title: Tempus - Annual report 1996 - PHARE & TACIS

eurovoc_concepts:
Central and Eastern Europe
EU programme
higher education
project evaluation
project management

text: *w*r •it •it "it -k COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 19. 11. 1997 COM(97) 502 final. ' , Mi J11 * '" •. ' 3| j, ' SU; '*' fi*,' i '<•)"¥'? TEMPUS Annual report 1996 Tacis TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1. 1. The origins of Tempus 1. 2. Tempus I and II 2. MAIN FEATURES OF TEMPUS 2. 1. Strategy: bottom-up approach with top-down orientation 2. 2. Projects Tempus Phare. Tempus Tacis 2. 3. Management of the Programme 2. 4. Monitoring 2. 5. Budget 3. PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENTS IN 1996 General 3. 1. Council Decision on Tempus II Bis 3. 2. Exploitation of outputs Tempus PJiare 3. 3. New countries in Tempus Phare 3. 4. Management of JEPs Tempus Tacis 3. 5. New countries in Tempus Tacis 3. 6. Management of projects 0 & - 5- Page 9 9 9 11 11 12 12 13 14 14 15 17 17 17 17 19 19 19 19 19 19 3. 7. National Priorities 3. 8. Compact Projects 3. 9. Monitoring visits 4. THE 1996 SELECTION ROUNDS 4. 1. Overall Tempus budget 4. 2. Tempus Phare budget 4. 3. Tempus Phare actions 4. 3. 1. Joint European Projects 4. 3. 2. Joint European Networks (JENs) 4. 3. 3. Compact Measures (CMEs) 4. 3. 4. Individual Mobility Grants (IMGs) 4. 4. Tempus Tacis Budget 4. 5. Tempus Tacis selection procedure 4. 6. Tempus Tacis actions 4. 6. 1. Pre-JEPS and JEPs 4. 6. 2. Compact Projects (CPs) 5. LIST OF PUBLICATIONS ANNEX 1 - THE TEMPUS PROGRAMME: OVERALL STATITICS ANNEX 2 - FACT SHEETS: TEMPUS PHARE COUNTRIES ANNEX 3 - FACT SHEETS: TEMPUS TACIS COUNTRIES 20 20 20 21 21 22 23 23 25 25 25 26 28 28 28 30 31 33 37 51 - 6 - GLOSSARY of the m o st c o m m o n ly u s ed expression a nd abbreviations, a nd references to their appearance in the text See CME Compact Measure (Tempus Phare) 2. 2, 3. 3, 4. 3. 3 Council Decision on Tempus I, Tempus II and Tempus II Bis 1. 2,3. 1 CP Compact Project (Tempus Tacis) 2. 2, 3. 8, 4. 6. 2 (the) Foundation European Training Foundation in Turin (Italy) 2. 3, 2. 4, 3. 2, 3. 9 IMG JEN JEP Monitoring National Priorities NCP New Independent States NTO (the) Phare Programme Pre-JEP RBAP Selection TIP TOP Individual Mobility Grant (Tempus Phare) 2. 2, 3. 3, 4. 3. 4 Joint European Network (Tempus Phare) 4. 3. 2 Joint European Project (Tempus Phare and Tacis) 2. 2, 3. 2, 3. 4, 3. 6, 3. 9,4. 3. 1,4. 6. 1 National Contact Points (in EU Member States) National Tempus Office (in Tempus Phare partner countries) Preparatory Joint European Project (Tempus Tacis) Revised Budget and Activity Plan Tempus Information Point (in Tempus Tacis partner countries) Tempus Output Promotion 2. 4, 3. 9 2. 1,3. 7 2. 3 1. 2,2. 2,3. 2,3. 7 2. 1, 2. 3, 2. 4 1. 1, 1. 2 2. 2, 2. 4, 4. 6. 1 2. 4 2. 1,4 2. 3, 2. 4 3. 2 1. INTRODUCTION 1. 1. The origins of Tempus The political events of 1989 and 1990 in Central and Eastern Europe had a dramatic impact on the European Community. The Member States individually and collectively found themselves facing unprecedented challenges to the established philosophy and procedures in external relations. From the outset there was no doubt in the urgency of making an appropriately rapid and effective response to these challenges. Quick action needed to be taken to strengthen the emerging democracies and capitalise on this unexpected opportunity to redirect the future of Europe. Aiming for an integrated global response, the European Community sought to provide a comprehensive framework for the provision of practical assistance and expertise to help the countries concerned restructure their economies and political systems. An overall programme of assistance was agreed by the Council of Ministers in December 1989. Known as Phare1, it provided the framework for Community assistance to the economic and social reform processes in Central and Eastern Europe. The partner countries themselves identified higher education and training as one of the priority areas for trans-European cooperation. From an early stage a number of assistance programmes in the field of education were embedded within Phare. In January 1990 the. Commission submitted the European Parliament its plans for the creation of a new Phare programme specifically designed to meet the higher education needs of Central and Eastern Europe. This was the starting signal for Tempus. to the Council and 1. 2. Tempus I and II The Council adopted Tempus on 7 May 1990, for an initial pilot phase of three years beginning on 1 July 1990. A later Council Decision extended the pilot phase for one year, until the end of June 1994. Initially 3 countries were involved in the scheme: Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary. This number increased with the years as illustrated in Figure 1. During 1996 the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia as well as Bosnia and Herzegovina entered the Tempus Phare Programme as new eligible countries. At that time Phare stood for "Pologne, Hongrie: Assistance à la Restiucturation Economique". The current full name is "Phare-Community programme for assistance for economic restructuring in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe". - 9 - The Council Decision adopting the second phase of the Tempus Programme (Tempus II) was taken on 29 April 1993 2. This decision meant the continuation of support for the existing partner countries and the geographical extension of the Programme's activities to the new republics of the former Soviet Union (the New Independent States) and Mongolia. Projects in these countries - with the exception of the Baltic States- were funded from the overall Tacis budget, the European Union (EU) initiative fostering the development of harmonious and prosperous economic and political links between the New Independent States and Mongolia. Preparatory activities in Belarus, the Russian Federation and the Ukraine already commenced in 1993. Where necessary this report will make a distinction between Tempus Phare' and Tempus Tacis'. the European Union and T e m p us I 1992 1991 1990 T e m p us II 1993 1994 1995 1996 Phare Albania Bosnia and Herzegovina Bulgaria Czech Republic Former DDR Estonia Hungary Latvia Lithuania Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Poland Romania Slovak Republic Slovenia Former Yugoslavia Tacis Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyztan Moldova Mongolia Russian Federation Tajikistan Turkmenistan Ukraine Uzbekistan 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Fig. 1: Phare and Tacis country participation in Tempus between 1990 and 1996 OJ N° L112/34, 6 May 1993. - 1 0- 2. MAIN FEATURES OF TEMPUS 2. 1. Strategy: bottom-up approach with top-down orientation Strategically speaking Tempus mainly follows what is called a bottom-up approach. Support concentrates on innovation at the base of the university-pyramid, i. e. in the departments and faculties and not at central planning level. The rationale behind this approach is the assumption that reform will be less easily accepted when imposed through hierarchical structures. Project initiation and management at departmental and faculty level also increase the sense of ownership over projects. Finally, the Programme as a whole is more likely to correspond to the reform needs on the "shop floor". In recent years several special actions have added a top-down aspect to the Programme in areas where the steering of activities was felt necessary. Current examples include the Tempus Phare Compact Measures and the Tempus Tacis Compact Projects. Another way in which the scope of the programme under Tempus II has been controlled in a more top-down manner is the restriction of project activities to specific areas: the 'National Priorities'. These annually reviewed listings reflect the needs in the current phase of the overall socio-economic development of each specific partner country. They are jointly identified by the national authorities and the Commission and published in the Guide for Applicants. By using the priorities as one of the selection parameters, Tempus has been able to continue to develop greater relevance to the specific processes of reform in each partner country while at the same time giving applicants guidance in their efforts. In recent years the national priorities are less focused on academic subject areas but address more structural the national priorities have become the top-down element in the Tempus instrumental for gradually reinforcing Programme. This evolution is demonstrated by: instead. In this way issues • • • • the direct link between Tempus national priorities and the pre-accession strategy for those Phare partner countries with which the EU has signed Association Agreements ; the fact that the national priorities are directly complementary to legislative reform processes in higher education ; the emphasis on innovative management practices at universities which are listed in the national priorities of all the partner countries; institutional development and the national priorities focus on development, course accreditation and credit transfer issues. the structural approach in curriculum - 11 - The top-down orientation was further promoted during 1996 with the organisation of 2-day training seminars which took place in several Phare partner countries and organised by qualified EU expert organisations in collaboration with the respective National Tempus Offices (NTOs). The Academic Cooperation Association (ACA) organised 2-day training seminars on 'Academic Accreditation and Credit Transfer' for Strategic in Bulgaria and 'University Management of Universities 'University Management and Autonomy' Financial Management' in Slovenia. (ESMU) held training seminars on in Hungary and Romania and on the Czech Republic. The European Centre 2. 2. Projects Tempus supports cooperation projects between EU Member States and partner countries in Central and Eastern Europe, the New Independent States and Mongolia in the field of higher education. To this end the Programme regularly calls for proposals for a variety of project types. Tempus Phare In the Phare countries the majority of Tempus activities take place within Joint European Projects (JEPs). A JEP is a multi-lateral cooperation project between recognised higher education institutions from at least two countries in the EU and one of the partner countries. Universities from other G24 countries, Malta and Cyprus as well as enterprises from all countries concerned can also participate as associated partners. The maximum duration of a JEP is three years. A second category of project, and an area of increasing importance, is the Compact Measures, or CMEs. Compact Measures replaced Complementary Measures in 1996. They aim to increase Tempus' impact on the organisational and administrative aspects of higher education. CMEs are typically short (one- or two-year) projects. The Compact Measures scheme consists of three strands: • Strand 1, focusing on institutional restructuring and university management development. This category is subdivided into: 0 la. Preparatory studies. 0 l b. Implementation of previous findings. • • Strand 2, focusing on dissemination of Tempus or other project results. Strand 3, focusing on policy development at national authority level. i? Finally, Tempus awards Individual Mobility Grants (IMGs) in the Phare countries. Through these, individual (ad hoc) visits of higher education staff, senior Ministry officials and education planners from East to West and vice-versa can be funded. Types of activity are organised into three groups, each with a specific time limit: • Course and materials development (1 week to 3 months) • Staff development (1 week to 3 months) • Activities to support the development of higher education (1 week to 1 month). Tempus Tacis Tempus Tacis supports Joint European Projects (JEPs) similar to those under Tempus Phare, apart from the number of project partners which is subject to a minimum of two and a maximum of three participating EU institutions and only one partner in the Tacis countries per JEP. Tempus Tacis JEPs are preceded by pre-JEPs. These are projects intended for preparatory contact, mobility, and other activities and are a compulsory first step before a proposal for a 'full-size' JEP can be submitted. The fixed duration of a pre- JEP is one year. The ensuing JEP has to be carried out with the same group of partners as featured in the pre-JEP (possibly expanded with a third EU partner). Not all pre-JEP consortia are awarded a subsequent JEP grant. Compact Projects (CPs), the third type of Tempus Tacis project, were introduced in the reporting year. They address precisely defined, short-term needs. Activities must focus on university administration, the development of the national higher education system or the improvement of external relations (with universities or other parties in the international community, the national education system, or in the local economic and social field). Tempus Tacis features no Individual Mobility Grants. The Tempus Tacis project structure is currently being reviewed for implementation from 1997 onwards. - 13 - 2. 3. Management of the Programme For the implementation of the scheme, the Commission is assisted by a management committee composed of two representatives appointed by each Member State and chaired by a Commission representative. The management committee is referred to as the Tempus Committee. Technical assistance for the implementation of the programme is provided by the Tempus Department of the European Training Foundation in Turin following the guidelines of the European Commission Directorate-General XXII in Brussels. In the Phare countries the Foundation is assisted by the National Tempus Offices (NTOs). They are the programme's main links to the national authorities of Central and Eastern Europe and perform parts of the day-to-day administration of the Programme. In the Tacis partner countries a network of Tempus Information Points (TIPs) has been established in order to ensure appropriate support on the spot. They assist with the implementation of the Tempus Programme by disseminating information about the Programme, providing information on the status of higher education in the partner countries and giving practical support to project operators. In the EU Member States designated National Contact Points (NCPs) assist with the dissemination of programme information, project submission guidelines and forms, and general support through, amongst others, the organisation of workshops and coordinators' meetings. 