N° 2015CE16BAT064

STUDY ON COORDINATION AND HARMONISATION OF THE

ESI FUNDS AND OTHER EU INSTRUMENTS

TENDER SPECIFICATIONS

Ref. Ares(2015)3178613 - 29/07/2015

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INFORMATION ON TENDERING .......................................................................... 3

1.1. Participation ....................................................................................................... 3

1.2. Contractual conditions ....................................................................................... 3

1.3. Joint tenders ....................................................................................................... 3

1.4. Subcontracting ................................................................................................... 3

1.5. Content of the tender ......................................................................................... 3

1.6. Identification of the tenderer: legal capacity and status .................................... 4

2. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS .............................................................................. 5

2.1. Objectives of the Study ..................................................................................... 6

2.2. Methodology ...................................................................................................... 7

2.3. Tasks .................................................................................................................. 7

2.4. Deliverables ..................................................................................................... 15

3. CONTENT AND GRAPHIC REQUIREMENTS OF THE FINAL

DELIVERABLES ..................................................................................................... 16

3.1. Content ............................................................................................................ 17

3.2. Graphic requirements ...................................................................................... 17

4. EVALUATION AND AWARD ............................................................................... 17

4.1. Evaluation steps ............................................................................................... 17

4.2. Exclusion criteria ............................................................................................. 18

4.3. Selection criteria .............................................................................................. 18

4.4. Award criteria .................................................................................................. 20

4.5. Technical offer ................................................................................................. 21

4.6. Financial offer ................................................................................................. 21

3

1. INFORMATION ON TENDERING

1.1. Participation

Participation in this tender procedure is open on equal terms to all natural and legal

persons coming within the scope of the Treaties and to all natural and legal persons in a

third country which has a special agreement with the Union in the field of public

procurement on the conditions laid down in that agreement. Where the Multilateral

Agreement on Government Procurement1 concluded within the WTO applies, the

participation to the call for tender is also open to nationals of the countries that have

ratified this Agreement, on the conditions it lays down.

1.2. Contractual conditions

The tenderer should bear in mind the provisions of the draft contract which specifies the

rights and obligations of the contractor, particularly those on payments, performance of

the contract, confidentiality, and checks and audits.

1.3. Joint tenders

A joint tender is a situation where a tender is submitted by a group of economic operators

(consortium). Joint tenders may include subcontractors in addition to the joint tenderers.

In case of joint tender, all economic operators in a joint tender assume joint and several

liability towards the Contracting Authority for the performance of the contract as a

whole. Nevertheless, tenderers must designate a single point of contact for the

Contracting Authority.

After the award, the Contracting Authority will sign the contract either with all members

of the group, or with the member duly authorised by the other members via a power of

attorney.

1.4. Subcontracting

Subcontracting is permitted in the tender but the contractor will retain full liability

towards the Contracting Authority for performance of the contract as a whole.

Tenderers must give an indication of the proportion of the contract that they intend to

subcontract.

Tenderers are required to identify all subcontractors whose share of the contract is above

10%.

During contract execution, the change of any subcontractor identified in the tender will

be subject to prior written approval of the Contracting Authority.

1.5. Content of the tender

The tenders must be presented as follows:

Part A: Identification of the tenderer (see below 1.6)

1 See http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_E/gproc_e/gp_gpa_e.htm

4

Part B: Evidence for exclusion criteria (see section 4.2)

Part C: Evidence for selection criteria (see section 4.3)

Part D: Technical offer (see section 4.5)

Part E: Financial offer (see section 4.6)

1.6. Identification of the tenderer: legal capacity and status

The tender must include a cover letter presenting the name of the tenderer (including all

entities in case of joint offer) and identified subcontractors if applicable, and the name of

the single contact person in relation to this tender.

If applicable, the cover letter must indicate the proportion of the contract to be

subcontracted.

In case of joint tender, the cover letter must be signed by a duly authorised representative

for each tenderer, or by a single tenderer duly authorised by other tenderers (with power

of attorney).

Subcontractors must provide a letter of intent stating their willingness to provide the

service foreseen in the offer and in line with the present tender specification.

In order to prove their legal capacity and their status, all tenderers must provide a signed

Legal Entity Form with its supporting evidence. The form is available on:

http://ec.europa.eu/budget/contracts_grants/info_contracts/legal_entities/legal_entities_e

n.cfm

Tenderers that are already registered in the Contracting Authority’s accounting system

(i.e. they have already been direct contractors) must provide the form but are not obliged

to provide the supporting evidence.

The tenderer (or the single point of contact in case of joint tender) must provide a

Financial Identification Form and supporting documents. Only one form per offer should

be submitted (no form is needed for subcontractors and other joint tenderers). The form is

available on: http://ec.europa.eu/budget/contracts_grants/info_contracts/index_en.cfm

Tenderers must provide the following information if it has not been included with the

Legal Entity Form:

- For legal persons, a legible copy of the notice of appointment of the persons authorised

to represent the tenderer in dealings with third parties and in legal proceedings, or a copy

of the publication of such appointment if the legislation which applies to the legal entity

concerned requires such publication. Any delegation of this authorisation to another

representative not indicated in the official appointment must be evidenced.

- For natural persons, where applicable, a proof of registration on a professional or trade

register or any other official document showing the registration number.

