Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - SAPARD annual Report - Year 2002
Date: 2003-10-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Central and Eastern European countries, EU programme, accession to the European Union, activity report, aid to agriculture, rural development

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 7.10.2003
COM(2003) 582 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE
AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

SAPARD ANNUAL REPORT – Year 2002

   
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

3.2.

3.3

4.

5.

5.1

5.2

5.3

6.

7.

8.

9.

SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. 3

SAPARD - State of Play .............................................................................................. 5

Accreditation of the SAPARD Agencies and decisions conferring management of aid5

SAPARD – in operation............................................................................................... 7

Changes in legal frameworks ....................................................................................... 7

Execution in 2002 – Financial and budgetary issues ................................................. 15

Work carried out in relation to the Court of Auditors................................................ 18

Mid-term-evaluation .................................................................................................. 18

SAPARD – ‘the learning process’ - Key elements in relation to 2002...................... 20

Monitoring of commitments ...................................................................................... 20

Flooding ..................................................................................................................... 21

Seminars financed under Article 7(4) “Assistance by the Commission” .................. 22

Involvement in SAPARD of Non Government Organisations .................................. 23

Information on European Anti Fraud Office (OLAF) Activities concerning SAPARD25

Public procurement .................................................................................................... 25

Contributions from Candidate Countries ................................................................... 26

ANNEX A – Calendar of events concerning the Multi-annual Financing Agreement (MAFA)
and Annual Financing Agreements (AFA) ................................................................ 52

ANNEX B – Modification of programmes to the end of 2002................................................ 55

ANNEX C – Conferral of Management - calendar and coverage ........................................... 56

ANNEX D/1 – Data on commitments to final beneficiaries ................................................... 57

ANNEX D/2 – Data of commitments to final beneficiaries .................................................... 59

ANNEX E – Payments reimbursing expenditure declared to the Commission....................... 61

2

1.

SUMMARY

This is the third report produced by the Commission on the Special Accession Programme for
Agriculture and Rural Development, SAPARD.

The first report COM(2001) 341 published in July 2001, gave an overview of the SAPARD
instrument including the background to its introduction, the legal instruments upon which it is
based,  the  financing  arrangements,  and  the  tasks  to  be  accomplished  before  it  could  be
operational.  That  report  provided  background  information  on  the  instrument.  It  could  give
relatively little information on operational aspects because then only two countries were in a
position to apply it. The second report COM(2002) 434 published in July 2002 covered 2001,
a  period  when  five  countries  eligible  for  support  under  SAPARD  were  able  to  apply  the
instrument. Although these countries constituted half the eligible countries they accounted for
less than one quarter of the total appropriations for all countries.

In view of the situation just described, in the report for 2001 the Commission made clear that
any  assessment  of  the  instrument  on  the  basis  of  disbursement  of  Community  budget
resources  risked  giving  a  distorted  image.  However  many  criticisms  were  levelled  at  the
SAPARD instrument often based on this disbursement.

Since  the  report  for  2001  was  issued  expenditure  under  the  instrument  has  increased
markedly. In particular as regards payments to final beneficiaries, (as reflected in the quarterly
declarations received by the Commission) these have risen sharply throughout 2002. For the
declaration relating to the last quarter of 2002 they exceeded € 20 million. This was double
that of the previous quarter which in turn was some three times that of the one before. This
progress  was  achieved  without  payments  other  than  on  account  being  made  to  Poland  and
Romania,  by  far  the  two  greatest  beneficiary  countries.  Once  these  two  countries  realise
reimbursement  claims  proportional  to  their  weights  in  the  budget  allocation  under  the
instrument the impact on overall payments will be considerable.

However the Commission is still convinced that a proper assessment of the instrument must
take account also of factors other than the rate of budget execution. The are several reasons
for this.

One important aspect in this context is the fact that for beneficiary countries under SAPARD,
as  for  structural  expenditure  in  Member  States,  there  is  a  time  lag  between  commitments
being  made  to  final  beneficiaries  and  the  draw  down  from  the  budget  of  the  corresponding
Community co-financing aid.

This lag is  generally  not visible with  Member  States,  as the  eligible expenditure  at  any  one
time flows from a  sufficiently large volume  of  commitments  made  in  previous  years.  Thus,
for  example,  at  the  beginning  of  the  2000-2006  period  much  of  eligible  expenditure  in
Member States relates to commitments to final beneficiaries made in the 1994-1999 period. A
similar  situation  prevailed  with  the  three  new  Member  States  when  they  began  to  absorb
Community  funds  almost  immediately  post  accession.  In  all  these  situations  the  countries
concerned  had  the  structures  in  place  for  aid  to  be  granted,  plus  a  stock  of  pre  existing
commitments  to  final  beneficiaries,  that  were  of  a  nature  to  be  eligible  for  Community  co-
finance immediately upon accession.

The  lack  of  visibility  of  the  time  lag  just  described  is  in  sharp  contrast  to  that  found  with
SAPARD. Under this instrument and for all beneficiary countries there was a zero stock level
of pre-existing commitments with final beneficiaries that could be eligible for Community co-

3

finance under SAPARD. Thus in order to get expenditure flowing to final beneficiaries from
the Community  under  that  instrument  it  was  essential  to  build  structures  allowing  aid  to  be
granted and controlled (the key point being the conferral of management decision) after which
commitments to these  beneficiaries  may  be  made.  It  is  only  these  commitments  that  permit
eligible  expenditure  to  be  incurred  and  subsequently  reimbursed,  and  so  charged  to  the
Community budget.

The process of building the structures to apply aid schemes plays a role going way beyond the
impact it has in terms of budget execution under SAPARD. The existence of these structures
has a positive impact on the capacity of each beneficiary country to absorb rural development
funds  post  accession.  The  significance  of  that  role  cannot  be  measured  in  terms  of  budget
execution under SAPARD. Here the crucial factor is the way in which SAPARD is managed
in  all  beneficiary  countries,  namely  on  a  fully  “decentralised”  basis.  On  this  point  the
instrument is unique in that the other pre-accession instruments, PHARE and ISPA, even in
the few months prior to enlargement, still require at least some key points being managed by
the Commission. With SAPARD the Commission is not involved in any such key points. In
each of the ten SAPARD beneficiary countries, as is the case with structural funds in Member
States, it is the national authorities  that assume  entire responsibility  for management of  this
instrument, subject to only ex-post control by the Commission.

Already in early 2000 the Commission concluded that the way to manage SAPARD was only
on a fully decentralised basis. One  element in arriving at this view was the large number of
projects that would need to be handled. By the end of 2002 the projects for which contracts
with beneficiaries had been issued already stood at 2 160 and by end of June 2003 this total
was over 7 000. Leaving aside matters of language (all projects are managed in the language
of  the  beneficiary  country  concerned)  such  numbers  were  way  beyond  the  capacity  of  the
Commission  without  a  totally  abnormal  increase  in  staff.  Another  element  behind  that
decisions was the assessment that the skills and experience gained in the Candidate Countries
from  this  form  of  management  would  be  excellent  preparation  for  them  as  new  Member
States by making major contribution to administrative capacity building.

Some commentators considered that the challenge of this form of management would be too
great. On no occasion did the Commission share this view. Although it was a great challenge
for all concerned it has been met successfully by all of the beneficiary countries.

Decentralised  management  with  rigorous  preparation  (and  subsequent  control)  was  also  an
action  consistent  with  the  view  expressed  by  the  European  Parliament  in  its  report
accompanying  the  2001  Discharge.  Here  it  called  on  the  Commission  to  ensure  that  all
Candidate  Countries  implement  proper  accounting,  audit  and  control  systems.  The  process
leading  up  conferral  of  management  decisions  to  apply  SAPARD  through  decentralised
management is a  great step in the direction required by  the  European  Parliament  at  least  as
regards safeguarding Community budget recourses.

