EvalPartners Small Grants Program
Call for Proposals 2016
1. Project Title: ARK2GEA - Transnational cooperation Albania-Romania-Kosovo towards the
implementation of Global Evaluation Agenda 2016-2020
2. Partners:
Organization name/ Abbreviation
Albanian Society of Program Evaluation (ASPE)
Romanian Society of Evaluators (RoSE)
Kosovo Evaluation Network (KEN)
Status
(VOPE, academic
institution, NGO,
government agency)
VOPE – National level
VOPE – National level
VOPE – National level
Country
Albania
Romania
Kosovo
Established in October 2011, Albanian Society of Programme Evaluation (ASPE) has defined its mission
as contributing to the development of evaluation in Albania and promoting the use of evaluation in
public and private organizations. Its strategy for the institutionalization of evaluation in Albania is based
on the bottom up model from the local government to the central government. Having this vision, ASPE
has already successfully implemented three projects under the EvalPartners Initiative. The project
EvAlbania 1 implemented in 2012 as a pilot project under P2P EvalPartners initiative aimed to provide
advocacy and awareness on the importance of evaluation throughout all organizational levels in Albania
- Central Government, Local Governments, Academia, and Civil Society. The project EvAlbania 2
implemented in 2014 aimed to create the conditions for establishment of evaluation departments in
Albanian municipalities. The Project EvALRO implemented in 2015 aimed to enhance professional
capacities and developing practices that recognize and promote cultural diversity and gender equality in
evaluation.
Romanian Society of Evaluators (RoSE) has brought a fruitful contribution in strengthening individual
capacities of evaluators by developing occupational standards, that were enforced in 2012 by the
Government, by providing education and training in evaluation and by developing codes of ethics and
practice based on Gender+ principles. As a member of EvalPartners’ Network since 2014, RoSE has
strengthened its institutional capacity and participated in the process of adoption of GEA. Since 2015,
RoSE members have joined EP initiatives (EvalGender+ and Professionalization). The National Study on
Gender+, carried out by RoSE by using IOCE methodology, identified the main problems that affect a
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
Page 1
sound evaluation capacity in Romania. GEA1is a very good guide on the way to address these problems
and P2P provides the best opportunity for appropriate intervention.
Kosovo Evaluation Network (KEN), as an informal network, was established under the umbrella of
LAPSI's jurisdiction and is mostly comprised of LAPSI networking professionals. LAPSI Members serve as
KEN Founding Members at the same time. Our experts possess a strong background in evaluation of
strategic policy documents at both central and local level (i.e. Kosovo National Development Strategy).
We possess an invaluable experience in providing economic research and analysis services to a number
of Kosovo Institutions as well as think tanks.
Considering the gap that exists concerning VOPE's in Kosovo, we at LAPSI mobilized our resources in
order to bring to life the first VOPE in Kosovo, KEN. Its utmost mission is to achieve the objectives set in
the Global Agenda 2020. We strongly believe in the development of evaluation mainstreaming and
promotion of professional education for evaluators, which would ultimately comply with LAPSI mission.
KEN is a newborn VOPE. Its main activities are planned in the 'Work plan for 2016-2017: Enlargement of
the network', which would be supported and closely monitored by LAPSI.
3. Project team (at least 3 per VOPE, including at least one woman, and at least one young and
emerging evaluator)
Name
Gender
Age
Affiliation
Fation Luli
Male
46
President, ASPE
Suela Sefa,
Female
39
Board Member,
ASPE
Telida Asllani
Female
42
Board Member,
ASPE
Elira SUKRAJA
Female
31
Board Member,
ASPE
Valon Grabanica
Male
29
President, KEN
1
Responsibilities under this
project
Project Manager, senior
evaluator, in charge with
overall P2P Project
management, planning,
implementation, evaluation,
reporting
Senior evaluator, responsible
for research, planning, action
plan and research and
development of tools and
implementation national
studies
University lecturer, responsible
for provision of education and
training, development of joint
tools and advocacy campaigns
Emerging young evaluator,
responsible for communication
and dissemination, curricula
development and financial
management and reporting
Project Manager with vast
professional experience in the
field of policy evaluation and
analysis. Vast experience in
providing economic research
and analysis services to a
GEA – Global Evaluation Agenda 2016-2020
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
Page 2
Besnik Cecelia
Male
30
Board Member, KEN
Vedat Sagonjeva
Male
33
Board Member, KEN
Virgil Pamfil
Male
63
Board Member,
Romanian Society of
Evaluators
Mirela Mustata
Female
47
Member,
Romanian Society of
Evaluators