5

2. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

In its proposals for a 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework2, the Commission set

out an ambitious agenda to simplify and rationalise the EU budget. In line with this

approach, the common provisions for the European Structural and Investment Funds3

bring together the three cohesion policy funds (the European Regional Development

Fund - ERDF, the European Social Fund - ESF - and the Cohesion Fund - CF) and the

agricultural and fisheries funds (the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development

– EAFRD - and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund - EMFF), building on

complementarities and synergies that had developed among these Funds, which are all

delivered under shared management in accordance with Article 59 of the Financial

Regulation4. A significant number of implementation modalities have been aligned for

the five Funds in the new regulatory framework (certain elements of programming,

common eligibility rules, joint approach to financial instruments, a common set of rules

of integrated approaches of territorial development and numerous common rules on

monitoring and evaluation) with the aim to improving their efficiency and to reducing the

administrative costs related to their implementation.

The legislator has sought greater harmonisation of rules under shared management within

the Financial Regulation and between sector-specific regulations to promote

simplification. Nevertheless, differences remain among the ESI Funds notably in the

areas of programming, management and control, and evaluation and monitoring.

Finally, the ESI Funds have become a key investment instrument in the context of the

delivery of the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth ("Europe 2020

strategy") and more recently the 'Job, Growth and Investment Package' of the Juncker

Commission. This has raised the need for "ensuring coherence and coordination between

2 COM(2012) 42 final, 'A simplification Agenda for the MFF 2014-2020' 3 - Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013

laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European

Social Fund (ESF), the Cohesion Fund (CF), the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development

and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European

Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European

Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (hereafter CPR).

- Regulation (EU) No 1299/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013

on specific provisions for the support from the European Regional Development Fund to the European

territorial cooperation goal (referred to as ETC Regulation).

- Regulation (EU) No 1301/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013

on the European Regional Development Fund and on specific provisions concerning the Investment

for growth and jobs goal and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 (hereafter ERDF Regulation).

- Regulation (EU) No 1300/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013

on the Cohesion Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1084/2006 (hereafter CF

Regulation).

- Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013

on the European Social Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 (hereafter ESF

Regulation), including the Youth Employment Initiative

- Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013

on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and

repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 (hereafter EARDF Regulation).

- Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the

European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No

2328/2003, (EC) No 861/2006, (EC) No 1198/2006 and (EC) No 791/2007 and Regulation (EU) No

1255/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (hereafter EMFF Regulation). 4 Regulation (EU, EURATOM) N°966/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council of 25 October

2012 (JO L 298 of 26/10/2012, p.1)

6

all funds covered by the Common Strategic Framework5, maximising synergies with

instruments available at EU level, making full use of innovative financial instruments."6

In this context, the purpose of this study is to assess the extent to which EU priorities

linked to the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth have been

delivered through by the EU budget in a coherent, complementary and coordinated

manner. In view of this, it shall assess the overall coherence, complementarity and

coordination7 between the ESI Funds, and with other EU instruments (either delivered by

grants or through financial instruments). These assessments shall be based on

experiences and results of programming and implementing relevant policies and

instruments in the 2014-2020 period information. The contractors should then assess

options to address the main bottlenecks identified in these areas. The results of the study

will feed into the impact assessment of the Commission's proposal for the post-2020

regulatory framework.

2.1. Objectives of the Study

Following the methodological approach foreseen in the Commission's Impact

Assessment Guidelines8, the study should address the overall issues of coherence,

complementarity and coordination of the ESI Funds and other EU instruments by

achieving the following specific objectives:

A) Assess the coherence, complementarity and coordination of policy objectives (Treaty-

based and those established in the regulatory framework):

‒ between the ESI Funds in the context of shared management,

‒ between the ESI Funds and other EU funding instruments involving grants

(either centrally managed or delivered under shared management),

‒ between the ESI Funds and EU financial instruments and instruments

managed by the European Investment Bank9;

B) Assess the coherence, complementarity and coordination of implementation

mechanisms:

‒ between the ESI Funds in the context of shared management,

‒ between the ESI Funds and other EU funding instruments involving grants

(either centrally managed or delivered under shared management),

‒ between the ESI Funds and EU financial instruments and instruments

managed by the European Investment Bank.

Based on those assessments, the study should then:

5 The Common Strategic Framework has been introduced into the Common Provision Regulation (Art.

10 and Annex I) "to facilitate the sectoral and territorial coordination of Union intervention under the

ESI Funds and with other relevant Union policies and instruments, in line with the targets and

objectives of the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, taking into account key

territorial challenges of the various types of territories." (recital 16 CPR) 6 Mission letter from President Juncker to Commissioner Creţu, 1st November 2014, p. 4:

http://ec.europa.eu/archives/juncker-commission/docs/cretu_en.pdf 7 As elaborated in the framework of the "3C initiative" (http://www.three-cs.net/3cs-defined.html) and

based – among others – on the OECD work under the banner of "policy coherence for development"

(http://www.oecd.org/pcd/). A synthesis of this work is available in the following evaluation report:

http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/evaluation/evaluation_reports/reports/2008/1107_en.pdf 8 http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/guidelines/ug_chap3_en.htm 9 For the purpose of this study European Investment Bank refers to the European Investment Bank

group, which includes the European Investment Fund.

7

C) (i) Identify the main strengths, weaknesses and bottlenecks in delivering EU priorities

through EU instruments in a coherent, complementary and coordinated manner and

suggest a set of options improve their coherence, complementarity and coordination.

(ii) Assess the advantages and disadvantages for each of the options in preparation of the

impact assessment of the Commission's proposal for the post-2020 regulatory

framework.

2.2. Methodology

Objectives A to C should be addressed through:

- desk research based on existing documentation as detailed in the tasks below and

a review of the academic literature as foreseen under task 2;

- 220 interviews and 16 focus groups involving the main relevant actors at EU,

national and regional levels, as well as beneficiaries of the ESI Funds and other

EU instruments.