The  Commission  also  welcomes  the  contribution  the  SAPARD  instrument  has  made  to  the
enlargement process. The Enlargement negotiations concluded with the recognition that “the
EU  considers  that  maximum  use  should  be  made  of  the  experience  gained  in  the
implementation of SAPARD, in particular through using the SAPARD Agency to implement
and manage  future rural development  measures, whether  funded  from  EAGGF  Guidance  or
Guarantee”.  The  negotiations  also  concluded  that  differentiated  appropriations  (as  for
SAPARD) should be used to implement the temporary rural development instrument. These
comments are particularly interesting also in the context of work leading up to the discharge
for  2000.  Here  the  financing,  management  and  control  procedures  had  been  depicted  as

4

complex  and  possibly  not  needed  upon  accession.  It  is  now  clear  that  many  beneficiary
countries  want  either  to  continue  to  use  unchanged  the  structures  built  for  SAPARD  post
accession (or at least to maintain much of them).

This  report  describes  the  work  done  and  results  for  2002.  However,  it  also  includes  certain
developments  that  occurred  in  early  2003  where  to  have  had  a  cut  off  at  the  end  of  2002
would have provided the reader with a truncated picture. As in the report for 2001 it includes
a  section  based  on  contributions  from  the  beneficiary  countries.  However,  so  as  not  to
overload the text  with  those numerous  contributions, nor to run  the risk of their  submission
retarding the issuing of the present text, the texts of the reports received from each beneficiary
country 
site
published 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/external/enlarge/index_en.htm,  and  not  in  the  present
document.

web 

are 

the 

on 

be 

to 

2.

2.1

SAPARD - STATE OF PLAY

Accreditation  of  the  SAPARD  Agencies  and  decisions  conferring  management
of aid

Pre-conferral preparatory work and audit

The Conferral of Management of aid achieved for Bulgaria, Estonia, Slovenia, Lithuania and
Latvia in 2001 indicated the need to improve the approach so as to facilitate the task for the
remaining  countries  (Czech  Republic,  Hungary,  Poland,  Romania  and  Slovakia)  to  obtain
conferral decisions before the end of 2002.

The  procedures  and  work  requirements  used  in  2001  were  improved  to  facilitate  the
assessment of the quality of the implementing procedures and to detect possible weak points
in the architecture of the system.

For  this  purpose  rather  than  await  submission  of  the  formal  accreditation  package  the
Commission introduced a prior, informal presentation of the system  (management trail)  and
on  the  basis  of  that  presentation  set  out  the  steps  to  be  taken  to  monitor  introduction  of
whatever corrective action was necessary.

Once  the  assessment  of  the  degree  of  preparation  of  each  country  was  completed,  special
attention  was  devoted  to  any  major  difficulties.  This  was  the  case  in  particular  with  two
countries  (Romania  and  Hungary)  that  had  encountered  difficulties  such  as  to  risk  not
completing the National Accreditation in 2002.

Five  fact  finding  missions  were  carried  out  in  these  two  countries  to  assess  the  quality  and
extent of preparation for accreditation.

Conferral of Management of aid

As soon as the preparation was completed and its quality considered sufficient to meet Multi-
annual  Financing  Agreement  requirements,  the  National  Authorising  Officer  granted  the
National  Accreditation.  The  conferral  audit  followed  shortly  afterwards  leading  to  the
Commission decision on conferral. This decision was adopted in April for the Czech Republic
and  Slovakia,  followed  in  July  for  Poland  and  Romania,  and  finally  in  November  for
Hungary.

5

Thus  by  the  end  of  November  2002  the  conferral  procedure  that  started  in  2001  was
completed for the SAPARD Agency and the National Fund in all ten Candidate Countries for
at least certain measures.

For those countries that have already received conferral decisions in 2001 and early 2002, the
planning  for  the  implementation  of  the  remaining  measures  included  in  the  Rural
Development programme but not yet accredited was started.

Post conferral audit (follow-up)

The auditors carried out post conferral audits in four countries (Bulgaria, Lithuania, Poland,
and Romania) to ascertain that items recommended for improvement of the system detected in
previous audits were settled adequately.

In  the  course  of  these  audits,  it  was  noted  that  the  change  in  personnel  in  the  SAPARD
Agency (Romania) and in the Regional offices (Poland) introduced an extra element of risk in
the system that required closer monitoring.

Clearance of account decisions

Bulgaria  and  Estonia  were  the  two  Candidates  Countries  that  filed  a  declaration  of
expenditure relative to 2001. According to Article 11 of Section A of Multi-annual Financing
Agreement, the Commission carried out two on the spot missions in 2002 that resulted in the
clearance of account decision for 20011.

Conformity clearance decision

Article  12  of  Section  A  of  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreement  states  that  the  Commission
shall take a decision on the expenditure to be excluded from Community co-financing where
it finds that expenditure has not been effected in compliance with the Multi-annual Financing
Agreement.  At  the  end  of  2001,  only  two  countries  (Bulgaria,  and  Estonia)  had  declared
expenditures, and at  the end of 2002 the number  of  countries  that  had  declared  expenditure
increased to five (Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia and Slovenia).

Conferral of the remaining measures (Second wave)

The conferral of management of aid was granted on a measure by measure basis. The system
for the SAPARD Agency  and  the National Fund  were implemented  (first  wave) to  run  as a
general  rule  most  of  the  major  measures  in  each  programme  but  not  all  of  them.  This  was
done in order to avoid the less speedily prepared measures slowing down the entire process.
This approach also permitted experience  gained by  all parties in  the first round of  conferral
decisions to be drawn on in subsequent work on other measures.

In  the  third  quarter  of  2002,  the  Czech  Republic  completed  the  national  accreditation  for
measure 2.3 “Agri-environment” and requested its conferral. The audit was completed before
the end of that year2.

1

2

C/2002/3612/ of 2.10.2002, marginally outside the time limit in Multi-annual Financing Agreement.
The Commission Decision was adopted on 19 February 2003.

6

                                                
The  Commission  requested  all  National  Authorising  Officers  to  provide  before  the  end  of
2002  a  timetable  for  their  intentions  relative  to  the  National  Accreditation  and  subsequent
conferral requests of the remaining measures. Furthermore and taking into consideration the
accession  foreseen  for  May  2004  for  eight  of  the  ten  countries,  it  was  suggested  to  the
National Authorising Officers of these countries to implement all the remaining measures in a
single effort, if possible3.

3.

3.1

SAPARD – IN OPERATION

Changes in legal frameworks

Amendments  to  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 1268/1999  and  to  Commission  implementing
Regulations (EC) No 2759/1999 and (EC) No 2222/2000.

The  legal  base  for  the  SAPARD  instrument  is  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 1268/1999  (the
implementing
“SAPARD  basic  Regulation”)  for  which  there  are 
Regulations (EC) No 2759/1999 and (EC) No 2222/2000. Because no Community legislation
is directly applicable in Candidate Countries, the substance of these instruments is set out in a
special  instrument,  the  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreements  (MAFA)  concluded  with  each
country4.

two  Commission 

Modification of Regulation (EC) No 1268/1999 (Council Regulation (EC) No 696/2003)

In mid August 2002 serious flooding caused major damage inter alia in the Czech Republic
and Slovakia5.

Very  soon  afterwards,  on  28  August,  the  Commission  decided  that  a  response  from  the
Community  was  needed  in  the  wake  of  exceptional  natural  disasters  including  through  the
SAPARD instrument6. In view of the urgency a proposal was tabled already on 18 September.

The  proposal  took  account  of  the  fact  that  such  events  can  place  a  considerable  economic
burden on affected parties both in the public and private sectors. The Commission considered
that in the event of such disasters the Community should show solidarity with the population
concerned.  One  element  of  the  response  was  to  propose  the  creation  of  the  European
Solidarity  Fund  under which  assistance  would  be  provided  in  the  form  of  grants.  The  other
was to modify the SAPARD basic Regulation. The changes proposed to that Regulation were
to  increase  both  the  limits  on  intensity  of  aid  (from  50%  to  75%)  and  the  ceiling  of  the
Community contribution for relevant projects (from 75% to 85%) of total public expenditure.