2. 4. Monitoring Following the revision of all Tempus monitoring procedures, an overall monitoring policy was adopted in 1995 and implemented during 1996. Three types of monitoring at the disposal of the programme management were identified and instructions on their usage were defined. In the new monitoring policy emphasis is put on the improvement of preventive monitoring by increasing transparency of procedures and improving dissemination of information. Complementing the traditional means of preventive monitoring (e. g. monitoring letters and workshops) a hot-line for project contractors compiling Annual Reports and Revised Budget and Activity Plans (RBAPs) opened in September 1996 and electronic means of information dissemination were put in place. In addition, all Tempus project contractors received a Tempus Management Handbook and explanatory leaflets ('the Tempuzzle') in which the contractual and administrative terms of Tempus projects are clarified in simple terms and project contractors are provided with practical hints for efficient project management. - 14 - Through desk monitoring the performance of projects is assessed in terms of progress, organisation and financial management. The RBAPs, Annual and Final Reports and regular correspondence are the main tools used for desk monitoring. The progress of projects is also followed through field monitoring in the form of site visits. Under Tempus Phare a full programme of monitoring visits is agreed with all NTOs each year. Visits are carried out by NTO staff together -when possible - with staff of the Foundation. Following each visit, recommendations are made for follow-up and feedback is given to the project partners. Tempus Tacis monitoring visits to JEPs are carried out by the Tacis Monitoring and Evaluation Team, based on information supplied by the Foundation Programme Manager. For pre-JEPs and Compact Projects the TIPs carry out monitoring visits, again joined by Foundation staff whenever possible. The monitoring visits provide a valuable opportunity to assess the impact of the Tempus actions at an institutional appropriateness of Tempus policy within the institution concerned. level and, if applicable, to judge 2. 5. Budget Two factors determine the total budget available for Tempus activities: • • the national Phare and Tacis budgets, which are determined annually by the Commission; the proportion of Phare or Tacis funds which each of the national authorities allocates for Tempus activities. Every year each partner country decides how much of its total Phare or Tacis budget it wishes to allocate to Tempus activities. From this amount of money newly selected projects are funded for the whole of their duration even if they extend into the next year(s). This mechanism is referred to as pluri-annual funding. Thus a 1996 budget of ECU 600 000 could fund e. g. two new ECU 300 000 projects for three years instead of only the first year of six similar projects. This is to safeguard continuity in the operation of three-year projects. It also offers contractors more in managing their projects, allowing them to carry over certain flexibility proportions of the funds available for one year to a subsequent year where appropriate. - 1 5- Budget evolution Phare (in MECU) Budget evolution of Tempus allocation and percentage of global Phare budget 1990 i r t H i iW filin 11 ALB Tempus & proportion BG Tempus & proportion CZ Tempus & proportion EE Tempus & proportion H Tempus & proportion LV Tempus & proportion LT Tempus & proportion PL Tempus & proportion RO Tempus & proportion SLO Tempus & proportion SK Tempus & proportion m 5% 1. 2 m 8% 2. 5 -m 6% 2. 4 88 l is 3. 5 4% 9. 6 5% 75 7% 87. 5 90 85 9% 15 17% 12 14% 12 m 14% 420. 5 52 12% 22. 6 2. 5 11% 66 6 I 9% 66. 6 10 15% 60 60 110 385 2 13% 5. 5 9% 7% 40 10% 10 22. 5 68. 5 1 10% 1. 5 13% 1. 5 7% 1. 5 6% 5. 5 8% 89. 8 119. 5 98. 5 100 85 92 584. 8 6. 2 \ 7% 12 j 10% 16 j 16% 16 j 16% 16 19% 16 17% 82. 2 14% 15 1. 5 10% 18 11% 29. 5 7% 32 5 95 6% 7. 5 20 25 39 42 1. 5 8% 2. 5 10% 5% 3. 5 126 9. 5 8% 180. 8 197 200 225 209 22. 4 7% 13. 5 7% 26 13% 35 16% 35 17% 30 174 1185 8 17% 151. 9 13% 104 10 ! 10% 126 130 100 13 j 10% 18 \ 14% 12 i 12% 18 66 \ 27% 526 71 ! 13% 10 24 25 68 2. 3 26% 3. 5 35% 2. 5 10% 2. 6 10% 10. 9 16% 11. 3 1. 2 \ 11% 33 33. 3 9% 5 j 35% 5 40 i 13% 40 \ 13% 5 46 \ 11% 5 203. 6 24. 2 \ 12% Sub-total Total Tempus 3045 22. 3 7% 594. 5 403 8% 690. 9 $&£ 12% 740 109 j 15% 736 ms 13% 782. 5 tmt tm> 3 848. 4 4643 %2% Regional funds Former DDR Yugoslavia Overhang' funds Baltics &ALB 0. 9 - 15 6 Total Tempus 23. 2 70. 5 12. 5 10. 25 37. 75 0. 9 6 9. 9 m 129. 15 95. 9 102. 1 518, E3 16 - 3. PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENTS IN 1996 General 3. 1. Council Decision on Tempus II Bis Following positive recommendations in a 1995 external evaluation and moreover the need to consolidate and complete the restructuring of Phare countries higher education systems, the Council of Ministers decided on 21 November 1996 to amend Decision 93/246/ EEC (adopting Tempus II) in order to extend the original four year period by two years to continue until 30 June 2000 3. No major technical changes are foreseen for the period between 1 July 1998 and 30 June 2000 but activities complementing those of other European mobility programmes will be increasingly emphasised in those Phare countries with which the EU signed Association Agreements regarding access to Socrates and Leonardo. In the near future the associated Phare countries (10) will start their participation in the Socrates Programme. In this perspective, Tempus activities in these associated Phare countries will be reoriented within the existing technical and operational framework. Academic preferences for Tempus will be exclusively focused on fields in direct relation to European integration and EU pre-accession and the Tempus national priorities will be directed, besides to the requirements for accession, to the structural conditions for successful academic mobility within Socrates. 3. 2. Exploitation of outputs In 1995, the Commission together with the Foundation's Tempus Department, launched the Tempus Output Promotion (TOP) project in an effort to maximise the (added) value of the Tempus Programme through the analysis and dissemination of its achievements. The objectives are different for the two identified phases of the project. The first phase - the largest part of which was in 1996 and concerned mostly Tempus Phare - focused on the analysis of Tempus' impact in fields which will be of strategic importance in the years to come. Different teams of experts carried out five studies in the following fields: • University Management • University - Enterprise Cooperation 3 OJ K ' L306/36, 28 November 1996. 17 - • Student Opportunities • National Higher Education Reform • Mutual Benefits ('From assistance to cooperation'). too rich a sample of recommendations The analyses provided future developments to discuss in this context. They will be published in eariy 1997. On the basis of the research carried out for the studies a start was made with the production of a series of handbooks for project participants and the academic community in general. for The second phase of TOP started in late 1996 and will focus on the development of mechanisms to disseminate outputs of the Tempus Programme. Already in the reporting year a database with the results of all finished Tempus JEPs was established. Additionally, the first part of a large set of information sheets, the Tempus at Work series, was prepared for printing in late 1996. The series will, amongst others, feature: • • general Tempus, Tempus Phare, and Tempus Tacis sheets; separate sheets on the roles of all countries (EU and partner countries) involved in Tempus; • separate sheets on all current Tempus Tacis JEPs; • • summary sheets of the results of the above mentioned analyses; • sheets on Tempus activity in specific subject areas. For 1997, a number of handbooks related to issues important to the pre-accession phase of the associated Phare partner countries is to be produced. The production of these handbooks will build upon the analyses and experiences from the first phase of TOP within Tempus Phare (university management, and university enterprise cooperation). Additionally, a handbook on dissemination and sustainability of Tempus project results is foreseen. These three handbooks will be produced by expert teams in close collaboration with the Commission and the Foundation. TOP Tacis started in 1996 and has been developed on the basis of the experience of TOP Phare and in close cooperation with Tempus Phare. Under Tempus Tacis, TOP aims at feeding directly into the current activities of the Tempus Programme in the New Independent States and Mongolia. TOP Tacis activities in the start up phase included: a database with concrete outputs of all current Tacis JEPs to be formatted into an Output Compendium and the Tempus at Work sheets covering Tacis JEPs and countries which will be made available as a tool for publicity. 18 Tempus Phare 3. 3. New countries in Tempus Phare In 1996 both Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia became eligible for support through Tempus. The Commission prepared a number of immediate measures for 1996 to quickly integrate them into the Tempus Programme. A call for 'Pre-Tempus Compact Measures' in 1996 resulted in 10 project proposals for Bosnia and Herzegovina, 7 of which were approved during a special selection round. Two MECU was made available for special 1996 actions in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. A call was made for East-West IMGs aimed at establishing contacts. Thirty-one Individual Mobility Grants were finally awarded. A National Tempus Office was successfully established in Skopje. Preparations for a Tempus Office for Bosnia and Herzegovina are being made and hopefully the recruitment of staff should take place at the beginning of 1997. Full participation of both countries will commence in 1997. 3. 4. Management of JEPs In 1996 Bulgaria was added to the list of countries whose partner institutions can act as JEP contractors. As a result, this construction was applied in 6 out of the 22 new JEP proposals accepted for funding in 1996. In 1996 Albania and the Baltic States were the only Phare countries for which this construction was not yet accepted. The Baltic States will become eligible for JEP contractorship in 1997. Tempus Tacis 3. 5. New countries in Tempus Tacis The central Asian countries of Tajikistan and Turkmenistan became eligible for support through the Tempus Tacis Programme in 1996. A call for applications for Tempus projects was made in both countries. For Tajikistan applications for 10 pre- JEPs and 1 Compact Project were submitted. For Turkmenistan 5 Pre-JEP proposals were received. Due to the fact that by the end of 1996 a decision had yet to be taken on the size of the total budgets available for both countries projects did not commence in the reporting year. 3. 6. Management of projects In Tempus Tacis JEPs only EU partner universities can take on the role of contracting and coordinating institutions. - 19 3. 7. National Priorities Until now one set of priorities for Tacis projects was used for all countries in the New Independent States and Mongolia. In 1996 the Commission introduced separate priority subject listings for all countries individually. These priorities, details of which can be found in the annexes to this report, were published after ratification by these priorities were considered for funding in the 1996 selection rounds. the national authorities. Only projects complying v/ith 3. 8. Compact Projects In 1996 Tempus Tacis introduced Compact Projects as a means to support self- contained and targeted actions responding to precisely defined, short-term needs. Activities must focus on university administration, the development of the national higher education system, or (with universities or other parties in the international community, the national education system, or in the local economic and social field). improvement of external relations the Proposals for CPs may be submitted by consortia which include EU institutions with relevant experience in the New Independent States and Mongolia and a sound knowledge of the local context. The maximum duration of a CP is 18 months. CP grants can be awarded up to ECU 80 000 and cannot be followed by a subsequent Joint European Project. 3. 9. Monitoring visits As from 1996, the Commission has adopted a new approach for the field monitoring of current JEPs. Tempus Tacis monitoring visits to Joint European Projects are now carried out by the Tacis Monitoring and Evaluation Team. The required information is provided by the Foundation. The objective of field monitoring is to evaluate the progress of project activities towards the achievement of the objective and to provide assistance to the project consortium in order to improve project performance from an implementation point of view. In addition, the potential sustainability of results is evaluated, especially for projects in their final year, and options for better coordination with other Tempus or Tacis projects are indicated. Each project is visited at least once in its life by the Monitoring and Evaluation Teams. A second visit may be carried out if the first indicated serious problems which need to be followed up. In 1996, twenty-two visits to JEPs which started in 1994 were carried out. - 2 0- 4. THE 1996 SELECTION ROUNDS 4. 