Tatiana Bratescu
Female
55
President,
Romanian Society of
Evaluators
Liviu Proteasa
Male
30
Board Member,
Romanian Society of
Evaluators
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
number of Kosovo Institutions
as well as think tanks.
Young sector evaluation
expert and trainer in value
chain analysis. Consultant in
economic development,
business enabling
environment, international
trade and value chain analysis
in various UNDP and Kosovo
Chamber of Commerce
projects.
Senior evaluator and trainer,
responsible for research,
National Development
Strategy and Economic Reform
Program in Kosovo expert and
guru in planning, action plans
drafting and research and
development of tools and
implementation national
studies
Project Coordinator, Senior
Evaluator and Trainer in
charge with the P2P Project
coordination and
backstopping, planning,
implementation, evaluation,
reporting, provision of training
and coordination with
transnational partners
Senior evaluator, PhD in
communication, university
lecturer- responsible P2P
communication and
dissemination of results in
Romania, provision of
education and training,
development of joint tools and
advocacy campaigns
Senior evaluator, Mentor and
Researcher responsible with
research transnational
meetings, , lobbying and
networking in Romania,
Young emerging evaluator
responsible for P2P facilities,
equipment, logistics, mailing
lists for participants, work
with web-site, financial
management and reporting in
Romania
Page 3
4. Project summary (300 words max) - Please also post the project summary on the IOCE
Forum when you will submit your project proposal. Project summary should include
description of project objectives and main activities
The general objective of the Project ARK2GEA - Transnational cooperation Albania-Romania-Kosovo
towards the implementation of Global Evaluation Agenda 2016-2020 is to enhance capacities of 3
National VOPEs of Balkan countries (ASPE of Albania, RoSE of Romania and KEN from Kosovo),
members of IOCE and EvalPartners Network to play strategic roles to enabling environment for
evaluation in their countries according to the vision for the future of evaluation profession established
by the Global Evaluation Agenda (GEA).
Following to the successful results in the EvALRO project2 the partnership has been extended by
including the national VOPE from Kosovo, new comer in P2P, to join efforts in implementing GEA to a
wider geographical area and provide sustainability of previous project results.
The Project specific objectives (SO) are:
1. Enhancing VOPEs’ strategic roles to strengthen enabling environments for evaluation within their
countries, contributing to improved national evaluation systems and policies according to GEA vision
2. Strengthening VOPEs’ institutional and operational capacities and to develop participatory
approaches with stakeholders concerned with evaluation according to GEA vision
3. Strengthening the individual capacities of evaluators in each country and promoting professional
education and occupational framework
All project activities have joint work and specific deliverables as contribution of each VOPE clearly
identified. They are structured as 4 work packages:
 the first three packages relate to a specific objective and are fully in line with GEA actions. A
special attention is given to ensure fully compliance with P2P requirements.
 the 4th work package concerns the project management activities including coordination among
partners, transnational meetings, communication plan, monitoring/evaluation and
dissemination of results.
5. Please provide a very concise situation analysis linking your proposed intervention to the
National Evaluation Capacity area you are trying to address through this proposal? (500
words max)
Albania: The evaluation function remains underdeveloped in Albania and its degree of
institutionalization within the various structures of the country is fragile. It is an environment where the
development of NEC is not a priority of government, and it is evident the lack of technical and financial
resources. Member active of EvalPartners since December 2012, the support of EvalPartners is basic to
develop an evaluation culture that corresponds to the specific characteristics of the country. Promoting
evaluation at all levels of government, Advocacy for evaluation, Strong and ongoing communication,
Professional development and teaching with universities, those are some of the activities that address
our daily working plan based on “No one left behind”. With the proposed project, ASPE is focused on
identifying the gaps in Albanian context of National Evaluation Capacity and will propose actions to
correct those gaps targeting the 4 dimensions of EvalAgenda 2020.
Romania: In 2007, the only research carried out on the state of evaluation and capacity of public
institutions in Romania at regional and local levels, identified the lack of legislation and institutional
support. Many hopes were related at that time to the adoption of the new National Strategy for
2