The proposal was based on Article 308 of the Treaty, and therefore, needed to be submitted to
the  European  Parliament  for  its  opinion.  Moreover,  the  proposal  was  also  submitted  to  the
Economic  and  Social  Committee  for  its  opinion.  However,  whilst  the  proposal  was  still

3

4

5

6

At the beginning of 2003 the National Authorising Officers of 7 Candidate Countries (Bulgaria, Czech
Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Slovakia) had indicated their intentions. In the case
of Bulgaria (7 measures) and the Czech Republic (the remaining 1 measure) the National Authorising
Officers have granted the National Accreditation.
For further information see section 3.8 of the SAPARD annual report 2000.
For details see section “Flooding”.
The other key initiative was to table a proposal to set up the European Union Solidarity Fund (approved
by Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 (OJ L 311, 14.11.2002, p. 3).

7

                                                
pending before the Council the Nice Treaty entered into force which provides for a particular
legal basis, Article 181a of the EC-Treaty (as amended by the Nice-Treaty). The legal basis
for  the  proposal  therefore  had  to  be  amended  accordingly.  The  proposal  for  the  Fund,
although tabled later than that for SAPARD, lead to a Council  act  already  on  11 November
20027.

Progress on the proposal concerning SAPARD was however slow and did not permit adoption
of  the  modification  in  2002  (the  opinion  of  Parliament  was  given  on  11 March  2003).  The
modification of the SAPARD basic Regulation was adopted on 14 April 20038. Its content is
identical to the proposal made in seven months previously.

Modification  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  2759/1999  (Commission  Regulation  (EC)
No 2251/2002 of 17 December 2002)

There  were  two  distinct  elements  that  required  modification  in  this  Regulation.  One
concerned the scope of the training measure, the other the forestry measure. The need for the
first was detected through practical experience with application of the instrument. That for the
second  was  triggered  by  the  work  associated  with  the  exceptional  disaster  initiative  (see  in
this section “Modification of Regulation (EC) No 1268/1999”).

As regards the training measure, the initial version of Regulation (EC) No 2759/1999 limited
aid mainly to farmers and other persons involved in agricultural activities. The reason for this
limitation  was  that,  in  principle,  it  reflected  rural  development  legislation  applicable  in  the
Community.  The  modification  introduced  by  Regulation  (EC)  No 2251/2002  considerably
widened the field of persons who could receive training so as to permit support to any person
for virtually  all actions covered by  SAPARD. This was justified on the  grounds  that  within
the  Community  training  of  this  wider  range  of  person  may  be  supported  under  another
instrument,  the  Social  Fund.  However  in  the  case  of  the  SAPARD  beneficiary  countries  no
Community  instrument  is  able  to  play  a  similar  role  to  that  of  this  fund.  The  modification
brought  about  by  Regulation  (EC)  No 2251/2002  in  substance  aligned  the  training
possibilities under SAPARD upon what, in practice, is available for Rural Development in the
Community including on this aspect under the Social Fund.

Concerning the forestry measure, the initial version of Regulation (EC) No 2759/1999 did not
permit  aid  to  restore  forestry  production  potential  damaged  by  natural  disasters  nor  permit
support for investments in forests to control fires. In view of experience of the flooding which
in  August  2002  caused  considerable  damage  in  various  Candidate  Countries  including  in
forests,  Regulation  (EC)  No 2251/2002  permitted  aid  to  restore  forests  in  the  wake  of
exceptional natural disasters. It also removed the restriction that had previously not allowed
aid for investments in forest fire prevention.

Modification  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  2222/2000  (Commission  Regulation  (EC)
No 188/2003 of 31 January 2003)

The thrusts of the amendments introduced by the Regulation (EC) No 188/2003, the bulk of
associated work being carried out in 2002, was to address two situations. One concerned the
need  to  be  able  to  respond  rapidly  and  appropriately  through  the  SAPARD  instrument  to

7

8

Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 (OJ L 311, 14.11.2002, p. 3).
Council Regulation (EC) No 696/2003 (OJ L 99, 17.4.2003, p. 24).

8

                                                
exceptional natural disasters such as the serious flooding in mid August 2002. The other was
to  act  in  a  timely  manner  to  the  prospect  of  there  being  a  large  cancellation  of  SAPARD
commitment appropriations already by the end of 2003.

Concerning  the  exceptional  natural  disaster  component  the  modified  text  introduced  a
derogation  allowing  for  payments  to  affected  beneficiaries  in  the  form  of  advances,  as  an
exception to the general rule of payment being made only after expenditure has been incurred.
Application  of  this  provision  was  however  subject  to  adoption  of  the  modification  of  the
SAPARD basic Regulation referred to above.

Concerning  the  second  component,  the  risk  of  large  scale  cancellation  of  appropriations
became  evident  relatively  early  in  2002  when  it  was  clear  that  several  countries  accounting
for  a  significant  part  of  the  total  SAPARD  appropriations  would  not  secure  conferral  of
management decisions till towards the middle of the year at the earliest. At that time although
seven  out  of  the  ten  beneficiary  countries  had  started  to  use  these  appropriations,  three  of
them,  including  the  two  largest,  and  accounting  for  over  two  thirds  of  total  SAPARD
appropriations,  could  not  because  they  had  not  secured  Commission  decisions  conferring
management of aid. Until the countries concerned had demonstrated their ability to fulfil the
conditions  justifying  such  a  decision,  the  instrument  may  not  be  applied,  no  eligible
expenditure on projects may be generated and consequently none of the appropriations for the
countries concerned could be the subject of any payment order. This is fully consistent with
the  principles  of  sound  financial  management.  However  one  important  consequence  for
budget execution is that whenever the decision concerned is taken, eligible expenditure, upon
which  that  execution  depends  cannot  be  backdated,  unlike  the  situation  for  analogous
expenditure in Member States.

In order to justify the new deadlines for cancellation of appropriations set in Regulation (EC)
No 188/2003,  due  account  had,  in  the  view  of  the  Commission,  to  be  taken  of  the  above
situation.  It  was  seen  that  SAPARD  programmes  in  view  of  the  timing  of  the  conferral  of
management decisions could only start for Candidate Countries accounting for the bulk of the
financial  aid  in  2002.  However  appropriations  were  first  entered  in  the  budget  in  2000.
Experience with countries that had started SAPARD earlier showed that there was no realistic
chance for countries with conferral decisions in 2002 to be able to use any substantial part of
their  allocations  by  the  deadline  existing  prior  to  the  introduction  of  Regulation  (EC)
No 188/2003, namely the end of 2003. So as not to discriminate against those countries that
had  managed  to  make  more  rapid  progress  in  obtaining  conferral  decisions  all  were  treated
identically under Regulation (EC) No 188/2003, which extended by two  years the time limit
for  use  of  appropriations  for  the  annual  allocations  2000  to  2002.  For  subsequent  years  the
limit moves progressively towards the rules applicable for Structural  Funds. The Regulation
provides that the Commission shall decommit any part of a commitment which has not been
settled  by  the  payment  on  account  or  for  which  it  has  not  received  an  acceptable  payment
application by the following dates:

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

for appropriations corresponding to the 2000 annual allocation: 31 December 2004,

for  appropriations  corresponding  to  the  annual  allocation  for  2001:  31 December
2005,

for  appropriations  corresponding  to  the  annual  allocations  for  2002  and  2003:
31 December 2006,

for  appropriations  corresponding  to  the  annual  allocations  for  any  year  after  2003:
31 December  of  the  second  year  following  the  year  of  the  financial  commitment
concerned.

9

The  proposal  was  subject  of  a  vote  in  the  competent  committee  (European  Agricultural
Guidance  and  Guarantee  Fund  –  EAGGF)  on  17 December  2002  that  cleared  the  way  for
adoption by the Commission. However, in view of the importance and sensitivity of the issue
(potentially  avoiding  cancellation  of  several  hundred  million  €  at  the  end  of  2003)  it  was,
following  the  request  of  several  Member  States  also  explained  to  the  STAR  committee  (on
29 January  2003)  prior  to  its  adoption.  For  the  same  reason,  the  Commission  took  the
initiative to discuss it with the Chair of the Budget Control Committee prior to its adoption.