1. Overall Tempus budget The Central and Eastern European national governments allocated a total amount of MECU 83. 05 to Tempus Phare activities in 1996. For the countries participating in Tempus Tacis this figure was MECU 20. 5 4. The table below (Figure 2) shows how the amounts compare to those of earlier years. 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 0 1 20 r 40 1 60 r 80 129,2 H Tacis • Phare 1 100 120 140 1 1 Fig. 2: Tempus allocations between 1990 and 1996 in MECU 4 This figure only refers to the following Tacis countries: Russian Federation, Ukraine, Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Mongolia and Uzbekistan. See 4. 4. - 21 - 4. 2. Tempus Phare budget The total amount available in 1996 for Tempus activities in the Phare countries was MECU 83. 5. Figure 3 shows a breakdown of this figure into the respective national allocations for Tempus activities in 1996. The average per year for each country since participation is added for comparison. Fig. 3: Tempus funds in MECU per Phare partner country in 1996 compared with the average per year since inclusion in the scheme. Note: The average figures for Slovenia, as well as for the the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic are averages since these countries became independent. The budgets for Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia cover not only 1996 but also 1997. - 22 - 4. 3. Tempus Phare actions 4. 3. 1. Joint European Projects JEP applications are,. considered for support through a cooperative decision making process which consists of several different stages. This selection process is illustrated in Flowchart 1 overleaf. Results of the 1996 JEP selection round During the second quarter of 1996 the selection of Joint European Projects to start in September of that year took place. The results of that selection round are given in the table below. The 1995 figures are included for comparison. Number of new JEP proposals received Number of new JEPs proposed for funding Success rate Average JEP grant allocated Number of JEPs renewed in 1995/96 Total number of JEPs supported in 1995/96 1995 916 229 25% ECU 375 649 247 485 1996 611 183 30% ECU 348 561 455 638 Out of the 611 applications received, 474 complied with the national priorities and of those 183 were proposed for funding. Compared with last year there has been a decrease of 30% in the number of applications received. The percentage of applications complying with the priorities has remained stable at around 77%. The decrease in the number of applications varies considerably from countiy to country, ranging from 8% in Romania to 50% in the Czech Republic. The narrow priorities defined for each countiy and the expectations created by the prospect of access to other EU programmes are possible explanations for this decrease. In comparison with 1995 the success rate has increased. The 183 applications proposed for approval this year represent 30% of the total number of applications received and 39% of those complying with the priorities. These figures were of 25% and 30% respectively for the 229 applications approved last year. With less applications in competition the budget restrictions have had only a limited impact. Statistical data on country participation, subject distribution and a breakdown of details per country can be found in the annexes to this report. 2 3- Joint selection procedure and technical implementation in 1996 Priority setting National authorities, in agreement with the Commission, define priorities for action and objectives to be reached by Tempus. These are published and dispatched to all interested. Technical implementation First stage: priority evaluation Second stage: quality evaluation Identification of applications respecting priorities. B i B B i B B Bi S B S BB B S B H ff Technical quality assessment of the applications in priority areas. Assessment of academic relevance and quality of applications in priority areas by partner countries' academic experts. Identification of projects in three different lists: 1. projects potentially proposed for funding 2. projects potentially proposed for reserve list, to funded if budget allows 3. projects for expert meeting where specific experts' advice is sought mmimm^é&iM^^mÈ&mm^^mMÉMmmm^m wmmmmmmmmmmEES Expert meeting of EU and partner countries' academic experts under the chairmanship of the Commission. mmeM^Mm*ti&mimw-&mm>Mmïmkm*»M mmmmmmhmum Final decision on the proposed projects by the Commission after consultation of the partner country authorities. Notification of the results to the applicants. Final decision Notification Flowchart N° 1 - 24 4. 3. 2. Joint European Networks (JENs) The Joint European Network action - allowing the most successful completed Joint European Projects to maintain their networks over a period of up to two years with an emphasis on the dissemination of results - was discontinued in 1996. A part of their role has been taken over by the new Compact Measures. However, 46 projects approved in 1995 entered their second and last year of operation in 1996. 4. 3. 3. Compact Measures (CMEs) The selection process for CMEs is split up into two stages. The first stage of the assessment process, dealing with the quality assessment of the projects, is carried out by the NTOs. The second stage, a review of all NTO assessments, is carried out by the Foundation following guidelines agreed with the Commission. Results of the 1996 CME selection round First selection round (June 1996)* Number of applications Number of applications supported Success rate Total budget Average size of grant CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round 126 68 48% ECU 2 552 260 ECU 37533 4. 3. 4. Individual Mobility Grants (IMGs) In 1996, the selection of all East-West mobility was carried out by the NTOs. They were also responsible for the payment of the corresponding grants. In addition, the West-East IMGs to Poland were selected by the NTO in Warsaw. The remaining part of the selection process was carried out by the Foundation following guidelines agreed with the Commission. National conditions and preferences included in the Guide for Applicants formed part of the selection criteria for the Individual Mobility Grants. - 25 Results of the 1996 IMG selection round There were two selection rounds for IMGs, one in February and one in June. The results were as follows: First selection round (February 1996) Number of applications Number of applications supported Success rate Total budget Average size of grant Second selection round (June 1996) Number of applications Number of applications supported Success rate Total budget Average size of grant 851 546 64% ECU 1 411 560 ECU 2 585 951 574 60% ECU 1 363 030 ECU 2 375 An additional 31 East-West IMGs were awarded to staff from the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in late 1996. These have not been included in the above tables. For statistical details on the 1996 IMGs, please refer to the annexes to this report. 4. 4. Tempus Tacis Budget In 1996 all Tacis countries apart from the Russian Federation and the Ukraine started to receive their Tacis funding for Tempus activities on a biennial basis. As funding is released at different points during the two-year budget period, only the budgets for the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Mongolia and Uzbekistan were approved before the end of the reporting year. New projects in Moldova, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan could not therefore commence before 1997. As a direct result of the new two-year financing structure, money has to be set aside for the next academic year in order to fund JEPs emanating from pre-JEPs which were financed in 1996. In Georgia and Azerbaijan funds were so limited that only full scale JEPs could be supported in 1996. The budget figures used in this report refer only to the actual allocation to Tempus activities in 1996. These figures do not include any carry over to 1997 of funds in order to finance JEPs emanating from pre-JEPs which were financed in 1996. - 26 The total Tempus allocation for 1996 was MECU 19. 4. Figure 4 shows a breakdown of this amount into the respective national allocations for Tempus activities in 1996. The Tempus allocation for each country for 1995 is added for comparison. Fig. 4: Tempus funds in MECU per Tacis country, 1995 and 1996 figures. Note: Due to the biennial funding construction no funds for Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova and the newly included partner countries, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan have been released yet. They have therefore not been included in this chart. The availability of Tacis funds differed from country to country in comparison with 1995. The Russian Federation's Tempus budget dropped from MECU 11. 575 to MECU 7. 8, whereas funds in the Ukraine increased from MECU 3. 83 6 in 1995 to MECU 4. 9 in 1996. 5 The Tempus budget of the Russian Federation in 1995 consisted of an allocation of MECU 9 from the national budget and of MECU 2. 57 from the Inter-State budget. 6 The Tempus budget of Ukraine in 1995 consisted of an allocation of MECU 3 from the national budget and of MECU 0. 83 from the Inter-State budget. - 27 4. 5. Tempus Tacis selection procedure For Tempus Tacis projects, a two stage selection cycle was employed (see Flowchart 2 overleaf). The first stage, carried out by the Foundation, focused on the formal and technical aspects of the applications: number and eligibility of partners, compliance with priority areas, project management, financial issues, feasibility of project objectives and strategy. During the second stage, the academic relevance of shortlisted projects was assessed by senior academic experts from the EU and partner countries. Based on the results of the two stages a list of projects proposed for funding was drawn up. The final decision was made by the European Commission. 4. 6. Tempus Tacis actions 4. 6. 1. Pre-JEPS and JEPs A total number of 241 pre-JEP applications was received for the 1996 call for applications, 59 of which were selected for support. Forty-five applications concerned the 5 countries for which the budget had not yet been approved by the end of 1996. Thirty-one applications did not comply with the national priorities and, therefore, were not considered for funding. For the remaining 165 applications the success rate was 35. 7%. Compared with 1995 there was a large drop (45%) in the number of pre-JEP applications. This is attributed to two main factors: 1. The priority effect. In 1996, the Commission in agreement with the national authorities of the partner countries established country specific priority areas for each partner country. This policy has focused the Tempus Tacis Programme on a smaller number of priority disciplines. The first consequence of this decision has been the reduction in the number of applications and, on the other hand, a better imbedding of Tempus in the national Tacis programmes of the partner countries. 2. The Compact project effect. In 1996, a new project type was introduced, the Compact Project. As a result, some potential pre-JEP applications became Compact project applications. Number of pre-JEP proposals received Number of pre-JEPs proposed for funding Success rate Average pre-JEP grant allocated 1995 435 87 20% ECU 43,600 1996* 241 59 35. 7% Please note that the data only refers to projects involving Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Mongolia, Russian Federation, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. 28 - General overview of the Tempus Tacis project selection in 1996 Priority setting Partner country ministries and European Commission define priority subject areas at national level. These are published and dispatched to all interested parties. Receipt of project applications by the given deadline. Technical implementation Control of formal eligibility. Tecluiical quality assessment of all formally eligible applications, including priority conformity check. Academic assessment of all formally eligible applications by EU and partner country academic experts. Jt,MM«!Mffl Meeting between the Foundation, technical assessors and academic experts under the European Commission's chairmanship. Consultation with relevant authorities in the partner countries. I mmmmmMBm Identification of projects to be distributed in two different lists: 1. projects potentially proposed for funding 2. projects potentially proposed for reserve list, to be funded if budget allows s3@ Final decision Notification Final approval by the European Commission on projects to be funded. ÉitWèiiii'ii^iirfTHiiagtrî Notification of the results to the project applicants. Flowchart N° 2 - 2 9- In response to the 1996 call for JEP applications, 83 out of the 87 consortia carrying out a pre-JEP in 1995/96 submitted a proposal for a full-scale project. Of these, 26 were awarded a JEP grant. Disregarding the 11 applications which focused on support to the group of countries for which the budget had not yet been approved, this represents a success rate of 36. 1%. To allow for comparison, the figures for Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova and - for 1996 -Tajikistan and Turkmenistan have not been included in the table below. Hence, the figures refer only to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Mongolia, Russian Federation, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. Number of new JEP proposals received Number of new JEPs proposed for funding Success rate Average JEP grant allocated Number of JEPs renewed from '94 and '95 Total number of JEPs running 1995 95 31 32. 6% ECU 612 200 26 51 1996* 72 26 36. 