EvALRO Project – implemented in 2015-2016 by ASPE and RoSE in 2016-2016 under P2P
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
Page 4
Evaluation (NSE) which, even drafted, was never enforced. Following to the draft NSE the main
weaknesses of Evaluation Capacity in Romania are related to “poor evaluation culture”, “lack of
professional evaluators”, “poor legal and institutional support for evaluation”, “weak methodological
guidance”, “lack of enforced performance indicators”. The ways to strengthening evaluation, agreed
with CSOs are to promote evaluation framework, to support professionalization and development of
“evaluation market” and to enforce practices and guides to evaluate projects, programs and policies.
Unfortunately, the current state of evaluation is not substantially improved and no updated strategy to
enhance evaluation capacity is enforced.
Kosovo: Considering the gap that existed with regards to VOPE's in Kosovo, we as Think tank LAPSI
mobilized our resources in order to bring to life the first VOPE in Kosovo – Kosovo Evaluation Network
(KEN). Its utmost mission is to achieve the objectives set in the Global Agenda 2020. Our partnership
strongly believes in the development of evaluation mainstreaming and promotion of professional
education for evaluators, which would ultimately comply with our network’s mission. Our main activities
are planned in the 'Work plan for 2016-2017: Enlargement of the network', which would be aiming to
support the advancement of the policy making and strategic planning in Kosovo. Even though the
capacities of the central government have increased and there has been co-ordination within the Prime
Minister’s Office and line ministries leading up to the adoption of National Development Strategy (NDS)
2016‑2021, the capacities are very limited to ensure a proper evaluation of sector strategies and in
particular the National Development Strategy economic reforms. In particular we aim to link our project
interventions to the capacity building in evaluations in Kosovo in particular setting sights to the
implementation of Kosovo Government Administrative Instruction (AI) on the procedures, criteria and
methodology for the preparation and approval of strategy documents and plans for their
implementation as well as AI on budget impact assessment for new government initiatives.
6. Can you draw a very simple theory of change explaining the project? (recommended but
not compulsory)
According to GEA the national evaluation capacity can be understood in terms of two variables: demand
(evaluation use) and supply (quality of evaluation). The project aims to support Partner VOPEs to
achieve high capacity in both supply and demand, focused at the national level. It focuses on supporting
three levels of capacity-building: 1) the enabling environment, 2) institutional, and 3) individual plus
cross-cutting support on equity-focused, gender responsive evaluation.
The theory of change presented below summarizes the benefits of the proposed intervention:
PROPOSED
INTERVENTION
ACTIVITIES3
OPERATION
AL
OUTCOME
A14Strengthen
enabling
environment
in AL, RKS, RO
EVALUATION
POLICIES:
Improved
evaluation
policies
3
4
ALBANIA
CURRENT
SITUATION
Evaluation
status is
not Known
Evaluation
Policy not
adopted.
P2P
EXPECTED
OUTCOME
Evaluation
status
mapped
using EP
institutiona
l toolkit.
Advocated
needs for
improved
policies
ROMANIA
CURRENT
P2P
SITUATION EXPECTED
OUTCOME
Evaluation Evaluation
status is
status
not
mapped
updated
using EP
institutiona
Evaluation l toolkit.
Policy not Advocated
adopted.
needs for
improved
policies
KOSOVO
CURRENT
SITUATION
Evaluation
status is
not
Known
Evaluation
Policy not
adopted.
P2P
EXPECTED
OUTCOME
Evaluation
status
mapped
using EP
institutional
toolkit.
Advocated
needs for
improved
policies
The activities are identified by their index according to the Work Plan presented in AF section 8
A1 -Index of Key Activity 1 – represents the first Work Package 1 related to first dimension of GEA
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
Page 5
EVALUATION
CULTURE:
Presence of
an
evaluation
culture
Evaluation
not
known, nor
its value
appreciated.
Raised
awareness
and
interest on
the
evaluation
use in line
with GEA
vision
Evaluation Improved
not
awareness
enough
and
known, nor interest on
its value
the
enough
evaluation
appreciated. use in line
with GEA
vision
Evaluation Raised
not
awareness
known, nor and interest
its value
on the
appreciated. evaluation
use in line
with GEA
vision
A2 Strengthen
VOPEs
capacity with
multistakeholders’
networks
INSTITUTIO
NAL
CAPACITY:
VOPEs
equipped
with
capacity to
undertake
evaluation
policies
VOPE
encounters
challenges,
in context
of the
national
evaluation
system,
and in
motivating
volunteer
members.
VOPE is
stronger
and has
improved
influence in
catalyzing
stakeholde
rs
for the
cause of
strengtheni
ng capacity
for
evaluation
in line with
GEA vision
VOPE is
facing
increasing
challenges
in context
of the
national
evaluation
system,
maintaini
ng
motivatio
n among
the
volunteer
members.
A3 Strengthen
individual
capacities of
evaluators
INDIVIDUAL
CAPACITIES:
Presence of
culture of
evaluation
professionali
sm to
respond to
raising
global
demand of
evaluation
services
Weak
occupational
framework
set with
respect to
evaluation
Lack of
professional
education
capacity and
certification
of skills
Poor
interest for
profession
for young,
emerging
evaluators
and low
level of
recognition
of ethical
features.
Improved
policy to
enroll of
emerging
evaluators
and
educate
individual
evaluators
in line with
GEA vision.
Educational
programs
for
evaluators
initiated.
First
trained
evaluators
Occupatio
nal
standards
in
evaluation
enforced.
Lack of
profession
al
education
capacity
and
certificati
on of
competen
ces.
Poor
interest
for
profession
for young,
emerging
evaluators
and low
level of
recognitio
n of
ethical
features.
VOPE is
brand
new on
the
national
market
and faces
challenges
in context
of poor
demand on
national
evaluation
system,
and in
involving
volunteer
members.
No
occupation
al
framework
set with
respect to
evaluation.
No of
professional
education
capacity
and
certification
of skills
Poor
interest for
profession
for young,
emerging
evaluators
and low
level of
recognition
of ethical
features
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
VOPE is
stronger
and has
improved
influence in
catalyzing
Stakeholde
rs’
networks
for the
cause of
evaluation
and
sustainable
developme
nt in line
with GEA
vision
Improved
Policy to
increase
the
number of
VOPE
Members
and
enrolling
emerging
evaluators
in
challenging
activities to
promote
evaluation
culture
knowledge
and
practice
in line with
GEA vision.
VOPE is
strengthened
and has
increasing
influence in
catalyzing
stakeholders
for
increased
capacity in
evaluation
in line with
GEA vision
Awareness
raised
among
evaluators
on the
benefits of
evaluation
occupation.
Increased
number of
VOPE
Members
and
enrolling
emerging
evaluators
in
promoting
evaluation
practice in
line with
GEA vision
Educational
programs
for
evaluators
initiated.
First trained
evaluators.
Page 6
7. Expected Outcomes and indicators
What outcomes and results from the overall EvalPartners Outcomes Framework (section 6 in
the P2P call) will your project contribute to?
Desired Results
Outcome 1: VOPEs
are more influential
and able to play
strategic roles to
strengthen an
enabling environment
for evaluation within
their countries
Output 1.1: VOPEs
advocate for demand
and use of evaluation
at national level
Outcome 2: Stronger
VOPEs that actively
work with multistakeholder new
networks towards
achieving Global
Evaluation Agenda
priorities.
Output 2.1: VOPEs
have built their
institutional capacity
and have established
collaborative
relationships with
other VOPEs,
academic institutions,
and civil society
Output 2.2: VOPEs
actively partner with
Possible Measures (Qualitative and Quantitative) of Achievement
Please highlight the contribution of each participating VOPE
Activity A15
 Joint achievements – exchange of experience and reach agreement on the
framework of documents/events/approaches to strengthen enabling
environment
Activities: A11-A13
 ASPE6 - 1 study on status of evaluation in AL; 1 customized joint statement
distributed to at least 1 CSO; 1 National event organized
 RoSE7 – 1 updated study on status of evaluation in RO; 1 customized joint
statement distributed to at least 1 CSO; 1 National event organized
 KEN8 – 1 study on status of evaluation in RKS; 1 customized joint statement
distributed to at least 1 CSO; 1 National event organized
Activity: A14
 Joint achievements – 1 joint statement that advocates value of evaluation
(same with A12); 1 advocacy approach based on EP9 Advocacy toolkit
 ASPE – 1 public event organized (same with A13); 1 Press release issued; 1
Official communication sent to the Government
 RoSE – 1 public event organized (same with A13); 1 Press release issued; 1
Official communication sent to the Government
 KEN – 1 public event organized (same with A13); 1 Press release issued; 1
Official communication sent to the Government
Activity: A2
 Joint achievements – 1 Exchange of experience on effective using VOPEs
networks and developing participatory approaches and establishing
collaborative relationships
Activities: A21-A23
 ASPE - 1 Official Statement for endorsing GEA priorities; 1 training + 1 other
initiative; at least 1 partnership agreement with 1 academic/gov. unit
 RoSE – 1 Official Statement for endorsing GEA priorities; 1 training + 1
workshop; at least 1 partnership agreement with 1 CSO/gov. unit
 KEN – 1 Official Statement for endorsing GEA priorities; 1 training + 1 other
initiative; at least 1 partnership agreement with 1 academic/gov. unit/CSO
Activities: A24-A28
5
Link to the content of activities stated in AF section 8 – Work Plan
ASPE - – Contribution of VOPE1, namely ASPE, Albania
7
RoSE – Contribution of VOPE2, namely RoSE, Romania
8
KEN– Contribution of VOPE3, namely KEN, Kosovo
9
EP – EvalPartners Network
6
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
Page 7
multi stakeholders in
achieving expectation
of new networks
Output 2.3: VOPEs
adapt Global
Evaluation Agenda
priorities in local plans