Several  points  of  a  more  technical  and  procedural  nature  were  also  included  in  Regulation
(EC) No 188/2003 including a provision permitting greater flexibility  concerning  the  timing
of expenditure declarations.

Also  included  in  Regulation  (EC)  No 188/2003  is  a  provision  allowing,  in  defined
circumstances, the responsibility of project selection to be passed to a designated organ rather
than to fall exclusively under the remit of the SAPARD Agency. This innovation allows for
example project selection to be decided by a designated Non-Government Organisation. This
change  is  a  move  in  the  direction  urged  by  Parliament  concerning  an  enhanced  role  for
representatives of civil society. However, by the end of 2002, it was difficult to see what use
had  been  made  by  any  Candidate  Country  of  this  facility  to  give  Non  Government
Organisations a decision making role.

Annual Financing Agreement 2002

This agreement had six components, as follows:

(i)

to set up and make available the Community contribution to co-finance actions under
the 2002 budget

The  Community  financial  grant  for  SAPARD  programmes  in  2002  includes  commitment
appropriations  under  budget  line  B7-010  of  €  545  million  and  a  transfer  of  € 9.5  million
approved  by  the  budget  authority  on  30  September  2002  from  budget  line  B7-010A
(Administrative management) of amounts not used by the Commission. Final appropriations,
including  the  above  transfer,  available  for  Candidate  Countries  thus  amounted  to
€ 554 500 000.  These  appropriations  were  allocated  to  Candidate  Countries  in  accordance
with Commission Decision 1999/595/EC of 20 July 1999 on the indicative allocation of the
annual Community financial contribution to pre-accession measures for agriculture and rural
development. The resulting amount by country is as follows:

10

ANNUAL FINANCING AGREEMENT 2002 – ALLOCATION BY COUNTRY

Country

Amounts in €

Bulgaria

Czech Republic

Estonia

Hungary

Latvia

Lithuania

Poland

Romania

Slovakia

Slovenia

55 582 227

23 526 795

12 942 243

40 578 737

23 297 531

31 808 039

179 874 468

160 630 119

19 502 405

6 757 436

TOTAL

554 500 000

(ii)

a provision so that final beneficiaries may secure, without interruption, contracts for
support  under  SAPARD  and  under  the  rural  development  support  system  post
accession

The  period  of  validity  of  the  commitment  made  to  the  beneficiary  country  in  the  Annual
Financing Agreement  2002  runs  till  the  end  of  2004  (to  be  extended  to  the  end  of  2005  by
Annual Financing Agreement 2003), namely well after the date of accession. It was necessary
in  the  Annual  Financing  Agreement  2002  to  stipulate  the  time  limit  within  which  the
SAPARD Agency could issue contracts with beneficiaries it being a pre-accession instrument,
and  to  avoid  a  situation  where  for  the  same  project  an  interested  party  had  the  choice  of
support from two instruments. It was also important to ensure that the possibility of obtaining
support was not subject to interruption due to accession. This objective was secured by laying
down  that  no  contract  involving  Community  funds  shall  be  entered  into  by  the  SAPARD
Agency with  any  beneficiary later  than  the  date  the  country  concerned  enters  into  contracts
involving a form of assistance for Rural Development as a member of the European Union.

(iii)

streamlining the tasks of project selection, role of Non-Governmental Organisations

The  modification  opened  the  way  for  greater  flexibility  in  project  selection  for  certain
measures namely those where in the programme there is only one designated beneficiary (or
in the case of the agri-environment measure, more than one such body). These changes were
designed  to  widen  the  role  of  Non-Governmental  Organisations  in  the  SAPARD  process9.
Although  most  countries  expressed  support  for  enhancing  the  role  of  Non-Governmental
Organisations  during  the  meeting  of  Ministers  from  Candidate  Countries  held  under  the
auspices of the European Parliament in February 2001, only four (Slovenia, Bulgaria, Estonia
and  Hungary)  of  the  ten  eligible  asked  to  have  this  option  included  in  their  Agreement  for
2002. However as reported above, by the end of 2002 it was difficult to see what use had been
made by any Candidate Country of this facility.

9

See also in the section “Modification of Regulation (EC) No 2222/2000”.

11

                                                
(iv)

introduce  eligibility  under  SAPARD  for  supplies  originating  in  Cyprus,  Malta  and
Turkey

The  Council  decision  taken  late  in  2001  widened  eligibility  under  SAPARD  to  goods,
services  and  supplies  originating  in  Cyprus,  Malta  and  Turkey10.  This  development  was
therefore  introduced  into  the  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreement  via  the  Annual  Financing
Agreement for 2002.

(v)

to  make  timely  arrangements  in  anticipation  of  modification  of  the  SAPARD  basic
Regulation

In order to ensure that in the event of the Council modifying the SAPARD basic Regulation to
include specific provisions relating to exceptional natural disasters (see section “Changes of
legal frameworks, Modification of Regulation (EC) No 1268/1999”),  corresponding changes
were introduced into the Multi-annual  Financing Agreements through the  Annual Financing
Agreement  for  200211.  These  changes  envisaged  increasing  aid  intensities  and  co-financing
rates but did not prejudge the attitude the Council might take over the proposal. This approach
was taken so that in the event of rapid conclusion of that legislative process no further delay
would be  caused due  to  the  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreement  not  already  accommodating
relevant provisions.

(vi)

technical changes

A  number  of  essentially  technical  changes  were  introduced  through  the  Annual  Financing
Agreement for 2002.

Other specific initiatives taken by the Commission to help with application of SAPARD

The  Commission  was  involved  in  numerous  activities  in  particular  helping  to  prepare
Monitoring Committees, to give advice during them and to follow-up all initiatives taken in
that  context  which  required  action  by  it.  Such  follow-up  concerned  in  particular  numerous
programme changes. Annex B gives an overview of the number of decisions the Commission
has taken on changing the SAPARD programmes since the start.

The Commission invited the beneficiary countries by letter sent in June 2002 to bring forward
any suggestion, which could help to ease the implementation of the SAPARD programme. To
date the response from three countries has  been relatively modest. However, all programme
modifications approved by the Monitoring Committee were given a positive follow-up by the
Commission  except  in  the  case  of  the  deletion  of  the  agri-environmental  measure  (voted
unanimously) by the Monitoring Committee for Poland.

The  Commission  responded  to  numerous  requests  from  parties  interested  in  any  aspect  of
SAPARD,  originating  within the beneficiary  countries  and  elsewhere.  Over  and  above  such
activities,  and  independent  of  their  importance  at  least  to  those  who  triggered  the  requests,
these activities have become of an almost routine nature and thus do  not  warrant  other than
passing mention in this report. There were however several initiatives which require mention,
as follows:

10

11

Council Regulation (EC) No 2500/2001 (OJ L 342, 27.12.2001, p. 1).
In the case of the Czech Republic this change was made in Annual Financing Agreement 2001

12

                                                
Sensitive sectors

During the negotiation and approval of the programmes, the Commission recognised the need
for pre-accession assistance under SAPARD also in sensitive sectors where in the European
Union there are restrictions, or even exclusions for support to  investments.  Such sectors  are
recognised  as  meat,  milk,  eggs,  sugar,  wine,  starch,  milling,  and  malting.  Permitting  aid  in
these sectors under SAPARD was warranted so as not to obstruct the underlying objective of
this instrument, namely to prepare structures in beneficiary countries for accession.

However  in  the  context  of  the  various  programmes  it  was  agreed  that  a  more  specific  and
detailed monitoring system should be developed to follow developments in sensitive sectors.
Such  monitoring  would  enable  instances  where  SAPARD  might  lead  to  a  considerable
increase in production capacities in sensitive sectors for appropriate, timely action to be taken.

In  June  2002  the  Commission  issued  guidance  to  all  beneficiary  countries  on  this  issue  in
particular  by  indicating  the  specific  sectors  concerned  and  the  indicators  to  be  used.
Consistent with the normal practice on SAPARD that guidance issued only after a draft had
been discussed with all countries concerned.