2.3. Tasks

The study covers 6 tasks. The first task consists of a report setting out the methodological

approach to the different elements of the study. It shall be agreed with the Commission

before proceeding with work on the other tasks. Task 2 consists of a literature review

covering the issues of coherence, complementarity and coordination of the ESI Funds, of

the ESI Funds with other EU instruments, and of the ESI Funds and with EU financial

instruments and other instruments managed by the EIB. Tasks 3 to 5 should deliver

objectives A and B of the study. Task 6 is aligned to objective C of the study as set out in

section 2.1.

Task 1: Methodological report

The consultant shall submit a methodological report of max 50 pages (plus annexes)

setting out its approach to carry out the different tasks covered by this study.

With regard to interviews the methodological report should in particular explain how

interviewees will be selected to ensure the coverage of Commission services, a

representative sample of ESI Funds authorities and beneficiaries, as well as authorities

and beneficiaries of the other EU instruments referred to under Tasks 4 and 5. The

sample of ESI Fund programmes should cover all 28 Member States. It shall also cover

all three categories of regions for programmes financed by the ERDF, the ESF and the

EAFRD, where those categories of regions apply, as well as national and regional

programmes (when both types of programmes exist in one Member State). The sample of

programmes should also cover a proportionate selection of cross-border, transnational

and interregional cooperation programmes financed by the ERDF. Interviews may be

handled on site or via phone calls in the relevant languages. Draft questionnaires to be

used for these interviews and a description of the planned methodologies for analysing

their results should be provided in an annex.

With regards to the focus groups, the methodological report should explain how the

participants in these groups will be selected and how meetings will be organised. Focus

groups should be held at EU level and at national/ regional levels. They should also

involve a representative sample of beneficiaries from Member States. Travel expenditure

of the participants will be covered by this contract.

The report should provide a preliminary list of the literature to be reviewed under Task 2.

8

Task 2: Provide a literature review covering the issues of coherence,

complementarity and coordination between the ESI Funds, and with other EU

instruments (delivered through grants or financial instruments).

Based on existing documentation (previous studies, guidance, reports and evaluations10

)

and on assessments available in the academic literature, the contractors shall provide a

comprehensive overview of how policy coherence and complementarities and

coordination of implementation mechanisms have been addressed (with a specific focus

on the 2007-2013 programming period, but also drawing on earlier literature when

relevant) between the ESI Funds, and with other EU instruments (delivered by grants or

financial instruments and /or by the EIB). They shall establish the list of the main

challenges identified for the coherent, complementary and coordinated implementation of

EU priorities through the EU budget.

Task 3: Assess the overall coherence, complementarity and coordination between

policy objectives and implementation mechanisms of the 2014-2020 ESI Funds in

the context of shared management.

In view of this, the consultants should follow a four-step approach to establish an

overview of the coherence, complementarity and coordination between policy objectives

and of implementation mechanisms of the ESI Funds, at EU and national /regional /

cross-border levels. They should also identify patterns between Member States and

explain the reasons behind successful or less successful coherence, complementarity and

coordination.

First, the consultants should provide a detailed mapping of the policy objectives of each

of the ESI Funds (as defined under objective A, in Section 2.1) in order to assess how

coherence, complementarity and coordination have been established at policy level.

Second, the consultants should identify the mechanisms for the implementation of the

ESI Funds in order to assess the coherence, the complementarity and the coordination of

their implementation mechanisms at EU and national /regional /cross-border levels in

relation to:

‒ the programming phase of the ESI Funds, and in particular where different funds

intervene in the same field (e.g., support to SMEs, broadband, water management,

energy efficiency, climate action, transport, health);

‒ the management and control of the ESI Funds;

‒ the monitoring and evaluation of the ESI Funds, information and communication

processes.

The study should also identify where coordination between the ESI Funds has been

achieved or where it has been perceived as difficult at these three different stages both at

EU and national/ regional/cross-border levels with a view to contribute to the delivery of

EU priorities linked to the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in a

coherent, complementary and coordinated manner through the EU budget.

Third, the contractors should assess to which extent the 2014-2020 regulatory

framework has changed the coherence, complementarity as well as coordination of policy

10 Including ex post evaluations run by DG REGIO on the 2007-2013 programming period, the

evaluation being undertaken for DG CLIMA in autumn 2015, etc.

9

objectives and implementation mechanisms between the ESI Funds in the current

programming period:

In view of this, the study should as a minimum assess the changes brought about by the

following provisions:

- the arrangements for coordination, which are set out by Member States in all

partnership agreements (Art. 15.1(b)(i) of the CPR)11

;

- the introduction of a common menu of 11 thematic objectives as the basis for

priorities that are specific to each of the ESI Funds and are set out in the Fund-

specific rules (Art. 9 CPR);

- the introduction of Common strategic framework (Art.10 and Annex I CPR),

including the use of multi-fund programmes and integrated approaches for

territorial development;

- the introduction of ex ante conditionalities (Art. 19 CPR);

- the common rules for community-led local development (Art. 32-35 CPR);

- the common rules relating to financial support from the ESI Funds (e.g. common

eligibility rules) and to the management and control of programmes;

- the common rules regarding the monitoring and the evaluation of programmes,

including ex ante evaluations and the introduction of common indicators;

- the common rules for financial instruments.

It should also examine how the horizontal principles referred to in Article 5, 7 and 8 of

the CPR (partnership principle, promotion of equality between men and women, non-

discrimination, sustainable development, including namely climate change mitigation

and adaptation) have been implemented in a coherent, complementary and coordinated

manner between the ESI Funds.

Fourth, the consultants should determine whether and to which extent the changes

introduced in the 2014-2020 regulatory framework have contributed to reducing the

administrative burden falling on beneficiaries and the administrative costs falling on

Member State authorities and implementing bodies12

.