1% ECU572384 59 85 * Please note that the data refers only to projects involving Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Mongolia, Russian Federation, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. In the new pre-JEPs, progress towards a balance in country participation can be observed. Seventeen French, 19 British, and 19 German universities are now active in pre-JEP consortia. Southern European involvement rose sharply as did the involvement of Finland, Sweden and Austria. Reflecting the priorities of previous years, university management and European languages are the dominating subjects in the current JEPs. In the new pre-JEPs, however, law and the environmental sciences are better represented. Economics is a popular subject both in JEPs and in pre-JEPs. In 1996, 111 higher education institutions in the 8 partner countries for which projects were funded were involved in a Tempus Tacis project, out of which 73 participated in a Joint European Project or a Compact Project. Overall, until 1996, 131 higher education institutions in the above mentioned eight countries had benefited from a Tempus project grant. 4. 6. 2. Compact Projects (CPs) A total of 65 applications for the new Compact Projects were received, 14 of which were targeted at the five countries for which the budget had not yet been approved by the end of 1996. For the other countries 22 proposals were awarded a Tempus grant. This represents a success rate of 43%. 3 0- For further statistical details, please refer to the annexes to this report. Number of CP proposals received Number of CP proposed for funding Success rate Average CP grant allocated 1996* 51 22 43% ECU 60,000 Please note that the data refers only to projects involving Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Mongolia, Russian Federation, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. 5. LIST OF PUBLICATIONS Tempus Tacis Projects management handbook, in EN, FR and DE Catalogue N°: C2-92-95-091-DE-C C2-92-95-091-EN-C C2-92-95-091-FR-C ISBNN°: 92-827-5477-4 92-827-5478-82 92-827-5479-0 Tempus Phare Guide for applicants - Academic year 1997/98, in 11 languages Catalogue N°: C2-95-96-091- C2-95-96-091- C2-95-96-091- C2-95-96-091- C2-95-96-091- C2-95-96-091- C2-95-96-091- C2-95-96-091- C2-95-96-091- C2-95-96-091- C2-95-96-091- ES-C DA-C DE-C GR-C •EN-C •FR-C IT-C NL-C PT-C FI-C SV-C ISBNN°: 92-827-6768-X 92-827-6769-8 92-827-6770-1 92-827-6771-X 92-827-6772-8 92-827-6773-6 92-827-6774-4 92-827-6775-2 92-827-6776-0 92-827-6777-9 92-827-6778-7 3. Tempus Phare - Tempus Outputs Promotion, 5 studies in EN, FR and DE: Impact of Tempus on Institutional Management 1) 2) Tempus Contribution to University-Enterprise Cooperation 3) Tempus Student Mobility 4) The Impact of Tempus on National Reform 5) Mutual Benefits of Tempus project partnerships Catalogue N°: none ISBN N°: none - 31 - 4. Tempus Phare Compendium - Academic year 1996/97, in EN (introduction in DE, EN and FR) Catalogue N°: C2-02-96-359-3A-C ISBN N°: 92-827-92036-X 5. Tempus Tacis Compendium - Academic year 1996/97, in EN (introduction in DE, EN and FR) Catalogue N°\ C2-02-96-424-3A-C ISBNN°: 92-9157-045-1 Tempus Annual report 1994/95, in 11 languages Catalogue N°: C2-95-96-487-ES-C C2-95-96-487-DA-C C2-95-96-487-DE-C C2-95-96-487-GR-C C2-95-96-487-EN-C C2-95-96-487-FR-C C2-95-96-487-IT-C C2-95-96-487-NL-C C2-95-96-487-PT-C C2-95-96-487-FI-C C2-95-96-487-SV-C ISBNN°: 92-827-7035-4 92-827-7036-2 92-827-7037-0 92-827-7038-9 92-827-7039-7 92-827-7040-0 92-827-7041-9 92-827-7042-7 92-827-7043-5 92-827-7044-3 92-827-7045-1 7. Tempus at Work, in EN 8. Tempus leaflet, in 11 languages. - 3 2- Annex 1 The Tempus Programme: Overall statistics Tempus Phare 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MEÇU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from partner countries Staff to partner countries Students from partner countries Students to partner countries Number of JENs supported of which new 320. 38 272. 16 37. 75 10. 9 750 42,467 15,762 9,864 14,645 2,196 Number of CMEs supported* 138 Number of IMGs awarded from partner countries to partner countries 6,864 5,257 1,607 * Complementary Measures or Compact Measures Tempus I Tempus II 1990-1993 1994 1995 102. 1 102. 1 1996 83. 5 83. 5 485 229 16,641 6,718 5,542 3,653 728 112 83 100 • 1,271 1,271. 1 638 183 21,991 8,956 6,523 5,392 1,120 129 46 68 1,120 1,021 99 Total 601. 88 553. 66 37. 75 10. 9 1,401 100,649 38,987 27,856 28,751 5,055 167 331 10,624 8,756 1,868 95. 9 95. 9 464 239 19,550 7,551 5,927 5,061 1,011 38 38 25 1,369 1,207 162 Tempus Tacis 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) Number of partner countries involved 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported of which new Staff mobility within Pre-JEPs Staff mobility within JEPs Students mobility within JEPs Number of Compact Projects supported Number of partner country universities involved in JEPs Tempus I 1990-1993 1994 l e m p us II W95 1996 Total 21,944 23,994 20,543 69,931 3,45 3 74 7 76 28 11 87 59 31 1,421 1,174 1,304 586 156 916 95 51 8 59 85 26 1,027 1,198 91 22 64 296 85 4,926 2,700 342 22 Exceptionally, for 1995/96 only requests for East-West grants were supported. - 33 - Annex 1 Tempus Phare JEP distribution by country in 1996/97 Country involvement New JEPs in 1996/97 All JEPs running in 1996/97 Number I % (*) Number I % (*) 36 45 22 34 72 77 26 15 45 51 23 37 30 107 4 22 11 6 28 5 11 56 30 13 4 EU Member States Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Portugal Spain Sweden United Kingdom Partner countries Albania Bulgaria Czech Republic Estonia Hungary Latvia Lithuania Poland Romania Slovak Republic Slovenia Canada Iceland Norway Switzerland USA Other G24 19. 7 24. 6 12 18. 6 39. 3 42. 1 14. 2 8. 2 24. 6 27. 9 12. 6 20. 2 16. 4 58. 5 2. 2 12 6 3. 3 15. 3 2-. 7 6 30. 6 16. 4 7. 1 2. 2 0. 5 1. 6 1. 6 1. 6 81 183' 89 65 277 311 111 93 199 2 193 100 152 83 398 15 81 45 14 106 14 24 202 89 42 16 3 2 12 10 11 12. 7 28. 7 13. 9 10. 2 43. 4 48. 7 17. 4 14. 6 31. 2 0. 3 30. 3 15. 7 23. 8 13 62. 4 2. 4 12. 7 7. 1 2. 2 16. 6 2. 2 3. 8 31. 7 13. 9 6. 6 2. 5 0. 5 0. 3 1. 9 1. 6 1. 7 Total 183 100% 638 100% (*) The figures in this column indicate the percentage of projects in which the country in question appears. - 3 4- Annex 1 Tempus Tacis Pre-JEP and JEP distribution by country in 1996/97 Country involvement New Pre-JEPs and JEPs in 1996/97 All JEPs and Pre-JEPs running in 1996/97 Number % (*) Number % n EU Member States Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Portugal Spain Sweden United Kingdom Partner countries Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Moldova Mongolia Russian Federation Ukraine Uzbekistan Other G24 USA 7 18 6 13 30 39 13 6 18 1 23 7 14 12 41 6 2 H 3 4 48 25 8 6. 5 16. 8 5. 6 12. 1 28 36. 4 12. 1 5. 6 16. 8 0. 9 21. 4 6. 5 13 11. 2 38. 3 5. 6 1. 8 10. 2 2. 8 3. 7 44. 8 23. 3 7. 4 7 31 10 13 55 64 15 12 28 1 33 9 26 13 66 6 2 17 3 3 1 1 4 84 34 10 4. 2 18. 7 6 7. 8 33. 3 38. 7 9 7. 2 16. 9 0. 6 20 5. 4 15. 7 7. 8 40 3. 6 1. 2 10. 3 1. 8 1. 8 0. 6 0. 6 2. 4 50. 9 20. 6 6 0. 6 Total 107 100% 166 100% - 35 - Annex 1 Tempus Phare JEP distribution by subject area in 1996/97 N ew JEPs 1996/97 All r u n n i ng JEPs Subiect area Number % N u m b er Humanities Social Sciences Management and Business Natural Sciences and Mathematics Applied Sciences and Technologies Art and Design Languages Other JEP+ Areas 2 23 31 8 90 1 6 22 1. 1 12. 5 16. 6 4. 3 47. 6 0. 5 3. 3 14. 1 17 76 114 36 301 4 25 62 3 /o 2. 7 11. 9 17. 9 5. 6 47. 1 0. 6 3. 9 9. 8 0. 5 Total 183 100% 638 100% The sub-groups under Applied Sciences and Technology are the following: Agricultural Sciences Health Sciences Environmental Sciences Information Technology Engineering and Technology Architecture and Urban planning Other 29 38 52 39 105 16 22 4. 5 5. 9 8. 2 6. 1 16. 5 2. 5 3. 5 Tempus Tacis Pre-JEP and JEP distribution by priority area in 1996/97. N ew projects R u n n i ng proiects Subiect area N u m b er % N u m b er Humanities Social Sciences Management and Business (not focusing on University management) University Administration/Management Applied Sciences and Technologies Languages Other - 8 32 6 28 21 5 7 7. 3 30 5. 5 26 19. 5 4. 5 6. 5 14 57 7 42 23 16 7 % 8. 4 34. 5 4. 2 25. 4 13. 9 9. 6 4. 2 Total 107 100% 166 100% 36 - Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Albania Tempus I Tempus II 1990-1993 1994 1995 1996 Total 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 6. 19 3. 7 0. 09 2. 4 2. 4 2. 4 3. 5 3. 7 2. 5 2. 5 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from Albania Staff to Albania Students from Albania Students to Albania Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported* Number of IMGs awarded from Albania to Albania 13 413 171 121 115 6 226 180 46 17 5 452 208 161 79 4 0 2 191 182 9 13 6 445 227 176 42 0 3 10 295 295 15 4 415 205 153 46 11 15 138 137 1 14. 59 12. 3 0. 09 2. 4 28 1,725 811 611 282 21 3 18 850 794 56 * Complementary Measures or Compact Measures CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round. Tempus priorities 1996/97 for Albania In order for Tempus to complement the national higher education strategy, each year the national authorities meet with the European Commission in order to define Tempus priorities for the coming academic year. In the framework of the restructuring of the system of Higher Education in Albania, the national authorities have given priority to proposals in the following areas for 1996/97: ° The further development of health care via the restructuring and updating of clinical health departments and the Faculty of restructuring Veterinary Science of the Agricultural University of Tirana. D The further development of educational sciences via restructuring the departments of elementary, primary and secondary school teacher training. D The restructuring of curricula in experimental physics and chemistry. D The development of university management. D The development of transport and civil engineering. a The restructuring of the Mineral Resources and Energy Departments in the Polytechnic University of Tirana. D Support for Trans-European networks for student mobility 0 Humanities and Social Sciences (Law and European Studies, Social and Economical Sciences). ° Life Sciences (Natural, Environmental, Health Care and interdisciplinary sciences). Subject areas covered by all running JEPs in 1996/97 c 13% A: Humanities B: Management and business C: Natural Sciences and Mathematics D: Applied Sciences and Technologies E: Teacher Training - 37 Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Bulgaria 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from Bulgaria Staff to Bulgaria Students from Bulgaria Students to Bulgaria Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported* Number of IMGs awarded from Bulgaria to Bulgaria Tempus I Tempus II 1991-1993 1994 1995 1996 30. 63 28 2. 63 12 12 12 12 8 8 Total 62. 63 60 2. 63 80 3,093 1,486 835 686 86 35 564 474 90 59 32 1,863 857 682 277 47 1 7 174 155 19 57 28 1,815 877 638 259 41 83 9 18 143 143 82 22 2,304 1,139 755 372 38 98 8 6 96 82 14 162 9,075 4,359 2,910 1,594 212 18 66 977 854 123 * Complementary Measures or Compact Measures CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round. Tempus priorities 1996/97 for Bulgaria In order for Tempus to complement the national higher education strategy, each year the national authorities meet with the European Commission in order to define Tempus priorities for the coming academic year. In the framework of the restructuring of the system of Higher Education in Bulgaria, the following areas: the 1996/97 Tempus priorities cover 1. Priorities related to the restructuring of the higher education system: ° Restructuring of curricula and study programmes for Bachelor (4 years of study) and/or Master (minimum 1 year of study) degree courses in accordance with the new national law for higher education. ° Development of integrated education among Bulgarian universities based on joint inter-university education with joint curricula and study programmes. ° Trans-European student exchange with attention to specific issues such as foreign language teaching and recognition arrangements for studies undertaken abroad in line with the European Credit Transfer System. 2. Priorities related to strategic areas as identified within the Phare Programme: D Further development of specialisations at postgraduate level in strategic areas identified within the Phare Programme: economics and management in banking and finance, management in health-care, higher education and public services, medicine and strategic areas for European integration, especially European and comparative law, and European standardisation. The link between the Tempus priorities and the national reform process is evident. The new Law (in particular the introduction of the Bachelor degree) should produce more adaptable, less specialised graduates who will be better prepared for a fluctuating labour market. Subject areas covered by all running JEPs in 1996/97 A: Humanities B; Social sciences C: Management and Business D: Mathematics E: Applied Sciences and Technologies F: Modern European Languages G: Others - 38 - Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries 1996 Total 1. 0 1. 0 0 0 1. 0 1. 0 0 0 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1. Budget: Total Pre-Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from Bosnia and Herzegovina Staff to Bosnia and Herzegovina Students from Bosnia and Herzegovina Students to Bosnia and Herzegovina Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported Number of IMGs awarded from Bosnia and Herzegovina to Bosnia and Herzegovina CME figures for '96: only on special pre-Tempus selection round for Bosnia and Herzegovina. 