Infrastructure generating substantial net revenue

To  respect  the  aid  intensity  limits  laid  down  in  the  SAPARD  basic  Regulation  the
Commission already in 2001 issued advice to all beneficiary countries on how to determine if
a project is to be considered as generating substantial net revenue. That advice was important
because if such revenue were generated by a project involving infrastructure, the aid intensity
must respect a 50% (rather than a 100%) intensity limit.

The  advice  issued  was  based  on  the  concept  of  “substantial  net  revenue”  taken  from  the
Structural Funds general Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, Article 29(4)(a). A similar approach
under  SAPARD  to  that  under  the  Structural  Funds  was  set  out  in  that  advice.  The
Commission  did  however  explicitly  recognise  that  it  was  willing  not  to  insist  on  a  single
interpretation  of  the  relevant  revenue  and  acknowledged  that  differentiation  might  be
necessary if, for example, the underlying circumstances in different countries or project types,
warranted other approaches.

Consistent with the above the Commission issued in December 2002 revised guidance. This
was  after  discussion  with  an  interested  country,  which  foresaw  problems  with  the  paper  of
2001  in  certain  circumstances.  In  substance  the  revised  guidance,  issued  to  all  countries,
recognised that in cases of certain relatively small private infrastructure projects these would
be deemed not to generate substantial net revenue, and aid at up to 75% of total eligible costs,
would be considered eligible.

Monitoring of commitments

In  the  early  autumn  of  2002,  shortly  after  virtually  all  countries  had  secured  a  conferral  of
management  decision,  and  thus  SAPARD  was  able  to  operate  widely,  there  was  a  priority
shift from work associated with preparation to operation of the instrument.

The  nature  of  the  work  of  each  Monitoring  Committee  increasingly  in  2002  reflected  this
development. Most started to focus more on the need to examine progress of their programme
as provided  for  in  the  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreement.  Such  work  was  based  largely  on
information generated by the relevant SAPARD Agency but also on input from other parties,
including interested Non Governmental Organisations.

13

As  more  data  became  available  these  committees  could  see  developments  in  the  quarterly
reports  from  the  Commission  based  on  expenditure  declarations.  Inevitably  such  reports
cannot provide an up-to-date picture of what is really happening in terms of application of the
instrument.  Expenditure  declarations  are  the  result  of  an  upstream  event,  namely  that  of
potential beneficiaries becoming beneficiaries by being awarded contracts from the SAPARD
Agency for their  projects. Thus although not  all such contracts will lead to a corresponding
amount  being  including  in  a  subsequent  expenditure  declaration,  their  volume  and  value
provide useful  benchmarking.  This  at least was the idea of the  Commission  when  it  floated
the  suggestion  to  all  beneficiary  countries  in  a  letter  sent  in  October  2002.  In  essence  the
suggestion  was  to  set  up  an  information  exchange  based  largely  on  commitments  made  by
SAPARD Agencies to final beneficiaries. Interested countries were invited to provide data in
a  standard  format,  which  the  Commission  would  put  into  tabular  or  graphic  form,  to  the
extent possible on a comparable basis. In order to head off the risk of accusation that the idea
was  yet  more  bureaucracy  it  was  stressed  that  the  system  would  be  entirely  voluntary,  and
was designed to be simple to run in terms of data supply, as well as to use.

In  the  event  all  countries  agreed  with  the  idea  as  put  forward.  The  first  report  covered  the
period from the start of SAPARD to the end of 2002 (and was sent to all beneficiary countries
on  31  January  2003).  A  copy  of  that  report  is  attached  (Annex  D)  along  with  more  recent
data.

Timely execution of SAPARD budget appropriations

From  the  beginning  of  application  of  SAPARD  the  Commission  has  provided  advice  on
financial management of the instrument particularly from the perspective of actions that could
help to ensure full utilisation of appropriations consistent with the programme objectives. The
first  such  exercise  involving  all  beneficiary  countries  was  during  the  seminar  in  Tartu
(Estonia) in July 2001. In substance this part of the exercise was repeated during the seminar
in Brussels in June 2002. Here it was again mentioned that one of the indicators of success of
SAPARD  is  the  degree  to  which  the  beneficiary  country  takes-up  Community  support.  The
possible causes of low implementation were again outlined and the Commission put forward
several  options  to  address  this.  These  included  that  of  not  limiting  commitments  to  final
beneficiaries  of  amounts  in  any  particular  Annual  Financing  Agreement,  and  through  good
monitoring and management, to identify and to respond to problems.

That particular advice was further stressed in a letter from the Commission to all beneficiary
countries  sent  in  October  2002.  This  more  recent  advice  likewise  put  emphasis  on  pressing
ahead with commitments to final beneficiaries and explicitly raised the risk of cancellation of
unused  commitment  appropriations.  On  this  aspect  it  was  pointed  out  that,  even  if  the  time
limits  for  cancellation  were  extended  (as  they  in  fact  occurred  –  see  in  this  section
“Modification to Regulation (EC) No 2222/2000 (Commission Regulation (EC) No 188/2003
of 31 January 2003)” care would still need to be taken in managing the SAPARD instrument
to minimise the risk of these appropriations being lost.

On an aspect related to timely execution of SAPARD budget appropriations, but not limited
to this, is the willingness of the Commission to remove any rules seen to be “complex”. The
importance of this issue has underlined in the discharge resolution of Parliament for the 2000
budget where reference was made to the complexity of SAPARD rules. So as to take on board
in  a  practical  sense  this  point  the  Commission,  by  letter  sent  to  beneficiary  countries  in
June 2002, issued a standing invitation to receive suggestions to make the rules less complex.
To date the response from the beneficiary countries has been remarkably modest.

14

3.2.

Execution in 2002 – Financial and budgetary issues

(i)

Appropriations available and financial execution in 2002

Commitments (Mio €)

voted budget

changes *

total available
appropriations

implementation

lapsed

B7-010

B7-010A

Total SAPARD

545,0

10,0

555,0

9,5

-9,5

0

554,5

0,5

555,0

554,50

0,06

554,56

0

0,44

0,44

*

9 500 000 were transferred from B7-010A to B7-010.

Payments

(Mio €)

voted budget

changes *

total available
appropriations

implementation

lapsed

360,0

10,0

370,0

B7-010

B7-010A

Total SAPARD

Commitments

0

0

0

360,0

10,0

370,0

123,76

0,11

123,87

236,24

9,89

246,13

SAPARD appropriations are included in heading 7 of the budget. They are classified as non-
compulsory  expenditure  and  involve  differentiated  appropriations.  Chapter  B7-01  (the
SAPARD pre-accession instrument) includes Articles B7-010A (Agriculture - expenditure on
administrative  management),  and  B7-010  (Agriculture).  The  former  is  devoted  to  finance
certain technical assistance measures taken on the Commission’s initiative. The latter finances
the Community contribution to SAPARD programs implemented by Candidate Countries.

SAPARD budgetary allocations for commitments in the 2002 budget were set at € 555 million
of  which  € 545  million  was  for  programme  line  B7-010,  and  € 10  million  for  the
administrative management line B7-010A.

On  30  September  2002  the  Budgetary  Authority  adopted  a  transfer  of  € 9,5  million  of
amounts  not  used  by  the  Commission  from  administrative  line  B7-010A  to  program  line
B7-010 to make them available for the programs. Consequently, final appropriations available
for  Candidate  Countries  amounted  to  € 554,5  million  (included  in  the  Annual  Financing
Agreements 2002). An amount of € 438 879 of available appropriations was not used in 2002
and lapsed.

Payments

Allocations for payments were set at € 360,0 million for budget line B7-010, and € 10 million
for line B7-010A.

No appropriations were  carried over from 2001. An  amount of € 246,13 million  of  payment
appropriations was not used in 2002 and lapsed.

15

(ii)

Use of funds

Implementation of the Administrative management budget line B7-010 A

An amount of € 61,121 of Administrative management commitment appropriations was used
under Article 7(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1268/1999 by the Commission to cover the costs of
a seminar on “aspects of programme management” in Brussels.