The analysis for these tasks should be based on a combination of:

‒ desk-research (based on the analysis of the regulatory framework and on the

literature review established under task 2) and;

‒ interviews (x 60) and focus groups involving about 20 experts covering the 5 ESI

Funds (x 3 – to discuss programming, management and control and monitoring

and evaluation respectively) to collect the views of relevant actors at EU,

national, regional, cross-border levels, as well as of beneficiaries on whether and

how coordination mechanisms have improved.

11 A mapping of these arrangements in partnership agreements and programmes financed by the ERDF

and the CF, including multi-fund operational programmes financed by the ESF and ETC programmes

financed by the ERDF has been commissioned in 2014 by DG REGIO. See the Service Request Nr

2014CE16BAT061 of the study on the use of the new provisions during the programming phase of the

ESI Funds:

http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/studies/pdf/provision_2014/tor_new_provision.p

df

The results of this analysis will be made available to the contractor. 12 This work should take account of the results of the study on the use of new provisions on

simplification during the early implementation phase of the European Structural and Investment (ESI)

Funds that was launched by DG REGIO in 2015.

10

Task 4: Assess the overall coherence, complementarity and coordination between

the policy objectives and the implementation mechanisms of the ESI Funds and

other EU instruments delivered through grants, in the context of direct or indirect

management by the Commission or shared management with the Member States

and regions.

Given their broad thematic coverage, the ESI Funds intervene in areas where other EU

funding instruments also intervene to deliver EU priorities, therefore raising the question

of the coherence, complementarity and coordination of the different funding instruments

in achieving EU policy objectives.

In view of this, the consultants should follow the same four-step approach as under

Task 3. They should establish an overview of the coherence, complementarities and

coordination mechanisms of the ESI Funds with other EU instruments delivered through

grants, both at EU and national / regional levels. In order to streamline the approach, they

should undertake the analysis by thematic objective (Article 9 of the CPR) and look for

potential patterns across different types of budget delivery modes (centrally /

shared management) and Member States. They should also identify the reasons

behind successful or less successful coherence, complementarity and coordination in

respective cases.

First, the consultants should provide a detailed mapping of the policy objectives (as

defined under objective A, in Section 2.1) of the following EU sectoral funding

instruments delivered through grants (building, where appropriate on already existing

sectoral policy mapping), and assess how coherence and complementarities have been

established between them and the ESI Funds, taking account of the fact that these EU

instruments can be both:

‒ centrally managed by the Commission (Horizon 202013

; Competitiveness of

Enterprises and Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (COSME)

14; Connecting

Europe Facility (CEF)15

; Programme for the Environment and Climate Action

(LIFE)16

; EU programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI)17

; the

European Globalisation Adjustment Fund18

; Erasmus +19

; Creative Europe20

; the

13 Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013

establishing Horizon 2020 - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) and

repealing Decision No 1982/2006/EC 14 Regulation (EU) No 1287/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013

establishing a Programme for the Competitiveness of Enterprises and small and medium-sized

enterprises (COSME) (2014 - 2020) and repealing Decision No 1639/2006/EC 15 Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December

2013establishing the Connecting Europe Facility, amending Regulation (EU) No 913/2010 and

repealing Regulations (EC) No 680/2007 and (EC) No 67/2010 16 Regulation (EU) No 1293/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013

on the establishment of a Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE) and repealing

Regulation (EC) No 614/2007 17 Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013

on a European Union Programme for Employment and Social Innovation ("EaSI") and amending

Decision No 283/2010/EU establishing a European Progress Microfinance Facility for employment

and social inclusion 18

Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013

on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014-2020) and repealing Regulation (EC) No

1927/2006 19 Regulation (EU) No 1288/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013

establishing 'Erasmus+': the Union programme for education, training, youth and sport and repealing

Decisions No 1719/2006/EC, No 1720/2006/EC and No 1298/2008/EC

11

EU Health Programme21

; Justice Programme22

; Rights, Equality and Citizenship

Programme23

; the European Development Fund24

);

‒ or delivered under shared management (instruments other than the EARDF

under the Common Agriculture Policy; instrument other than the EMFF under

Integrated Maritime Policy; the Pre-Accession Instrument25

; the European

Neighbourhood Instrument26

; the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived27

;

the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF)28

; the European Union

Solidarity Fund29

).

Second, the consultants should identify the mechanisms for the implementation of these

EU instruments at the stages of programming, management and control, and monitoring

and evaluation. They should then assess to which extent the implementation mechanisms

of the ESI Funds identified under Task 3 are consistent and coordinated with the delivery

mechanisms of these EU instruments delivered through grants at EU and national /

regional level, where applicable.

The consultants should also determine where coherence, complementarity and

coordination between the ESI Funds and other EU instruments has been achieved or

where it has been perceived as difficult at each of the three stages set out above, both at

EU and national/ regional levels, where applicable.

Third, the contractors should assess to which extent the 2014-2020 regulatory

framework has changed the coherence, complementarity as well as coordination of policy

objectives and implementation mechanisms between the ESI Funds and the above-

mentioned EU instruments in the current programming period:

In view of this, the study should as a minimum assess the changes brought about by the

common provisions referred to under Task 3 (p.9), where applicable.