2. Projects for the Training of International Relations Officers in: D Project design and project management (in general, and also specifically related to Tempus) D Creating new international networks D Managing Student and Staff Mobility 3. Training of university administrators (Rectors, Deans and International Office Staff) ° Strengthening Foreign Language Departments in order to improve the capacity to prepare staff and students in future Tempus activities Preference was given to projects involving all unwersities of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The eligible universities are the University of Banja Luka, the University Centres of Mostar, the University of Sarajevo and the University of Tuzla. Pre-Tempus priorities 1996/97 for Bosnia and Herzegovina The Tempus programme will play an important role in the re-integration of Bosnian institutions into the European university community and thus assist in the normalisation of the relations with the rest of Europe, and within Bosnia and Herzegovina itself. The Phare programme has made 1 MECU available in 1996 for emergency measures to support the local universities and prepare them for regular participation in Tempus Phare in 1997. In the framework of a Phare project, part of these funds are used to re-equip the language centres and international offices of the local universities. The balance will be used for initial Tempus activities. The following priority areas have been formulated for Special Compact Measures. 1. Training and support of university administrators and joint development of: D Short term development planning and strategic planning D Financial management systems for financial planning 0 Human Resources Management ° External relations and problem/conflict resolution - 39 Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Czechoslovakia1 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from Czechoslovakia Staff to Czechoslovakia Students from Czechoslovakia Students to Czechoslovakia Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported* Number of IMGs awarded from Czechoslovakia to Czechoslovakia Complementary Measures Tempus I 1990-1992 34. 96 27. 70 7. 26 145 5,052 1,969 1,184 1,634 265 53 1,008 785 223 Covers only the period 1990-1992, before independence of the Czech and Slovak Republics. - 40 - Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Czech Republic2 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from the Czech Republic Staff to the Czech Republic Students from the Czech Republic Students to the Czech Republic Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported* Number of IMGs awarded from the Czech Republic to the Czech Republic Tempus I Tempus II 1993 1994 1995 1996 Total 10. 94 8 2. 94 5. 5 5. 5 8 7. 5 7. 5 81 1,861 691 428 612 130 240 151 89 41 15 1,624 553 522 404 145 10 83 54 29 33 14 1,184 510 381 199 94 57 13 4 59 59 45 11 1,864 772 511 417 164 65 2 7 71 62 9 31. 94. 29 2. 94 121 6,533 2,526 1,842 1,632 533 25 22 453 326 127 * Complementary Measures or Compact Measures CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round T e m p us priorities 1996/97 for the C z e ch Republic Subject areas covered by all running JEPs in 1996/97 inter-university In view of the Europe Agreement and the future cooperation in EU participation programmes, the Tempus priorities 1996/97 as negotiated between the national authorities and the European Commission, focused on projects which in Higher could develop a European dimension Education. Firstly, the following areas were pointed out: 22% A: Humanities B: Social sciences C: Management and Business D: Applied Sciences and Technologies E: Others D Development of new curricula in EU legislation and European Law in some of the following topics (legislative law; legislation registered trademarks; consumer law); environmental and processes; regarding patents international Q Priorities established within the Phare Programme: banking, insurance systems; Social work; Public Administration; Bachelor-type curriculum for training of school teachers. finance and Secondly, internal the areas of development of quality evaluation systems and Mobility Projects aiming at introduction of European credit Transfer System were earmarked. the 2 For 1990-1992 see Fact sheet Czechoslovakia. - 41 - Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Estonia Tempus I Tempus II 1992-1993 1994 1995 1996 Total 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 4. 63 2. 5 0. 03 2. 1 1. 5 1. 5 1. 5 1. 5 1. 8 1. 8 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported , of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from Estonia Staff to Estonia Students from Estonia Students to Estonia Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported* Number of IMGs awarded from Estonia to Estonia. 17 330 124 98 99 9 156 126 30 19 13 444 146 183 106 9 0 1 62 57 5 12 4 251 114 105 31 1 12 0 2 66 66 14 6 168 79 73 16 17 0 1 64 58 6 9. 43 7. 3 0. 03 2. 1 40 1,193 463 459 252 19 0 8 348 307 41 * Complementary Measures or Compact Measures CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round T e m p us p r i o r i t i es 1996/97 for Estonia In order for Tempus to be in compliance with a national higher education strategy, each year the the European national Commission in order to define Tempus priorities for the coming academic year. Applications for 1996/97 had to fall within the following priority areas: authorities meet with ° Introduce measures to achieve greater compatibility with EU universities, e. g. through Quality Assurance systems, academic credit transfer systems a n d / or courses taught in foreign languages. ° Restructure university management systems. D Introduce information technology into Higher Education to underpin new teaching methods. Subject areas covered by all running JEPs in 1996/97 A: Philosophy B: Social Sciences C: University Management D: Natural Sciences and Mathematics E: Applied Sciences and Technologies F: Music G: Others 42 - Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Tempus II 1996 Total 2. 0 2. 0 2. 0 2. 0 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Staff to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Students from the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Students to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported Number of IMGs awarded from the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round. 0 0 31 31 0 0 0 31 31 0 Study to prepare for the restructuring of graduate and postgraduate studies in engineering and technology. Priority should be given to proposals covering: D mechanical engineering D electrical and electronic engineering D biotechnology. The study should include a labour market needs analysis and involve local industry. Study for development of a national strategy for financing higher education the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. In view of the subject, the participation of the relevant national authorities is compulsory. in Study to develop a mechanism for performance assessment of academic staff in order to achieve quality standards research and management of the higher education process. In the view of relevant national authorities is compulsory. the participation of the subject, teaching, in T e m p us priorities 1996/97 for the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia In order to re-establish existing and establish new contacts, a special round for Individual Mobility Grants was announced for the end of October '96 for academic staff of the universities and for administrators and education planners from the Former Yugoslav to visit EU Republic of Macedonia, universities and organisations. in order Compact Measures: The following priorities have been identified as being of strategic and immediate importance for the development of higher education and future the framework development of Tempus in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. to establish the for 1. Study to assess the current application of information technology in higher education and to provide recommendations for further development, in particular in the areas of: D multimedia educational systems 0 networks. The study should result in concrete recommendations for further development of these computer and communication technologies in higher education. - 43 Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Hungary 1. Budget: Total T e m p us b u d g et (in M E C U) N a t i o n al i n d i c a t i ve p r o g r a m me Regional f u n ds O t h er P h a re s o u r c es 2. Projects: N u m b er of JEPs s u p p o r t ed of w h i ch n ew Mobility flows w i t h in JEPs Staff from H u n g a ry Staff to H u n g a ry S t u d e n ts from H u n g a ry S t u d e n ts to H u n g a ry N u m b er of institutions p a r t i c i p a t i ng in JEPs N u m b er of JENs s u p p o r t ed N u m b er of C M Es s u p p o r t e d* N u m b er of IMGs a w a r d ed from H u n g a ry to H u n g a ry T e m p us I T e m p us II 1990-1993 1994 1995 1996 Total 59. 9 50. 2 9. 7 204 9,479 3,005 1,966 3,845 663 73 944 581 363 16 16 66 41 2,707 1,009 691 819 188 63 41 22 16 16 83 38 2,815 1,073 963 602 177 115 23 28 28 10 10 106 28 4,361 1,633 1,343 1,071 314 148 3 2 43 25 18 101. 9 92. 2 9. 7 311 19,362 6,720 4,963 6,337 1,342 34 90 1,078 675 403 * Complementary Measures or Compact Measures CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round Tempus priorities 1996/97 for Hungary The Hungarian priorities for JEPs beginning in 1996/97, identified by the national authorities and the European Commission, required both compliance with an agreed institutional plan and action in certain specified disciplines, so as to achieve a comprehensive impact on the Higher Education system as a whole. Accordingly, the JEP proposal had to demonstrate either a significant impact on the development of an institution or, in the case of a project involving more than one national institution, on the quality of education in the chosen discipline; or coherence with Parliament's Decision on Higher Education Development. In die latter case, the important action areas envisaged by the Decision were summarised as being: the precise definition of levels of teaching in HE, and development of new teaching methods (e. g. shorter cycle courses, new types of post- secondary education, distance education); increased emphasis on mechanisms for student exchange; preparation for the integration of the Hungarian "Universitas"; reaction to the needs of a changing society (university-enterprise cooperation, promoting public education); and teacher (re)training. In addition, the proposal had to operate within certain sectors which had been identified as priority areas: D To introduce European Studies into Higher Education (particularly in association with Law and Economics); 0 To devise new curricula leading to the definition of new academic and professional profiles indispensable to the restructuring of the economy and the continuing socio economic transformations. Target areas for these new curricula were: Finance, Humanities and Law; Informatics and technology policy; regional planning and management; Genetic engineering; Quality management; and teacher (re) training (with particular emphasis on primary and secondary education) (15 projects); ° To establish Ph. D. programmes; 0 To develop continuing education courses in collaboration with enterprises; 0 To support Trans-European student mobility networks (especially ECTS); ° To complement the work already being done by other Phare programmes; D To develop advanced teaching materials, in particular multimedia technology and distance education tools. Subject areas covered by all running JEPs in 1996/97 A: Law B: Social Sciences C: Management and Business D: Natural Sciences and Mathematics E: Applied Sciences and Technologies F: Design G: Languages H: Others - 44 - Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Latvia 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from Latvia Staff to Latvia Students from Latvia Students to Latvia Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported* Number of IMGs awarded from Latvia to Latvia Tempus I Tempus II 1992-1993 1994 1995 1996 Total 6. 2 3. 5 2. 7 17 589 219 140 190 40 139 94 45 2 2 19 6 802 260 299 202 41 0 "2 75 71 4 13 5 389 163 152 72 2 18 0 5 75 75 2 2 14 5 450 215 128 91 16 23 1 3 61 56 5 12. 2 9. 5 2. 7 33 2,230 857 719 555 99 1 12 350 296 54 Complementary Measures or Compact Measures CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round Subject areas covered by all running JEPs in 1996/97 Tempus priorities 1996/97 for Latvia In order for Tempus to complement the national higher education strategy, each year the national authorities meet with the European Commission in order to define Tempus priorities for the coming academic year. Applications for 1996/97 had to fall within the following priority areas: a public health D engineering and agriculture a interdisciplinary studies in European arts, history, philosophy and languages literature, ° creation of facilities for student exchange. A: Social Sciences B: Management and Business C: Natural Sciences and Mathematics D: Applied Sciences and Technologies E: Music F: Teacher Training 45 - Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Lithuania 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from Lithuania Staff to Lithuania Students from Lithuania Students to Lithuania Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported* Number of IMGs awarded from Lithuania to Lithuania Tempus I Tempus II 1992-1993 1994 1995 1996 Total 6. 7 4 2. 7 16 541 225 132 154 30 147 90 57 2 2 20 5 660 279 167 197 17 0 4 46 42 4 3. 5 3. 5 3. 5 3. 5 18 10 602 221 214 162 5 21 2 39 39 24 11 492 193 149 136 14 22 1 1 42 40 2 15. 7 13 2. 7 42 2,295 918 662 649 66 1 14 274 211 63 Complementary Measures or Compact Measures CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round Tempus priorities 1996/97 for Lithuania In order for Tempus to complement the a national higher education strategy, each year the national authorities meet with the European Commission in order to define Tempus priorities for the coming academic year. Applications for 1996/97 had to fall within the following priority areas: D student mobility and recognition; a foreign language training; D inter-faculty course cooperation; ° continuing and post graduate education; ° new courses in European Studies. The link between the Tempus priorities and national policies is evident. The emphasis on foreign language training, student mobility and European Studies point in the direction of Lithuania's commitment to entering into closer cooperation with the EU and preparing itself for future membership. The attention given to credit transfer and compatibility is essential for a relatively small country, where higher education institutions are naturally specialised while the degree of choice in the education market must be and efficiency ensured Subject areas covered by all running JEPs in 1996/97 F 29% A: Social Sciences B: Management and Business C: Physics D: Applied Sciences and Technologies E: Languages F: Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies - 4 6- Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Poland 1. Budget- Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from Poland Staff to Poland Students from Poland Students to Poland Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported* Number of IMGs awarded from Poland to Poland Tempus I Tempus II 1990-1993 1994 1995 1996 Total 97. 