The Commission proposed to transfer part of the appropriations remaining on the assistance
line B7-010A (€ 9,5 million) to the programme line B7-010. This transfer was adopted by the
Budgetary  Authority  and  enabled  the  amount  concerned  to  be  included  in  the  Annual
Financing Agreements for 2002, and so reinforcing (using the same distribution key as for the
global  amount)  the  Community  finance  available  for  each  of  the  agriculture  and  rural
development  programs.  As  already  mentioned  an  amount  of  € 438 879  of  available
appropriations was not used and lapsed.

A total amount of € 111 937 of payment appropriations was used to pay commitments made
for a seminar on 12 and 13 November 2001 in Brussels on the implementation of pilot actions
relevant to EU agri-environmental policy and for a seminar on 17 and 18 June 2002 also in
Brussels  relating  to  “aspects  of  programme  management”12.  An  amount  of  € 9 888 063  of
available appropriations was not used and lapsed.

(iii)

Implementation of the program budget line B7-010

(a)

Commitment appropriations

Commitment of total available budget appropriations for implementing SAPARD programs in
2002 (€ 554,5 million) followed the approach taken in 2000 and 2001. A global commitment
was made once the Commission adopted, on 22 October 2002, the model text of the Annual
Financing  Agreements  and  authorised  the  Member  of  the  Commission  to  sign  it  with  each
Candidate Country.

The  provision  for  making  a  global  commitment  under  Article  36(2)  of  the  Financial
Regulation  allows  the  Commission  to  commit  the  whole  amount  available  for  a  given  year
and  set  up  the  individual  commitments  for  each  country  before  the  end  of  the  next  year.
Individual  commitments  at  a  total  amount  of  € 539,6  million  (equal  to  Annual  Financing
Agreement 2001) were made in early 2002 for  each of the  Candidate  Countries. The  global
commitment  of  to  Annual  Financing  Agreement  2002  was  made  on  18 October  2002,
followed by the signature in the first half of 2003 of the Annual Financing Agreement 2002
for  Bulgaria,  Latvia,  Lithuania,  Slovenia,  Poland,  Romania,  the  Czech  Republic  and
Hungary13.

(b)

Payment appropriations

Article 7 of Section A  of  the  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreement  relating  to  payments  from
the Commission to the SAPARD euro account distinguishes, in paragraphs 5 and 6, between
payments  on  account  and  interim  payments.  The  former  are  made  after  adoption  of  the

12

13

The final amounts actually paid for these seminars were € 50 816 for the seminar on pilot actions and
€ 61 121 for the seminar on programme management.
For Estonia and Slovakia the Annual Financing Agreement is planned to be signed later in 2003, for a
total amount of € 32,4 million.

16

                                                
programme, on condition that  the Commission decision conferring  financial management to
the SAPARD Agency has been adopted, and after the Multi-annual Financing Agreement and
the  first  Annual  Financing  Agreement  have  been  concluded.  Interim  payments  reimburse
expenditure  actually  paid  under  the  programme  as  certified  by  the  National  Authorising
Officer. As this expenditure is only possible after conferral of financial management upon the
responsible agencies, these payments may be made only after the conferral decision has been
taken.

(c)

Payments on account

Article  7(5)  of  the  Section  A  of  the  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreement  provides  for  this
initial  payment,  and  stipulates  that  the  amount  shall  not  exceed  49%  of  the  first  SAPARD
annual commitment for each country, and that it may be made in more than one instalment.
Under  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreement  the  National  Authorising  Officer  is  to  use  this
amount throughout the lifetime of the programme only to pay the Community contribution to
expenditure in compliance with that agreement.

To determine the actual amount of this initial payment, the Commission considers the actual
needs  of  cash  to  reimburse  eligible  cost  incurred  by  the  SAPARD  Agency,  including  the
implications  flowing  from  conferral  of  management  limited  only  to  some  measures  of  the
programme for the country concerned and the fact that no expenditure is eligible if incurred
prior to the  decision conferring management.  For reasons  of sound  financial  management  it
was  consequently  decided  to  make  the  first  payment  on  account  limited  to  a  half  of  the
maximum  possible  amount.  To  take  account  of  the  fact  that  only  some  of  the  measures  in
each programme had benefited from the conferral of management decision, it was decided to
calculate, for 2002 as in 2001, the “maximum possible amount” only for these measures, but
taking into account the margin for each individual measure (10% of its total allocation 2000-
2006) provided in the financial table of the programs.

Following  the  Commission  decision  on  conferral  of  management  the  following  initial
payments on account were made in 2002:

Candidate Country

Payment on account (€)

Czech Republic

Hungary

Poland

Romania

Slovakia

Total

5 497 951

9 482 800

42 034 668

37 537 477

4 557 496

99 110 392

Second instalments of the payment on account were also made in 2002 in favour of Estonia
(€ 3 024 458),  Slovenia  (€ 1 579 137)  and  the  Czech  Republic  (€ 5 497 951),  in  each  case
bringing  the  total  to  the  maximum  of  49%  of  the  first  SAPARD  annual  commitment.  The
advances  paid  in  2002  thus  amount  to  € 109 211 938.  The  need  for  additional  payments  on
account were justified by the amount of payment claims received from final beneficiaries but
not  yet  settled,  and  in  the  case  of  the  Czech  Republic  by  the  expected  needs  following  the
August  2002  floods  as  provided  in  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreement,  as  modified  by  the
Annual Financing Agreement in 2001 for that country. It may be noted that had the policy of
restricting payments on account to half the legal limit except in cases of manifest need, budget
execution in 2002 could have been over € 100 million greater than it was.

17

(d)

Interim payments

Payments  reimbursing  actual  expenditure  as  set  out  in  the  expenditure  declarations  and
applications  for  payments  were  submitted  by  Bulgaria,  Estonia,  Lithuania,  Latvia  and
Slovenia.

Candidate Country

Interim payments (€)

Bulgaria

Estonia

Lithuania

Latvia

Slovenia

Total

4 925 884

3 529 508

3 200 180

2 797 570

94 196

14 547 338

(e)

Appropriations not used in 2002

An amount of € 236 240 723 of available payment appropriations was not used and lapsed.

One  major  reason  for  this  was  that  Poland  and  Romania,  for  which  the  conferral  decisions
were  approved  in  July  and  August  2002,  did  not  apply  for  reimbursement  of  any  incurred
expenditure chargeable to the 2002 budget. The share of these two Candidate Countries in the
total appropriations is so large (61,4%) that overall budget execution is heavily dependent on
how these two countries perform.

A further factor was the scale of the payments on account limited to half of the 49% ceiling
for six Candidate Countries. The Commission did consider making payments subject only to
that limit, in which case budget implementation could have risen sharply as mentioned under
point (i).  The  decision  not  to  do  so  was  made  to  give  higher  priority  to  sound  financial
management than to more complete budget implementation. It may be noted that at the end of
June  2003  payments  made  by  the  Commission  (including  received  requests  for  which  the
payment procedure is in progress) from the Candidate Countries amounted to € 209,4 million,
an increase of € 55,2 over the level at the end of 2002. The total of € 209,4 million is made up
of € 147,1 million of payments on account and € 62,3 million of reimbursement. The figure of
€ 55,2  million  is  made  up  of  € 7,4  million  of  payments  on  account  and  €  47,8  million  of
reimbursement.

3.3

Work carried out in relation to the Court of Auditors

The  Court  of  Auditors  continued  to  give  close  attention  to  SAPARD  during  2002.  The
Commission is still however awaiting the observations the Court undertook to make relating
to the legal base of the instrument (point  6.7 of  the  report  from  the  Court,  of  15  December
2001).

4.

MID-TERM-EVALUATION

Article 5(1) of the SAPARD basic Regulation establishes that, for assessing the effectiveness
of measures included in SAPARD programmes, these programmes must be subject, inter alia,
to a mid-term-evaluation.