20 Regulation (EU) No 1295/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013

establishing the Creative Europe Programme (2014 to 2020) and repealing Decisions No

1718/2006/EC, No 1855/2006/EC and No 1041/2009/EC 21 Regulation (EU) No 282/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 on the

establishment of a third Programme for the Union's action in the field of health (2014-2020) and

repealing Decision No 1350/2007/EC 22 Regulation (EU) No 1382/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013

establishing a Justice Programme for the period 2014 to 2020 23 Regulation (EU) No 1381/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013

establishing a Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme for the period 2014 to 2020 24 Regulation (EC) No 215/2008 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European

Development Fund 25 Regulation (EU) No 231/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014

establishing an Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) 26 Regulation (EU) No 232/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014

establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument 27 Regulation (EU) No 223/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 on the

Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived 28 Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014

establishing the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, amending Council Decision 2008/381/EC

and repealing Decisions No 573/2007/EC and No 575/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the

Council and Council Decision 2007/435/EC 29 Regulation (EU) No 661/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014

amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund

12

The study should also assess to which extent guidance documents produced by the

Commission - the Guide for synergies30

and the Guidance for beneficiaries31

-

contributed to foster synergies (i.e. coordinated strategic choices and planning) between

the ESI Funds and other EU instruments delivered through grants.

Fourth, the consultants should determine whether and to which extent the changes

introduced in the 2014-2020 regulatory framework have contributed to reducing the

administrative burden falling on beneficiaries and the administrative costs falling on

Member State authorities and implementing bodies.

The analysis for these tasks should be based on a combination of:

‒ desk-research (based on the analysis of the regulatory framework and on the

literature review established under task 2);

‒ information and results from other studies or surveys made available by the ESIF

DGs;

‒ interviews (x 100) and focus groups (x 11 – one per thematic objective) involving

about 20 experts to collect the views of relevant actors at EU, national and

regional levels, as well as of beneficiaries on whether and how coordination

mechanisms have improved.

Task 5: Assess the overall coherence, complementarity and coordination between

policy objectives and implementation mechanisms of the ESI Funds and EU

financial instruments or instruments managed by the European Investment Bank

(EIB).

EU financial instruments and instruments managed by the EIB play an increasingly

important role in the delivery of EU priorities. The issues of the coherence,

complementarity and coordination between the ESI Funds, which are delivered under

shared management, and those instruments therefore deserves a specific analysis in the

context of the study.

In view of this, the consultants should establish an overview of the coherence,

complementarities and coordination mechanisms between the ESI Funds and EU

financial instruments and / or managed by the EIB both at EU and national / regional

levels. They should also identify the reasons behind successful or less successful

coherence, complementarity and coordination in some instances.

First, the consultants should provide a detailed mapping of the policy objectives (as

defined under objective A, in Section 2.1) of the following EU financial instruments and

instruments managed by the EIB:

‒ the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI)32

;

30 The Staff Working Document 2014-205 "Enabling synergies between European Structural and

Investment Funds, Horizon 2020 and other research, innovation and competitiveness-related Union

programmes) was published in June 2014 to help staff and organisation finding explanations on the

basic rules and principles for obtaining synergies and combining the different funds:

http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/guides/synergy/synergies_en.pdf 31 http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/guides/2014/guidance-for-

beneficiaries-of-european-structural-and-investment-funds-and-related-eu-instruments 32 Regulation (EU) 2015/1017 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 June 2015 on the

European Fund for Strategic Investments, the European Investment Advisory Hub and the European

Investment Project Portal and amending Regulations (EU) No 1291/2013 and (EU) No 1316/2013 —

the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI)

13

‒ financial instruments financed by the Connecting Europe Facility;

‒ InnovFin33

;

‒ financial instruments financed through the COSME programme (the Equity

Facility for Growth (EFG) and the Loan Guarantee Facility (LGF)34

;

‒ the SME Initiative35

;

‒ European Energy Efficiency Fund (EEEF)36

;

‒ the European Local Energy Assistance (ELENA) facility37

;

‒ the Union Civil Protection Mechanism38

;

‒ the New Entrants Reserve (NER) 300 programme39

;

‒ financial instruments financed through the LIFE programme40

(Natural Capital

Financing Facility and Private Finance for Energy Efficiency);

‒ financial instruments and advisory services financed through the Employment and

Social Innovation programme (EaSI);

‒ Erasmus + Master Loan Guarantee Facility41

;

Creative Europe Guarantee Facility.

They should assess how coherence, complementarity and coordination have been

established between the ESI Funds and the above-mentioned EU instruments at a policy

level.

Second, the consultants should identify the mechanisms for the implementation of

corresponding EU financial instruments and instruments managed by the EIB at the

stages of programming, management and control, and monitoring and evaluation. They

should then assess to which extent the implementation mechanisms of the ESI Funds

identified under Task 3 are coordinated with the implementation mechanisms of these

instruments at EU and national / regional level, where applicable. Complementarities and

potential overlapping between the different instruments should be highlighted.

They should also determine where coherence, complementarity and coordination

between the ESI Funds and EU financial instruments and other EU instruments managed

by the European Investment Bank has been achieved or has been perceived as difficult at

this stage both at EU and national/ regional levels.

Third, the contractors should assess to which extent the 2014-2020 regulatory

framework has changed the coherence, complementarity and coordination of policy

objectives and implementation mechanisms between the ESI Funds and the above-

mentioned EU instruments delivered through financial instruments in the current

programming period:

33 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-670_en.htm 34 http://ec.europa.eu/growth/access-to-finance/cosme-financial-instruments/index_en.htm 35 http://www.eif.org/what_we_do/guarantees/sme_initiative/index.htm 36 http://www.eeef.eu/ 37 http://www.eib.org/products/advising/elena/index.htm 38 DECISION No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013

http://www.gsa.europa.eu/gnss-funding-guide/eu-grants/civil-protection-financial-instrument 39 Commission decision of 3 November 2010 laying down criteria and measures for the financing of

commercial demonstration projects that aim at the environmentally safe capture and geological storage

of CO2 as well as demonstration projects of innovative renewable energy technologies under the

scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community established by Directive

2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council 40 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/funding/financial_instruments/ 41 http://ec.europa.eu/education/opportunities/higher-education/doc/erasmus-plus-master-loan_en.pdf

14

In view of this, the study should as a minimum assess the changes brought about by the

common provisions referred to under Task 3 (p.9), where applicable.