ASPE – 1 Face-to-face meeting organized and information on all EP
Networks for ASPE members; At least 1 ASPE member assigned to
participate in each EP network; 1 Statement on ASPE Action Plan to
implement GEA objectives
 RoSE – 1 Face-to-face meeting organized and information on all EP
Networks published on RoSE website for RoSE members; At least 1 RoSE
member assigned to participate in each EP network; 1 Statement on RoSE
Action Plan to implement GEA objectives
 KEN –1 Face-to-face meeting organized and information on all EP Networks
for KEN members; At least 1 KEN member assigned to participate in each EP
network; 1 Statement on KEN Action Plan to implement GEA objectives
Outcome 3:
Activities: A31-33
Strengthened
 Joint achievements – 1 Exchange of experience on effective policy to
individual capacities
develop education programmes for emerging evaluators, Joint P2P
of evaluators to
Sustainability Plan and to enroll emerging evaluators;
conduct credible and
 ASPE – 1-day traning for emerging evaluators provided by RoSE; 1
useful evaluations
Partnership Agreement with Academia; At least 2 regular activities
implemented beyond P2P; Improved policy to enroll new emerging
evaluators; At least 3 emerging evaluators enrolled
 RoSE – 1-day training curricula developed; At least 1 sustainable RoSE
activity implemented and registered. 1. Membership policy improved.
 KEN – 1-day traning for emerging evaluators provided by RoSE; 1
Partnership Agreement with Academia; At least 2 regular activities
implemented beyond P2P; Improved policy to enroll new emerging
evaluators; At least 3 emerging evaluators enrolled.
Additional outputs in Activity: A4
case VOPES want to  Joint achievements – 1 joint arrangements for management,
include
in
their
communication, monitoring, evaluation and dissemination of project
proposal
sustainable results;
 ASPE – 1 transnational meeting hosted; at least 9 transnational on-line
meetings; 1 communication plan; 1 Quality and Financial report; 1 register
of project activities and accounts
 RoSE –1 transnational meeting hosted; at least 9 transnational on-line
meetings; 1 communication plan; 1 Quality and Financial report; 1 register
of project activities and accounts
 KEN – – 1 transnational meeting hosted; at least 9 transnational on-line
meetings; 1 communication plan; 1 Quality and Financial report; 1 register
of project activities and accounts
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
Page 8
8. Work plan (activities should stretch over a maximum of nine months)
Expected project start date: 1 Nov.2016
Expected project end date: 30 July 2017
NOTE: The expected implementation period/dates in the table below are related to the
project implementation months, namely Nov.2016 (as M1) up to July 2017 (as M9)
Activity
A110. Strengthen enabling environment in AL11,
RKS12, RO13
Linked to Outcome 1
 A1.1. Produce a map of the status of
evaluation in the country with
recommendations for action
 A1.2. Work with at least one CSO to
advocate for evaluation use
 A1.3. Organize national events on
evaluation aimed at strengthening the
enabling environment
Linked to Output 1.1.
 A1.4. Disseminate at least one public
statement about the value of evaluation
 A1.5 Sent an official communication to at
least one relevant government agency or
civil society organization about the value of
evaluation
A214 Strengthen VOPEs capacity with multistakeholders’ networks
Linked to Outcome 2
 A2.1. Endorse the Global Evaluation
Agenda 2016-2020 (GEA)
Linked to Ouput 2 1
 A2.2 Show evidence of improved
capacity (e.g., new initiatives, new
programs/courses/
workshops/trainings, new grants)
 A2.3. Document official working
relationship with at least one other
VOPE, academic unit, or CSO
Linked to Ouputs 2 2 and 2.3.
 A2.4 Disseminate information about all
five EP15 networks to all its members
Expected
Implementation
Period/ Dates
M1-M9
M1-M4
M2-M8
M3-M6
Team members responsible for
implementation
ASPE:


RoSE


KEN


Fation Luli
Suela Sefa
Tatiana Bratescu
Virgil Pamfil
Valon Grabanica
Vedat Sagonjeva
M4-M9
M5-M9
M2-M9
M2-M4
M2-M9
M3-M9
ASPE:



RoSE



KEN


Fation Luli
Suela Sefa
Telida Asllani
Tatiana Bratescu
Virgil Pamfil
Mirela Mustata
Valon Grabanica
Vedat Sagonjeva
M3-M5
M3-M5
10
A1 -Index of Key Activity 1 – represents the first Work Package 1 related to first dimension of GEA
AL – Republic of Albania
12
RKS – Republic of Kosovo
13
RO – Republic of Romania
14
A2 - Index of Key Activity 2 – represents the second Work Package 2 related to second dimension of GEA
15
EP- EvalPartners Network
11
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
Page 9

A2.5 Assign at least one member to
participate in at least one of EPs’s new
networks.
 A2.6 Present at least one session
about an EP network during a face-toface meeting of each partner VOPE
 A2.7 Distribute information about the
GEA to all VOPEs’ members
 A2.8 Officially decided on specific
actions the VOPEs will take to advance
at least one aspect of the GEA
A3 Strengthen individual capacities of
evaluators
Linked to Outcome 2
 A 3.1. Involvement of a diverse mix of
members the activities of each VOPE,
including young and emerging
evaluators and gender-balanced
membership
 A3.2. Evidence of regular activities
being conducted by the VOPE, beyond
those foreseen in the P2P project.
 A3.3. Increase in membership,
particularly young and emerging
evaluators from both sexes
A4 Project Management
 Provision of coordination among
transnational partners
 Draft and implement communication
plan
 Organize and hold transnational
meetings
 Monitor, evaluate and disseminate
project results
M3-M7
M2-M9
M2-M9
M1-M9
M3-M9
M1 -M9
M3-M9
M1-M9
ASPE:




RoSE


KEN



ASPE:


RoSE



KEN


Fation Luli
Suela Sefa
Telida Asllani
Elira Suraja
Virgil Pamfil
Mirela Mustata
Valon Grabanica
Vedat Sagonjeva
Besnik Cecelia
Fation Luli
Suela Sefa
Virgil Pamfil
Tatiana Bratescu
Liviu Proteasa
Valon Grabanica
Vedat Sagonjeva
8. Budget Estimate
All costs should be in USD. Please fill the Excel form included in the template. To enter the
Excel form, please double click on it. Add lines and extend the form as necessary.
NO ADMINISTRATIVE FEES
Eligible expenses:
 travel (both land and air economy class fare);
 DSA - daily subsistence allowances covering accommodation, meals and incidentals
(DSAs should not exceed UN DSA rates published at
http://apps.who.int/bfi/tsy/PerDiem.aspx);
 terminal expenses and local transportation;
 visa costs (including vaccination if required);
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
Page 10