The  SAPARD  implementing  Regulation  (Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No 2759/1999),
specifies that appraisals and evaluation shall be carried out taking account of the procedures

18

for evaluation provided in Title IV Chapter III of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (Structural
Funds Regulation) and also provided by Section 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1750/1999  (Rural
Development  implementing  Regulation  repealed  and  substituted  by  Regulation  (EC)
No 445/2002).

The above-mentioned requirements are reflected in Articles 9, 10 and 11 of Section B of the
Multi-annual Financing Agreement with each Candidate Country.

Following seminars on evaluation held on 14-18 May 2001 (already reported on in the 2001
SAPARD  Annual  report)  the  specific  details  for  mid-term  evaluation  were  discussed  in
another  seminar  (held  on  Brussels  on  17-18  June  2002)  on  “aspects  of  management  and
implementation  of  the  SAPARD  programmes”.  During  this  seminar  special  attention  was
given  to  the  organisational  and  methodological  aspects  of  the  mid-term  evaluation.  Draft
“Guidelines  for  the  mid-term  evaluation  of  rural  development  programmes  supported  by
SAPARD” were presented and discussed with the Candidate Countries. In August 2002, after
revision of the document, the Commission sent these guidelines to the Candidate Countries to
initiate first steps to get the process of mid-term evaluation going and giving guidance to the
procedures.  These  guidelines  were  also  presented  (for  information)  to  all  Member  States  in
the STAR Committee and are available on the DG AGRI web site/enlargement
(http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/external/enlarge/index_en.htm).

Generally this evaluation exercise must follow the usual five step-structure of the evaluation
process, i.e. structuring, data collection, analysis, judgement, and reporting. The main goal is
to examine the initial results of the programme, as well as their consistency with the ex-ante
appraisal, the relevance of the targets and the extent to which they  have  been  attained.  This
exercise will also assess the use made of financial resources and the quality of reporting and
implementation.

In specific terms the objectives of the mid-term evaluation are:

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

to  evaluate  the  continued  appropriateness  of  the  SAPARD  strategy  in  terms  of
relevance and (internal and external) consistency;

to  assess  the  appropriateness  and  effectiveness  of  the  implementing  arrangements
(division  of  responsibilities,  management,  and  control)  as  well  as  the  monitoring
system (as a source of information for evaluation and a tool for management);

to  evaluate  the  initial  achievements  of  the  SAPARD  programme  in  terms  of
effectiveness and efficiency;

to  apply  the  common  and  programme  specific  evaluation  questions,  criteria  and
indicators;

to assess the institutional  impact of SAPARD  as a  means  of  preparing  the  relevant
Candidate Country for the implementation of the acquis communautaire;

to formulate recommendations in relation to potential adjustments of the programme.

19

During  2002,  Candidate  Countries  continued  to  make  progress  with  this  exercise.  By
December  2002  all  Candidate  Countries  except  for  Hungary  had  published  their  pre-
information notices (contract forecasts)14.

Workshops on mid-term evaluation organised by the Commission from June 2003 provide an
opportunity to all involved bodies to discuss the evaluation plan and exchange views on the
expectations  for  the  exercise  and  will  help  to  ensure  that  the  Commission’s  guidance  on
evaluation is incorporated into this plan15.

5.

5.1

SAPARD – ‘THE LEARNING PROCESS’ - KEY ELEMENTS IN RELATION TO 2002

Monitoring of commitments

In  the  autumn  of  2002,  shortly  after  conferral  of  management  decisions  had  been  taken  in
favour of virtually all beneficiary countries, the SAPARD instrument was able  to be  widely
applied. This development meant that the priority for many parties shifted from preparation to
operation.

This  development  concerned  the  nature  of  work  of  various  parties,  especially  SAPARD
Agencies  and  Monitoring  Committees,  to  increasingly  focus  on  operational  aspects.  The
Commission  considered  that  such  work  would  be  assisted  were  the  parties  involved  able  to
assess progress with their programme in comparison with that in other beneficiary countries,
in particular as for all concerned the exercise was entirely novel.

The  only  source  of  readily  comparable  data  which  the  Commission  initially  had  concerned
information based on the quarterly expenditure declarations pursuant to Article 9 of Section A
of the Multi-annual Financing Agreement. The information in those declarations is a central
component of the instrument. It is moreover sometimes seen as perhaps the key indicator of
progress with the instrument, as for example in work leading up to the European Parliament
resolution  for  discharge  in  respect  of  implementation  of  the  budget  for  2001.  However,  the
Commission  felt  that  a  more  relevant  indicator  of  progress  than  one  based  on  expenditure
declarations, in particular in the relatively early phase of implementation of SAPARD, could
usefully be employed at least by those closely involved in applying the instrument.

As  a  result  the  Commission  suggested  to  each  beneficiary  country  that  an  information
exchange be set up based largely on commitments made to final beneficiaries. The reason for
this  is  that  such  commitments  are  an  essential  precursor  of  each  component  part  of  the
expenditure  declaration,  and  precedes  the  latter  by  a  period  that  could  extend  over  many
months.  This  phenomenon  is  also  a  characteristic  of  Community  expenditure  related  to
investments  under  Structural  Funds.  However  its  impact  in  terms  of  budget  flows  is  not
readily evident with these Funds as the time when commitments to final beneficiaries may be
entered  into  is  not  subject  to  Community  rules,  and  moreover  expenditure  incurred  can  be
backdated to the time when the programming period starts. Neither of these possibilities exists
under  SAPARD.  Therefore  the  Commission  felt  that  at  least  for  purposes  of  management
information, a more appropriate tool than expenditure would be useful.

14

15

By  March  2003  all  countries,  except  for  Estonia,  Slovenia,  and  Hungary,  which  follow  a  simplified
procedure,  had  published  their  procurement  notices  in  the  Official  Journal.  Almost  all  countries  had
started the mid-term evaluation of their SAPARD programmes by end of June 2003.
The first such seminar concerned the Czech Republic, carried out on 28 May 2003.

20

                                                
The  information  exchange  envisaged  had  to  strike  an  appropriate  balance  would  be  struck
between  simplicity  and  utility.  The  Commission  felt  that  this  objective  could  be  met  if  the
exchange were based  on  the  cumulative  level  of  commitments  to  final  beneficiaries  entered
into  by  each  SAPARD  agency  irrespective  of  whether  they  had  resulted  in  a  payment,  and
communicated  quarterly  but  showing  monthly  totals.  All  countries  agreed  to  participate  in
sending data for this voluntary system. The data received is put into tabular and graphic form
by the Commission services. To facilitate comparisons the amounts are shown in comparison
to  a  base  that  for  each  country  is  the  Community  contribution  in  its  Annual  Financing
Agreement  for  2000.  To  deal  with  the  different  times  when  the  conferral  of  management
decisions have been taken the data is presented showing the number of months since the first
conferral  decision  was  taken  for  the  country  concerned.  The  data  exchange  also  shows  the
level of commitments in terms of Community contribution by measure for each country, and,
by measure, the total number of projects approved.

Experience to date with the system shows that it is useful for benchmarking in particular for
the SAPARD Agencies and Monitoring Committees. It has also been used to draw attention
to the risks of cancellation of unused commitment appropriations, in particular in instances of
countries where, over time, the rate of issuing contracts with final beneficiaries has not even
kept pace with amounts set out in successive Annual Financing Agreements16.

5.2

Flooding

In  August  2002,  central  Europe  experienced  severe  flooding.  Following  a  meeting  between
leaders  from  the  affected  countries  and  President  Prodi,  Community  emergency  aid  was
promised.  On  28  August  the  Commission  announced  a  proposal  for  the  establishment  of  a
special fund to be drawn on in the event of natural, technological or environmental disasters.
The  Commission  also  confirmed  that  actions  aimed  at  restoring  the  capacity  of  rural  areas
following flood damage could be considered as falling within the scope of SAPARD17.