The study should also assess to which extent guidance documents produced by the

Commission - the Guide for synergies and the Guidance for beneficiaries - contributed to

foster synergies (i.e. coordinated strategic choices and planning) between the ESI Funds

and other EU instruments.

Fourth, the consultants should determine whether and to which extent the changes

introduced in the 2014-2020 regulatory framework have contributed to reducing the

administrative burden falling on beneficiaries and the administrative costs falling on

Member State authorities and implementing bodies.

The analysis of these tasks should be based on a combination of:

‒ desk-research (based on the analysis of the regulatory framework and on the

literature review established under task 2) and;

‒ interviews (x 60) and focus groups (x 2 – one relating to the coordination of the

ESI Funds with the EFSI and the other to the coordination of the ESI Funds with

other EU financial instruments and instruments managed by the EIB) involving

about 20 experts to collect the views of relevant actors at EU, national and

regional levels, as well as of beneficiaries on whether and how coordination

mechanisms have improved.

Task 6: Identify the main strengths, weaknesses and bottlenecks in delivering EU

priorities through EU instruments in a coherent, complementary and coordinated

manner and suggest a set of options to improve their coherence, complementarity

and coordination. Assess the advantages and disadvantages for each of the options.

Based on the results of tasks 3, 4 and 5, the contractors should identify the main strengths

and weaknesses, as well as the bottlenecks in delivering EU priorities linked to the Union

strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in a coherent, complementary and

coordinated manner through the following EU instruments:

‒ the ESI Funds in the framework of the shared management rules;

‒ the ESI Funds and other EU funding instruments delivered through grants;

‒ the ESI Funds and EU financial instruments and instruments managed by the

EIB.

Based on this, they should then:

‒ suggest a set of options to improve the coherence, complementarity and

coordination of these EU instruments, taking account of the different approaches

developed over time at EU, national and regional levels;

‒ assess the advantages and disadvantages of each option in view of the preparation

of the impact assessment related to the Commission's proposal for the post-2020

regulatory framework.

Based on this, the consultants should support the Commission in preparing and animating

at least two workshops involving Commission services, as well as external academic

experts in order to validate a limited number of options in view of the Impact assessment.

15

At least two weeks before the workshops, the consultant will prepare and provide to the

Commission an issues paper summarising the results of the project and the main options

to be discussed in the workshops. The results of the workshops will feed into the final

report of the study. The contractor will draft a detailed summary of the workshops.

The Commission will provide the premises and catering for these workshops.

2.4. Deliverables

The contractor is expected to provide the following deliverables:

1. Methodological report: a report (max 50 pages plus annexes) describing the

methodology that will be applied to the study, as set out under task 1.

2. Four Interim reports:

‒ first interim report covering tasks 2 and 3

‒ second interim report covering task 4

‒ third interim report covering tasks 5

‒ fourth interim report covering tasks 6.

3. Draft final report: covering tasks 2 to 6 as well as an executive summary of

the entire draft report itself (tasks 2 to 6).

4. Final report: it shall include the final report itself (no more than 150 pages

plus annexes) addressing all the specific objectives (A-C) of the study. It shall

also include an abstract of no more than 200 words, a publishable executive

summary of maximum 6 pages, in English, French and German, key words to

facilitate web referencing of the study. It should finally include a power-point

summarising the results and conclusions.

All the different deliverables shall be submitted in English in an easily accessible style.

French and German versions have to be provided for the Executive Summary and the

abstract only. Detailed information on the format is provided in section 3.

Each deliverable will be examined by the Commission (a DG REGIO-led steering

group), which may ask for additional modifications or propose changes in order to

redirect the work if necessary. Within the steering group, DG EMPL will take the lead on

thematic objectives 8 (employment), 9 (social inclusion), 10 (education) and 11

(administrative capacity) under task 4. Deliverables must be approved by the

Commission.

The specific deadline for each deliverable is specified below and starts on the date of the

entry into force of the specific contract. The study envisages several meetings in Brussels

with the steering group in relation to the deliverables.

After the approval of the final report by the European Commission, the contractor will be

expected to give an oral presentation of its final report, highlighting its main results and

conclusions. This presentation will take place in Brussels and within Commission

premises. Costs relating to the organisation of this presentation will be covered by the

overall budget of the contract.

The contractor is expected to attend 9 meetings to be held at the Commission premises

for kicking off the project, discussing the deliverables with the members of Commission

16

staff (Steering Group), organising the workshops and presenting the final report to

Commission services. These meetings will be organised by the Commission.

End

month*

Deliverable/

Meeting

Output

0 M1 Kick-off meeting with the Commission services

1.5 D1 Methodological report covering task 1 (D1)

2 M2 Meeting to discuss the methodological report

6 D2 First interim report covering tasks 2 and 3 (D2)

6.5 M3 Meeting to discuss first interim report (tasks 2 and 3) with the

Commission services

7.5 D4 Second interim report covering task 4 (D3)

8 M4 Meeting to discuss second interim report (tasks 4) with the

Commission services

10 D5 Third interim report covering tasks 5 (D4)

10.5 M5 Meeting to discuss third interim report (task 5) with the

Commission services

12 D5 Fourth interim report covering tasks 6 (D5)

12.5 M6 Meeting to discuss third interim report (task 6) with the

Commission services

13.5 M7 / M8 Workshops to discuss with stakeholders the options set out in the

fourth interim report (task 6)

15 D6 Draft final report (covering tasks 2 to 6)

15.5 M9 Meeting to discuss first draft final report with the Commission

services

17 D7 Final report

17+1 Oral presentation of final report * Starting at the entry into force of the contract.