53 86. 9 10. 63 35 35 30 30 25 25 187. 53 176. 90 10. 63 248 12,578 4,393 2,942 4,616 627 76 2,190 1,739 451 175 91 7,263 2,851 2,122 1,910 380 16 14 339 307 32 156 65 5,348 2,120 1,667\ 1,338 223 224 12 26 275 275 202 56 7257 2937 1986 2040 294 328 10 16 318 295 23 460 32,446 12,301 8,717 9,904 1,524 38 132 3,122 2,616 506 * Complementary Measures or Compact Measures CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round 2. Mobility Joint European Projects Mobility projects which lead to the establishment of institutional structures supporting student mobility (e. g. student advisory/information services) and the introduction of a credit transfer system (based on the European Credit Transfer System - ECTS). Subject areas covered by all running JEPs in 1996/97 T e m p us p r i o r i t i es 1996/97 for P o l a nd In order for Tempus to complement the national higher education strategy, each year the national authorities meet with the European Commission in order to define Tempus priorities for the coming academic year. Applications for 1996/97 should have fallen within the following priority areas: 1. Structural Joint European Projects ° Transformation of uniform five-year Master Degree courses into a two-stage system with three/ four-year Bachelor Degree course followed by a two-year Master degree course or a system with common core curriculum (e. g. two to four semesters) for Bachelor and Master Degree courses, followed by separate strands for each Degree course. D Development of the European dimension in higher education. 0 Development and introduction new specialisations and professional profiles into undergraduate a n d / or postgraduate studies in response to labour market needs. of D Modernisation of two-subject teacher education in Higher Education Schools of pedagogy. - 4 7- A: Social Sciences B: Management and Business C: Natural Sciences and Mathematics D: Applied Sciences and Technologies E: Languages F: Others Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Romania 1. , Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from Romania Staff to Romania Students from Romania Students to Romania Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported* Number of IMGs awarded from Romania to Romania Tempus I 1991-1993 41. 75 41 0. 75 Tempus II 1994 1995 1996 Total 12 12 18 18 15 15 86. 75 86 0. 75 94 6,088 2,444 1,437 1,975 232 32 692 580 112 51 24 2,112 834 661 528 89 0 9 192 162 30 59 36 2,470 888 824 638 120 190 13 18 160 160 89 30 3,054 1,095 916 844 199 341 8 18 180 166 14 184 13,724 5,261 3,838 3,985 640 21 77 1,224 1,068 156 * Complementary Measures or Compact Measures CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round T e m p us p r i o r i t i es 1996/97 for R o m a n ia In the framework of the restructuring of the system of Higher Education the national authorities and the European Commission identified in the following priorities 1996/97: for Tempus actions in Romania, in particular their extension D The development of short cycle Higher Education courses and into continuing education in the areas of engineering and technology, agriculture and food processing, health care, social assistance, tourism, business services. Projects administration and financial the should be based on cooperation between education institutions and enterprises (including public administrative bodies) in order to make the degrees better suited to the needs of the economy. D The modernisation or restructuring of existing the needs of to cater for (long cycle) courses European integration via: and the • Upgrading to curricula restructuring of of Romania's integration related economy into European structures in the areas of law, quality assurance and management for industry and public administration. • Development of courses on specific topics related to the EU to be introduced into existing study programmes in the areas of EU law and interdisciplinary studies related to specific EU policy sectors. ° Preparation for participation in EU inter-university cooperation programmes through mobility projects featuring the introduction of an academic course credit transfer system, or agreements for mutual recognition of study periods with a view to integration within EU university networks. D Restructuring of primary and secondary school teacher training through curriculum development and the introduction of modern teaching methods. S u b j e ct areas c o v e r ed by all r u n n i ng JEPs in 1996/97 A: Humanities B: Social Sciences C: Management and Business D: Natural Sciences and Mathematics E: Applied Sciences and Technologies F: Languages G: Others 48 - Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Slovak Republic3 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from the Slovak Republic Staff to the Slovak Republic Students from the Slovak Republic Students to the Slovak Republic Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported* Number of IMGs awarded from the Slovak Republic to the Slovak Republic Tempus I Tempus II 1993 1994 1995 1996 Total 6. 18 5 1. 18 5 5 4. 5 4. 5 20. 68. 19. 5 1. 18 46 924 365 226 292 41 136 95 41 33 15 1,001 320 236 391 54 2 4 73 64 9 31 14 939 401 277 212 49 45 70 70 42 13 1,121 415 318 323 65 62 3 3 64 60 4 88 3,985 1,501 1,057 1,218 209 13 13 343 289 54 Complementary Measures or Compact Measures CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round Tempus priorities 1996/97 for the Slovak Republic Subject areas covered by all running JEPs in 1996/97 In order for Tempus to complement the national higher education strategy, each year the national authorities meets with the European Commission in order to define the Tempus priorities for the coming academic year. The Tempus priorities for 1996/97 relate on the one hand to the country's policy of European Union pre-accession and on the other hand to themes relevant for the participation in EU educational programmes: ° European Law; D Quality management; Q Public health and primary health care; 0 Economics and the financing of health and education; ° Specialised courses of specific purposes (LSP) for the training of translators and interpreters in the EU languages; languages for 0 Social work and employment services; D Human resource development, management and quality assessment of Higher Education Institutions. 3 For 1990-1992 see Fact sheet Czechoslovakia. 49 A: Law B: Social Sciences C: Management and Business D: Chemistry E: Applied Sciences and Technologies F: Languages G: Others Annex 2 - Fact sheets: Phare countries Slovenia4 Tempus I Iempus II 1992-1993 1994 1995 1996 Total 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National indicative programme Regional funds Other Phare sources 6. 57 4. 8 0. 77 1 2. Projects: Number of JEPs supported of which new Mobility flows within JEPs Staff from Slovenia • Staff to Slovenia Students from Slovenia Students to Slovenia Number of institutions participating in JEPs Number of JENs supported Number of CMEs supported* Number of IMGs awarded from Slovenia to Slovenia 44 1,108 481 268 304 55 217 187 30 2. 5 2. 5 2. 6 2. 6 1. 25 1. 25 24 5 622 232 203 149 38 1 5 81 72 9 12 7 335 123 146 50 16 14 5 2 61 61 16 4 505 273 191 36 5 19 7 4 43 40 3 12. 92 11. 15 0. 77 1 60 2,570 1,109 808 539 114 13 16 402 360 42 Complementary Measures or Compact Measures CME figures for '96: only on 1st section round Subject areas covered by all running JEPs in 1996/97 Tempus priorities 1996/97 for Slovenia In order for Tempus to complement the national higher education strategy, each year the national authorities meet with the European Commission in order to define Tempus priorities for the coming academic year. The priorities for Slovenia for the call for applications 1996/97 were twofold: On the one hand, priorities were designed to help the implementation of the new legislation on higher education: Q the restructuring of university programmes for primary and secondary school teachers; D the development of short cycle degrees in health higher care and education institutions (visoka strokovna sola). at professional agriculture On the other hand, different priorities were set up to support the implementation of the Europe Agreement: ° the development of European studies; ° the restructuring of education in the field of urban and regional planning, with a view to introducing inter-disciplinary cooperation; D the restructuring of the teaching of languages of the European Union. A: Law B: Public Administration C: Management and Business D: Natural Sciences and Mathematics E: Applied Sciences and Technologies F: Languages G: Others 4 Excluded are details about the projects (IMGs) which were carried out when Slovenia was still part of Yugoslavia, i. e. before independence in 1992. Twenty-four of the iiidicated JEPs were originally Yugoslaviaii projects but renewed as Slovenian projects in the same year. - 50 - Annexe 3 - Fact sheets: Tacis countries Armenia 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported Number of CPs supported Number of Armenian institutions involved in Tempus Subject areas covered by all running projects in 1996/97 D 17% 1995 1996 Total 0. 247 0. 95 1. 197 4 1 1 4. 9 1 1 A: Social Sciences B: University Adniinistration/ Management C: Applied Sciences and Technologies D: Languages Azerbaijan 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National allocation 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported Number of CPs supported Number of Azerbaijani institutions involved in Tempus Subject areas covered by all r u n n i ng projects in 1996/97 1995 1996 Total 0. 143 0 4 0 0. 973 1. 116 0 2 0 2 4 2 0 A: European Studies and International Relations B: Tourism and Leisure 51 - Annexe 3 - Fact sheets: Tacis countries Belarus 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported of which new Number of CPs supported Number of Belarussian institutions : involved in Tempus 1993 0. 380 13 0 1994 2. 1 1995 1. 49 1996 Total 1. 638 5. 608 24 8 13 3 11 Subject areas covered by all running projects in 1996/97 A: Law B: Social Sciences C: University Administration/ Management D: Agricultural and Food Sciences E: Languages Georgia 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported Number of CPs supported Number of Georgian institutions involved in Tempus Subject areas covered by all running projects in 1996/97 1995 1996 Total 0. 242 0. 943 1. 185 0 3 0 3 5 3 0 A: University Administration/ Management B: Applied Sciences and Technologies - 52 Annexe 3 - Fact sheets: Tacis countries Kazakhstan 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National allocation 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported of which new Number of Kazakh institutions involved in Tempus * Information not available at the time of printing Kyrgyzstan 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National allocation 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported of which new Number of Kyrgyz institutions involved in Tempus * Information not available at the time of printing Moldova 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) National allocation 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported of which new Number of Moldovan institutions involved in Tempus Information not available at the time of printing 1994 1995 1996 Total 0. 370 1. 999 2 2. 369 21 3 11 1994 1995 1996 Total 0. 09 0. 754 0. 5 0. 844 4 1 1994 1995 1996 Total 0. 23 1. 128 1 1. 358 9 2 53 - Annexe 3 - Fact sheets: Tacis countries Mongolia 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported Number of CPs supported Number of Mongolian institutions involved in Tempus Subject areas covered by all running projects in 1996/97 1995 1996 Total 0. 221 0. 655 0. 876 2 1 1 4 7 1 1 D 25% B 25% A: History B: University Management and Administration C: Medical Sciences D: Teacher Training Russian Federation 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported of which new Number of CPs supported Number of Russian institutions involved in Tempus 1993 1994 1995 1996 Total 2. 54 15. 37 11. 57 7. 652 37. 132 18 18 37 34 16 81 29 43 9 10 58 66 43 10 81 Subject areas covered by all r u n n i ng projects in 1996/97 A: Humanities B: Social Sciences C: University Administration/Management D: Economics E: Applied Sciences and Technologies F: Languages G: Teacher Training - • 54 Annexe 3 - Fact sheets: Tacis countries Ukraine 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported of which new Number of CPs supported Number of Ukrainian institutions involved in Tempus 1993 1994 1995 1996 Total 0. 5 3. 32 3. 83 4. 826 12. 476 25 15 10 9 5 21 15 15 6 4 22 Subject areas covered by all running projects in 1996/97 A: Law B: Economics C: University Administration/Management D: Social Sciences E: Languages 1994 1995 1996 Total 0. 25 1. 185 1. 453 2. 885 13 4 Uzbekistan 1. Budget: Total Tempus budget (in MECU) 2. Projects: Number of Pre-JEPs supported Number of JEPs supported of which new Number of CPs supported Number of Uzbek institutions involved in Tempus S u b j e ct areas c o v e r ed by all running projects in 1996/97 A: History B: Social Sciences C: University Administration/Management D: Applied Sciences and Technologies - 55 ISSN 0254-1475 COM(97) 502 final DOCUMENTS EN 15 16 11 Catalogue number : CB-CO-97-506-EN-C ISBN 92-78-25176-3 Office for Official Publications of the European Communities L-2985 Luxembourg S'é