travel-related insurance;
hire of premises and equipment for project events;
purchase of supplies for project events;
translation/interpretation expenses;
communication expenses;
production of information and communication materials, including web-sites;
bank fees,
IOCE membership fees;
international travel handling fees – up to USD 100 per round trip per person.
Please fill the table below. Please make sure that all budget lines are visible – expand the table
if necessary.
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
Page 11
Expenses
Unit
No. of unitsUnit price
Total
1. Travel Expenses
Flight Canada - Albania - Canada (ASPE)
Return Ticket
Intl.transport Albania - Kosovo (ASPE)
Ticket
Intl.transport Kosovo - Romania & Romania - Albania
Ticket
(ASPE)
Local transport AL, KO, RO (ASPE)
pers, roundtrip
Daily subsistence in Kosovo (ASPE)
Per-diem
Daily subsistence in Romania (ASPE)
Per-diem
2
2
2
4
6
6
1050
160
160
20
130
130
2100
320
320
80
780
780
Intl.transport Romania-Albania-Romania (RoSE)
Intl.transport Romania-Kosovo-Romania (RoSE)
Local transport RO, AL, KO (RoSE)
Daily subsistence in Kosovo (RoSE)
Daily subsistence in Albania (RoSE)
Return Ticket
Return Ticket
pers,roundtrip
Per-diem
Per-diem
2
4
6
8
12
300
320
10
130
130
600
1280
60
1040
1560
Intl.transport Kosovo-Albania-Kosovo (KEN)
Intl.transport Kosovo-Romania-Kosovo (KEN)
Local transport KO, RO, AL (KEN)
Daily subsistence in Romania (KEN)
Daily subsistence in Albania (KEN)
Return Ticket
pers,roundtrip
pers,roundtrip
Per-diem
Per-diem
3
2
4
4
12
200
300
15
120
100
600
600
60
480
1200
2. Event-related expenses (e.g. hire of premises, equipment, stationary, tea& coffee, etc)
Purchase of supplies (ASPE)
Event
Purchase of supplies (RoSE)
Event
Purchase of supplies (KEN)
Event
Production of Information/Project webpage (ASPE)
Webdesign
Production of Information/Project webpage (RoSE)
Webdesign
Production of Information/Project webpage (KEN)Webdesign
2
2
2
1
1
1
100
80
100
200
200
210
200
160
200
200
200
210
3. Other expenses
IOCE membership contribution (ASPE
IOCE membership contribution (RoSE)
IOCE membership contribution (KEN)
VOPE
VOPE
VOPE
1
1
1
100
100
100
100
100
100
Bank fees (ASPE)
Bank fees (KEN)
bankfees
bankfees
3
1
40
50
120
50
International travel handling fee
pers,roundtrip
TOTAL
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
13500
Page 12
9. Management Arrangements:
Name of the organization that will be
responsible for financial management of
the project
Name of the person who will perform the
duties of the project manager
Project manager’s e-mail
Project manager’s skype
Project manager’s mobile phone
Albanian Society of Program Evaluation (ASPE)
Fation Luli
[email protected]
Fation Luli
(1)-438-922-7799
10. Proposal Checklist:
This project proposal was developed by a partnership that includes at least two
VOPEs.
At least one of these VOPEs is from an ODA-eligible country.
All VOPEs involved in this project have registered on the IOCE VOPE Database
and have updated their information within the past 12 months
The budget is filled in the Excel form included in the proposal template.
NO ADMINISRATIVE FEES are included in the project budget.
Project budget includes only eligible expenses.
Organization that will be responsible for financial management of the grant has
a USD bank account or can accept USD to an existing account in other currency.
Partner VOPEs agree to pay IOCE membership fees for 2016 (min USD 100 per
VOPE) if they have not paid them yet.
Organization that will be responsible for financial management of the grant is
aware that it will be responsible for sending IOCE membership fees included in
the project budget to IOCE upon receipt of grant money.
The proposal file in saved in the Word format and named following the pattern
P2P2016 proposal from [Country of VOPE1] - [Country of VOPE2].doc and file
name includes all countries involved.
Project manager has registered on IOCE Forum.











The deadline for proposal submission is Monday September 15, 2016, midnight GMT-12.
To submit your proposal please go to IOCE Forum P2P 2016 page
http://forum.ioce.net/forum/p2p-proposals, launch a new topic, name it “Proposal from
[Country of VOPE1] - [Country of VOPE2] – etc”, paste the project title and brief description,
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
Page 13
and upload the project proposal file. Project proposals should be submitted as Word files only.
A proposal file should be named “P2P2016 proposal from [Country of VOPE1] - [Country of
VOPE2] – etc”.
P2P2016 proposal from Albania-Romania-Kosovo
Page 14