A hard copy and an electronic version of draft versions of reports are required. For the

final report four hard copies and an electronic version (four CDs, Word format and PDF

format or equivalent application compatible with MS Office) are required.

3. CONTENT AND GRAPHIC REQUIREMENTS OF THE FINAL DELIVERABLES

All studies produced for the European Commission and Executive Agencies shall

conform to the corporate visual identity of the European Commission by applying the

graphic rules set out in the European Commission's Visual Identity Manual, including its

logo42

.

The Commission is committed to making online information as accessible as possible to

the largest possible number of users including those with visual, auditory, cognitive or

physical disabilities, and those not having the latest technologies. The Commission

supports the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 of the W3C.

For full details on Commission policy on accessibility for information providers, see: http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/standards/accessibility/index_en.htm Pdf versions of studies destined for online publication should respect W3C guidelines for

accessible pdf documents. See: http://www.w3.org/WAI/

42 The Visual Identity Manual of the European Commission is available upon request. Requests should

be made to the following e-mail address: comm-visual-identity@ec.europa.eu

17

3.1. Content

The final study report shall include:

‒ an abstract of no more than 200 words, an executive summary of maximum 6

pages, both in English, French and German, and key words to facilitate web

referecing of the study;

‒ the following standard disclaimer:

“The information and views set out in this study are those of the author(s) and do not

necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not

guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor

any person acting on the Commission’s behalf may be held responsible for the use which

may be made of the information contained therein.”

‒ specific identifiers which shall be incorporated on the cover page provided by

the Contracting Authority.

The publishable executive summary shall be provided in both in English, French and

German, and shall include:

– the following standard disclaimer:

“The information and views set out in this study are those of the author(s) and do

not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does

not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this study. Neither the

Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf may be held

responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein.”

– specific identifiers which shall be incorporated on the cover page provided by the

Contracting Authority.

3.2. Graphic requirements

For graphic requirements please refer to the template published with these specifications

on the Inforegio website. The cover page shall be filled in by the contractor in

accordance with the instructions provided in the template. For further details you may

also contact comm-visual-identity@ec.europa.eu.

4. EVALUATION AND AWARD

4.1. Evaluation steps

The evaluation is based on the information provided in the submitted tender. It takes

place in three steps:

(1) Verification of non-exclusion of tenderers on the basis of the exclusion criteria

(2) Selection of tenderers on the basis of selection criteria

(3) Evaluation of tenders on the basis of the award criteria

Only tenders meeting the requirements of one step will pass on to the next step.

18

4.2. Exclusion criteria

All tenderers shall provide a declaration on their honour (see Annex 1), duly signed and

dated by an authorised representative, stating that they are not in one of the situations of

exclusion listed in the Annex 1.

The declaration on honour is also required for identified subcontractors whose intended

share of the contract is above 10%.

The successful tenderer shall provide the documents mentioned as supporting evidence in

Annex 1 before signature of the contract and within a deadline given by the contracting

authority. This requirement applies to all members of the consortium in case of joint

tender and to identified subcontractors whose intended share of the contract is above

10%.

4.3. Selection criteria

Tenderers must prove their economic, financial, technical and professional capacity to

carry out the work subject to this call for tender.

The evidence requested should be provided by each member of the group in case of joint

tender and identified subcontractor whose intended share of the contract is above 10%.

However a consolidated assessment will be made to verify compliance with the

minimum capacity levels.

The tenderer may rely on the capacities of other entities, regardless of the legal nature of

the links which it has with them. It must in that case prove to the Contracting Authority

that it will have at its disposal the resources necessary for performance of the contract,

for example by producing an undertaking on the part of those entities to place those

resources at its disposal.

4.3.1. Economic and financial capacity criteria and evidence

In order to prove their economic and financial capacity, the tenderer (i.e. in case of joint

tender, the combined capacity of all members of the consortium and identified

subcontractors) must comply with the following criteria: they must demonstrate a

turnover of the last two financial years above € 1.500.000.

The following evidence should be provided:

– Copy of the profit & loss account and balance sheet for the last two years for

which accounts have been closed,

– Failing that, appropriate statements from banks,

– If applicable, evidence of professional risk indemnity insurance.

If, for some exceptional reason which the Contracting Authority considers justified, a

tenderer is unable to provide one or other of the above documents, he or she may prove

his or her economic and financial capacity by any other document which the Contracting

Authority considers appropriate. In any case, the Contracting Authority must at least be

notified of the exceptional reason and its justification in the tender. The Commission

19

reserves the right to request any other document enabling it to verify the tenderer's

economic and financial capacity.

4.3.2. Technical and professional capacity criteria and evidence

a. Criteria relating to tenderers

Tenderers (in case of a joint tender the combined capacity of all tenderers and identified

subcontractors) must comply with the following criteria:

– The tenderer must prove experience in the field of Cohesion policy and the ESI

Funds, in particular as regards their implementation mechanisms under shared

management with at least 3 projects delivered in this field in the last three years

and covering more than two Member States.

– The tenderer must prove knowledge of fundamental features of EU policy other

than Cohesion policy and their delivery modes (direct or indirect management by

the Commission or shared management with the Member States and regions) as

well as knowledge of EU instruments delivered through financial instruments or

by the European Investment Bank (EIB). Expertise in the analysis of EU policies

and instruments delivery modes will be required at European, national and

regional level. This must be proved with at least 3 projects delivered in these

areas in the last three years.