title: REGOLAMENTO (CE) N. 2294/97 DELLA COMMISSIONE del 19 novembre 1997 che fissa l'importo massimo della restituzione all'esportazione di zucchero bianco per la sedicesima gara parziale effettuata nell'ambito della gara permanente di cui al regolamento (CE) n. 1408/97

eurovoc_concepts:
award of contract
export refund
white sugar


title: REGLAMENTO (CE) N° 2297/97 DE LA COMISIÓN de 19 de noviembre de 1997 por el que se modifican los precios representativos y los derechos adicionales de importación de determinados productos del sector del azúcar

eurovoc_concepts:
CCT duties
import
raw sugar
representative price
sugar product
white sugar


title: SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG nr. 3704/97 van Jyrki OTILA aan de Commissie. Monopolie voor apotheken in Finland?

eurovoc_concepts:
Finland
State aid
application of EU law
monopoly
pharmacology
restriction on competition
tax relief
university

formats: html pdf print

text: 8. 6. 98 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen C 174/105 In de meest recente studie wordt de huidige wetenschappelijke kennis over de gevaren en risico(cid:146)s van chrysotiel gee¤valueerd. De studie wijst uit dat er nu veiliger alternatieven zijn voor nagenoeg alle producten waarin momenteel chrysotiel wordt gebruikt. De Commissie is dan ook voornemens op basis van wat momenteel bekend is over de gezondheidsrisico(cid:146)s het gebruik van chrysotielasbest op enkele uitzonderingen na in de hele Gemeenschap te verbieden. Dit voorlopige beleidsstandpunt is op een vergadering van de desbetreffende werkgroep van 9 december 1997 aan de lidstaten en de industrie medegedeeld. Er is duidelijk een gekwalificeerde meerderheid vo·o·r het beginsel, hoewel er verdere besprekingen nodig zijn om overeenstemming te bereiken over een aanvaardbare lijst van uitzonderin- gen. De details van het Commissievoorstel zullen gedeeltelijk afhangen van het resultaat van een bijkomende studie over de technische en economische gevolgen van de vervanging van het bedoelde product. Deze studie moet eind maart 1998 voltooid zijn en kort daarna zal een voorstel voor een richtlijn worden ingediend. (98/C 174/163) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-3704/97 van Jyrki Otila (PPE) aan de Commissie (19 november 1997) Betreft: Monopolie voor apotheken in Finland? De Universiteitsapotheek is in 1828 in Helsinki opgericht. Met de wijziging van de wet op de apotheken in 1953 kreeg zij het recht om filialen te openen. De Finse wetgeving heeft de Universiteitsapotheek bovendien enkele bijzondere rechten toegekend, op grond waarvan ze is vrijgesteld van de zogeheten apotheekheffing en bepaalde belastingvoordelen geniet. Oorspronkelijk was de Universiteitsapotheek verbonden aan de Universiteit van Helsinki en vooral bedoeld om te functioneren als apotheek in de stad Helsinki. De reden hiervoor was dat studenten farmacie op deze wijze praktische ervaring konden opdoen. Tegenwoordig heeft de Universiteitsapotheek tevens filialen geopend in steden waar niet eens een universiteit is. Bovendien loopt slechts 27 procent (in 1997) van de studenten farmacie hun verplichte stage in de Universiteitsapotheek, terwijl 73 procent dit doet in particuliere apotheken. Een dergelijke situatie is naar mijn mening in strijd met de mededingingsregels en de grondslagen van het communautaire handelsbeleid. De Universiteitsapotheek heeft voor wat de mededinging betreft een verregaand monopolistische positie. Is de Commissie op de hoogte van deze situatie? Welke maatregelen gaat zij nemen om deze situatie te verbeteren? Antwoord van de heer Van Miert namens de Commissie (13 januari 1998) Het is de Commissie bekend dat wordt beweerd dat de apotheek van de Universiteit van Helsinki een geprivilegieerde positie heeft. Het geachte Parlementslid stelt dat deze voordelen van staatswege (vrijstelling van de apotheekheffing en andere belastingvoordelen) geniet en over een monopolie beschikt. Er lijkt evenwel geen sprake te zijn van een monopolie. Uit de beschikbare informatie blijkt immers dat er ook particuliere apotheken bestaan en derhalve concurreren met de Universiteitsapotheek. De vermeende voordelen moeten worden onderzocht in het licht van de regels betreffende staatssteun in het EG-Verdrag. Overeenkomstig deze regels kan de Commissie slechts optreden wanneer de handel tussen de lidstaten wordt verstoord door overheidsmaatregelen die bepaalde ondernemingen bevoordelen. Op grond van de beschikbare informatie oordeelt de Commissie dat de gevolgen van de betreffende voordelen beperkt blijven tot die plaatsen waar de Universiteitsapotheek verkooppunten heeft. De handel tussen de lidstaten wordt dus niet verstoord. De Commissie is derhalve niet voornemens verder onderzoek in dezen te verrichten


title: INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA n. 3663/97 dell'on. Carlo RIPA DI MEANA alla Commissione. Assegnazione appalto per la progettazione Nuova Tangenziale Est

eurovoc_concepts:
Latium
application of EU law
expressway
invitation to tender
provision of services
public contract
road building
works contract

text: 8. 6. 98 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunita‘ europee C 174/93 Nel 1995 la Comunita‘ ha destinato un Mio di ECU dalla linea di bilancio delle TEN- Trasporti (B5-700) al cofinanziamento di uno studio di fattibilita‘ relativo al corridoio adriatico. Secondo le informazioni in possesso della Commissione, la gara di appalto relativa allo studio di fattibilita‘ e‘ stata chiusa nel giugno 1997 e lo studio sara‘ completato nel 1998. Di norma, le autorita‘ nazionali e la Commissione effettuano una valutazione tecnico-finanziaria degli studi di fattibilita‘ dopo la conclusione degli stessi e dopo che e‘ stato richiesto il pagamento dell(cid:146)ultima rata del finanziamento comunitario. Entro la fine dell(cid:146)anno in corso, la Commissione prevede di adottare una relazione sull(cid:146)inclusione degli scali marittimi e fluviali e dei terminal intermodali nella rete transeuropea dei trasporti. (1) GU L 228 del 23. 9. 1995. (98/C 174/145) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-3663/97 di Carlo Ripa di Meana (V) alla Commissione (19 novembre 1997) Oggetto: Assegnazione appalto per la progettazione Nuova Tangenziale Est In una interrogazione al Sindaco di Roma, Francesco Rutelli, presentata dal consigliere Adriana Spera, risulta che l(cid:146)Amministrazione comunale di Roma nell(cid:146)assegnazione dell(cid:146)appalto per la progettazione della Nuova Tangenziale Est a favore della Spa Ferrovie dello Stato, per un importo di oltre 6 miliardi di lire, ha violato il disposto di cui alla Direttiva 92/50/CEE (1), recepita dallo Stato italiano con D. L. n. 157/95. In particolare, il Comune di Roma ha assegnato tale appalto con il sistema della trattativa privata, senza il ricorso alla gara europea, sull(cid:146)errato presupposto che l(cid:146)appalto in questione rientrasse tra quelli «esclusi». Poiche· risulta che tanto il consigliere Spera quanto l(cid:146)Usicons (associazione di consumatori) hanno a suo tempo segnalato alla Commissione la vicenda, puo‘ essa far sapere se vi e‘ stato un intervento da parte sua e, in caso affermativo, con quale esito? Inoltre, risulta alla Commissione che il Sindaco di Roma abbia revocato la delibera con la quale aveva assegnato l(cid:146)appalto alla Spa Ferrovie dello Stato, affidandolo, nuovamente con il sistema della trattativa privata, alla Spa S. T. A. , Societa‘ interamente controllata dal Comune di Roma, che si occupa della rimozione delle auto in sosta vietata ma non di progettazione e che, pertanto, non puo‘ accedere alla trattativa privata quale organismo con diritti di esclusiva nella materia oggetto dell(cid:146)appalto? (1) GU L 209 del 24. 7. 1992, pag. 1 Riposta data dal Sig. Monti in nome della Commissione (6 gennaio 1998) Il 17 marzo 1997, la Commissione ha inviato una domanda di informazioni alle autorita‘ italiane, manifestando le sue perplessita‘ sulle compatibilita‘ con il diritto comunitario dell’assegnazione a Ferrovie dello Stato S. p. A. dell’appalto per la progettazione della nuova tangenziale Est. Le autorita‘ italiane hanno risposto il 2 ottobre 1997, formulando le loro osservazioni e segnalando che stavano studiando soluzioni alternative. Nel frattempo, la Commissione era stata informata che il 1o agosto 1997 il Comune di Roma aveva preso una nuova decisione che abrogava la decisione precedente. Il 24 ottobre 1997 la Commissione ha inviato un’altra domanda di informazioni alle autorita‘ italiane su questa nuova decisione, segnalando loro che la nuova delibera che attribuisce alla societa‘ STA S. p. A. l’appalto per la progettazione della tangenziale solleva anch’esso riserve quanto alla sua compatibilita‘ con il diritto comunitario degli appalti pubblici e in particolare con la direttiva 92/50/CEE recante coordinamento delle procedure di aggiudicazione degli appalti pubblici di servizi


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3719/97 by Stelios ARGYROS to the Commission. Information brochure published by the Common Research Centre

eurovoc_concepts:
EU publication
Joint Research Centre
book trade
dissemination of EU information
paper
plastics
production cost
research policy

text: 8. 6. 98 FI Euroopan yhteiso¤jen virallinen lehti C 174/107 3. Yhteiso¤n kansalaiset, jotka katsovat joutuneensa jonkin ja¤senvaltion viranomaisten tekema¤n pa¤a¤to¤ksen vuoksi syrjityiksi koulutuksen saatavuuden tai ammattiin pa¤a¤syn ja ammatin harjoittamisen alalla, voivat valittaa kohtelustaan maan sisa¤isen lainsa¤a¤da¤nno¤n mukaisesti. Mika¤li on aihetta epa¤illa¤ kansallisen oikeuden sa¤a¤do¤ksen ja yhteiso¤n oikeuden sa¤a¤do¤ksen yhteensopivuutta, kyseinen kansallinen tuomioistuin voi tarvittaessa saattaa Euroopan yhteiso¤jen tuomioistuimen ka¤sitelta¤va¤ksi yhden tai useampia asioita, joissa pyydeta¤a¤n ennakkoratkai- sua. Lisa¤ksi yhteiso¤n kansalaiset voivat valittaa asiasta myo¤s komissiolle. (98/C 174/166) KIRJALLINEN KYSYMYS E-3719/97 komissiolle esitta¤ja¤(t): Stelios Argyros (PPE) (19. marraskuuta 1997) Aihe: Yhteisen tutkimuskeskuksen tiedotusjulkaisut Eurooppalainen tutkimuskeskus (Euroopan komissio, PO XII) julkaisi a¤sketta¤in yhteisia¤ tutkimuslaitoksia koskevan monitaitteisen tiedotuslehtisen, jonka mitat olivat A4 x 8. Ta¤ma¤ painotuote on kaksipuolinen ja painettu autotypiapaperille, jonka pa¤a¤llyste sisa¤lta¤a¤ muoviainesta. Mittojensa vuoksi painotuote ei ole kovin ka¤yta¤nno¤llinen, kun taas paperin koostumuksen vuoksi se ei ole kierra¤tetta¤vissa¤ eika¤ siis ympa¤risto¤ysta¤va¤llinen. Kyse on kuitenkin epa¤ilema¤tta¤ kalliista painotuotteesta, vaikka yhteisten tutkimuslaitosten menoja on pyritty rajoittamaan osana yhteiso¤n tutkimuspolitiikan yleisempa¤a¤ taloudellista sa¤a¤sto¤linjaa. Haluaisimme komission kertovan meille: › Paljonko kyseisen painotuotteen tuottaminen maksoi? › Mika¤ yksikko¤ hyva¤ksyi ta¤ma¤n menoera¤n? › Minka¤ se uskoo olevan ta¤ma¤n julkaisun tarkoituksen ja mita¤ hyo¤tya¤ se uskoo silla¤ tavoiteltavan? Komission ja¤senen E· dith Cressonin komission puolesta antama vastaus (7. tammikuuta 1998) Komission yhteisella¤ tutkimuskeskuksella on olennaisen ta¤rkea¤ asema tieteellisen tuen antamisessa yhteiso¤n politiikoille. Lisa¤ksi se tarjoaa kilpailun alaan liittyvien toimiensa kautta huomattavia mahdollisuuksia innovaatioihin eurooppalaisessa teollisuudessa, mutta na¤ma¤ mahdollisuudet eiva¤t ole viela¤ nykyisin riitta¤va¤n hyvin tunnettuja. Ta¤sta¤ syysta¤ on omaksuttu aktiivinen la¤hestymistapa tekniikan siirron, tutkimusyhteistyo¤n ja tutkimuskeskuk- sessa tapahtuvan koulutuksen edista¤miseksi, jotta yhteisesta¤ tutkimuskeskuksesta kansalaisille ja Euroopan teollisuudelle koituvaa hyo¤tya¤ voitaisiin lisa¤ta¤. Ta¤ma¤ la¤hestymistapa merkitsee myo¤s sita¤, etta¤ yhteisen tutkimuskeskuksen toiminta on tehta¤va¤ tunnetummaksi ja avoimemmaksi. Parlamentin ja¤senen tarkoittama juliste julkaistiin ta¤ssa¤ tarkoituksessa. Juliste julkaistiin 10 000 kappaleen painoksena ja sen kustannukset olivat 6 114 ecua. (98/C 174/167) KIRJALLINEN KYSYMYS E-3720/97 komissiolle esitta¤ja¤(t): Mark Watts (PSE) (21. marraskuuta 1997) Aihe: Hoitajien avustustaso EU:n ja¤senvaltioissa Voisiko komissio toimittaa ja¤senvaltiokohtaisesti jaotellut tiedot vammaisen tai ia¤kka¤a¤n henkilo¤n tai lapsen hoitajana toimiville henkilo¤ille maksettavan avustuksen ma¤a¤ra¤sta¤?


title: SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE Nr. 3717/97 von Raimo ILASKIVI an die Kommission. Studie über die wirtschaftlichen Konsequenzen einer Abschaffung des steuerfreien Verkaufs

eurovoc_concepts:
EU employment policy
Finland
derogation from EU law
duty-free sale
economic consequence
impact study
job cuts
transport policy

formats: html print