– The tenderer must prove capacity of working (read documents and communicate)

in 2243

EU official languages (Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian,

Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Polish,

Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak, Slovenian, Spanish and Swedish). This could, for

example, be demonstrated by means of proven experience with projects

successfully implemented in different Member States, candidate and/or third

countries, with at least 3 projects delivered in the last three years showing the

necessary language coverage.

– The tenderer must prove capacity to draft reports in English.

– The tenderer must prove experience of working in at least 10 EU countries with at

least 3 projects delivered in the last three years, the combination of which must

show the necessary coverage.

– The tenderer must prove experience in coordination of multidisciplinary

analytical projects covering different type of policies.

b. Criteria relating to the team delivering the service:

The team delivering the service should include, as a minimum, the following profiles:

Project Manager: At least 6 years' experience in project management, including

overseeing project delivery, quality control of delivered service, client orientation and

conflict resolution experience, with experience in management of team of at least 5

people.

43 The European Union currently has 24 official languages. For the purpose of this contract no

knowledge of Irish and Maltese is requested.

20

Language quality check: at least 2 members of the team should have native-level

language skills in English or equivalent44

, as guaranteed by a certificate or past relevant

experience.

Expert in EU cohesion policy and ESI Funds: Relevant higher education degree and / or

6 years' professional experience in the field of implementation mechanisms of the ESI

Funds, including financial instruments.

Expert in each of the main areas of EU policies: Relevant higher education degree and /

or 6 years' professional experience covering e.g. research and innovation, SME support,

sustainable growth, human capital, justice, transport, etc.

c. Evidence:

The following evidence should be provided to fulfil the above criteria:

– List of relevant services provided in the past three years, with sums, dates and

recipients, public or private. The most important services shall be accompanied

by certificates of satisfactory execution, specifying that they have been carried

out in a professional manner and have been fully completed;

– The educational and professional qualifications of the persons who will provide

the service for this tender (CVs) including the management staff. Each CV

provided should indicate the intended function in the delivery of the service.

4.4. Award criteria

The tender will be awarded according to the best-value-for -money procedure. The

quality of the tender will be evaluated based on the following criteria. The maximum

total quality score is 100 points.

4.4.1 Quality of the proposed methodology (50 points - – minimum threshold 50%)

– This criterion will assess the quality and the appropriateness of the methodology set

out in the tender and of the specific methodology illustrated for each task. In view of

this, the tenderers should provide a synthetic and exhaustive description of the

approaches they intend to use for this study and the methods they intend to follow.

This description should be detailed to the level of the different Funds to be covered. It

should in particular contain a description of how the tenders intend to liaise and

cooperate with all the relevant stakeholders at EU national and regional level and at

the level of beneficiaries (differentiated approach for interviews and focus groups).

– The completeness, the clarity and the relevance of the technical approach in respect

of the tasks described in the tender specifications under point 2 as well as the degree

to which all relevant issues are covered.

– Appropriate design of the technical approach as to produce reliable data, sound

analysis, credible findings and valid conclusions. In view of this, the tasks envisaged

shall be precisely described, including elements such as the sources of information,

collection of data and analytical tools employed.

44 At least Level C2 according to the Council of Europe's Common European Framework of Reference

for Languages: see http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/CADRE_EN.asp

21

Tenderers should give a thorough description of the approach proposed to attain the

Commission's objectives and to provide the requested output

4.4.2 Organisation of the work (30 points – minimum threshold 50%)

Tenderers should provide a synthetic and exhaustive description of the approaches they

intend to use towards project management. The description should provide details on

how the roles and responsibilities of the proposed team and of the economic operators (in

case of joint tenders, including subcontractors if applicable) are distributed for each task.

It also assesses the global allocation of time and resources to the project and to each task

or deliverable, and whether this allocation is adequate for the work. The tender should

provide details on the allocation of time and resources and the rationale behind the choice

of this allocation.

4.4.3 Quality control measures (20 points – minimum threshold 50%)

This criterion will assess the quality control system applied to the service foreseen in this

tender specification concerning the quality of the deliverables, the language quality

check, and continuity of the service in case of absence of the member of the team. The

quality system should be detailed in the tender and specific to the tasks at hand; a generic

quality system will result in a low score.

Tenders must score minimum 50% for each criterion, and minimum 60% in total.

Tenders that do not reach the minimum quality thresholds will be rejected and will not be

ranked.

After evaluation of the quality of the tender, the tenders are ranked using the formula

below to determine the tender offering best value for money. A weight of 60/40 is given

to quality and price.

( )

( )

(

)

The successful tender will be the one with the highest mark.

4.5. Technical offer

The technical offer must cover all aspects and tasks required in the technical specification

and provide all the information needed to apply the award criteria. Offers deviating from

the requirements or not covering all requirements may be excluded on the basis of non-

conformity with the tender specifications and will not be evaluated.

4.6. Financial offer

The price for the tender must be quoted in euro. Tenderers from countries outside the euro

zone have to quote their prices in euro. The price quoted may not be revised in line with

exchange rate movements. It is for the tenderer to assume the risks or the benefits

deriving from any variation.

Prices must be quoted free of all duties, taxes and other charges, including VAT, as the

European Union is exempt from such charges under Articles 3 and 4 of the Protocol on the

22

privileges and immunities of the European Union. The amount of VAT may be shown

separately.

The quoted price must be a fixed amount which includes all charges (including travel and

subsistence). Travel and subsistence expenses are not refundable separately.