Two countries requested modifications to their SAPARD programme in light of the impact of
the flood damage, namely the Czech republic and Slovakia. In the case of the Czech Republic,
it reported that approximately 40% of its territory was damaged by floods with some 6% of its
territory actually under water causing damage in 753 municipalities. It was estimated that the
costs of the flood damage were equivalent to about 3,1% of the country’s GDP in 2002. Total
damage  in  the  agricultural  sector  was  estimated  at  around  €  121  million.  In  the  case  of
Slovakia, the total area affected by the floods was estimated at around 8 700 hectares. Follow-
up meetings were undertaken by representatives from the Commission culminating in a set of
programme amendments, which were subsequently discussed and approved by each country’s
respective programme Monitoring Committee in October 2002.

In light of the floods, amendments were made to the Multi-annual Financing Agreements. For
reasons of  rapidity in the case of  the Czech Republic amendments were  made to the Multi-
annual Financing Agreement through the Annual Financing Agreement for 2001 (rather than
for 2002). Article 16 was inserted in the Multi-annual Financing Agreement covering the case
of exceptional natural disasters. This states that in the event that the Commission determines
that an exceptional natural disaster had affected the Czech Republic, revised intervention rates

16

17

This was the subject of letters sent by the Commission to each beneficiary country in early April 2003,
which set out options that might be taken to help to ensure more effective implementation of the various
programs.
See section “Changes in legal frameworks”.

21

                                                
could apply (increasing the ceiling on public aid from 50% to 75% of public aid as well as a
higher rate of Community co-financing from 75% to 85%). These revised rates formed part of
a  modification  proposed  by  the  Commission  to  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 1268/1999  in
response  to  the  floods  crisis.  In  addition  derogations  could  be  authorised  to  allow  for
additional  payments  on  account,  advance  payments  to  beneficiaries,  and  the  possibility  to
apply the programme on a retrospective basis as well as derogation from certain provisions of
the Multi-annual Financing Agreement such as obligations in respect of public procurement.

The SAPARD programme for the Czech Republic was subsequently amended to take account
of  the  revised  intervention  rates,  eligibility  criteria  to  include  provision  for  an  exceptional
natural disaster and revised selection criteria to ensure the prioritisation of applicants directly
affected  by  the  disaster.  In  the  case  of  Slovakia,  the  Monitoring  Committee  approved  a
modification to the existing measure on rural infrastructure. This measure was limited in the
programme  to  the  modernisation  of  buildings  with  historic,  cultural  or  national  value.  The
modification  extended  the  measure  to  include  provision  for  the  upgrading  of  rural
infrastructure  covering  local  roads,  bridges,  footbridges,  water  supply  as  well  as  gas  and
sewage pipelines.

All  the  aforementioned  changes  were  made  very  soon  after  the  Commission  tabled  the
relevant proposal to modify the SAPARD basic Regulation. However as modification of that
Regulation,  for  reasons  explained  in  section  “Changes  in  legal  frameworks”  could  not  be
secured until mid April 2003, potential beneficiaries had to wait at least till then to know if
they  would  to  be  able  to  benefit  from  the  improved  facilities  proposed  the  previous
September.

5.3

Seminars financed under Article 7(4) “Assistance by the Commission”

During  the  course  of  2002,  two  seminars  were  organised  by  the  Commission  involving  the
use of Article 7(4) assistance:

Seminar on “Aspects of programme management” in Brussels;

Seminar on “Certification of the accounts of the SAPARD Agencies” in Vienna.

5.3.1

Seminar on “Aspects of programme management” in Brussels

The seminar was held on 17 and 18 June in Brussels on aspects of programme management,
implementation  and  delivery.  Attended  by  five  participants  from  each  of  the  ten  Candidate
Countries, this seminar provided an opportunity to examine a wide range of subjects relating
to the SAPARD programmes. Subsequent feedback from the seminar indicated a high level of
satisfaction  with  the  content  of  the  seminar.  Over  three-quarters  of  the  participants  who
completed  a  follow-up  questionnaire  indicated  that  the  value  of  the  seminar  lay  in  the
opportunity it provided for the exchange of experience.

A  number  of  contributions  were  made  by  the  representatives  of  the  respective  Managing
Authorities and SAPARD Agencies. The main operational conclusions were:

– 

– 

– 

in respect of monitoring there was a need to operate to a strict timetable for preparing
Monitoring Committee meetings with appropriate documentation as well as a need to
take into account data on sensitive sectors;

the need for necessary preparations for all countries in respect of the obligations for a
mid-term evaluation to be undertaken of each programme;

there was a need to examine ways to increase the rate of financial implementation.

22

5.3.2

Seminar on “Certification of the accounts of the SAPARD Agencies” in Vienna

The seminar was held on 7 and 8 November in Vienna and brought together representatives
from  Certifying  Bodies  of  all  Candidate  Countries  receiving  SAPARD-aid.  The  Austrian
authorities hosted the seminar and provided some expert speakers.

The certification exercise, required by  Article 6 of Section A of the Multi-annual  Financing
Agreement, took place for the first time in 2002. However, only a small number of agencies
were involved and expenditure was low. Subsequently a much larger number of agencies will
be  involved  and  the  level  of  expenditure  will  be  significantly  higher.  The  purpose  of  the
seminar  was  to  help  ensure  that  the  work  of  the  Certifying  Bodies  is  harmonised  and
developed as far as possible.

From  the  experience  gained  from  the  first  financial  clearance  of  accounts  the  Commission
proposed  several  amendments  to  the  “model  of  certification  report”  and  provided  further
guidance in respect of the audit work to be done to meet generally accepted audit standards in
the framework of the certification of accounts.

6.

INVOLVEMENT IN SAPARD OF NON GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS

The SAPARD annual report for 2001 had an entire section, number 9, on the involvement of
Non-Government  Organisations  and  representatives  of  civil  society.  In  it  the  Commission
recognised  both  the  great  interest  in  this  expressed  in  particular  within  the  European
Parliament  in  the  context  of  the  “INPARD18”  initiative.  It  also  mentioned  some  practical
difficulties  that  could  be  anticipated  with  such  an  initiative.  The  Commission  however
explained that its reluctance should not be interpreted as opposing the development of the role
of civil society in the context of SAPARD.

In February 2002 the attractiveness of an increased involvement of civil society, the “bottom-
up” approach, was underlined before the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development
of  the  European  Parliament  by  Ministers  of  Agriculture  of  Candidate  Countries  many  of
whom  expressed  support  for  the  INPARD  approach.  In  order  to  ascertain  what  practical
action was felt necessary by these countries following their ministerial level declarations, the
Commission  invited  them  by  letter  of  13  June  2002  (in  the  context  of  the  draft  Annual
Financing Agreement 2002) to set out their requirements. No country sought a modification
of  the  SAPARD  basic  Regulation  (which  has  no  provision  for  initiatives  of  the  nature  of
INPARD). For six out of the ten beneficiary  countries their wishes  could  be accommodated
without  any  modifications  of  existing  legal  instruments,  the  Multi-annual  Financing
Agreements  and  the  national  programmes.  Concerning  the  other  four  countries  the
modifications they required could all be satisfied by changing those Agreements. The changes
were to allow project selection for certain measures to be the responsibility no longer of the
SAPARD  Agency  but  of  Non-Government  Organisation(s)  to  be  designated  in  the
programme,  but  in  all  cases  with  the  SAPARD  Agency  retaining  all  other  responsibilities
including  assessing  eligibility.  Although  the  requested  changes  were  made  in  the  relevant

18

INPARD  -  Innovative  Participatory  Rural  Development;  Initiative  of  the  Agriculture  and  Rural

Development Committee of the European Parliament for promoting a new pre-accession instrument.

23

                                                
Multi-annual Financing Agreements, even by the end of June 2003 no country had submitted
requests for programme changes to allow any Non Government Organisation to exercise this
power of project selection.

The exercise just described  puts  the  declarations made by many  ministers  in February 2002
into a perspective less enthusiastic than might otherwise have been assumed. However it does
not mean that the Commission took a more relaxed attitude in 2002 towards the importance of
Non-Government Organisations in the SAPARD context.

During 2002, Commission staff participated in a number of seminars and meetings involving
representatives of civil society.

As part of its objective to strengthen civil society and to promote multi-national exchange in
rural development, the PREPARE (Pre accession Partnerships for Rural Europe) programme
organised  a  Travelling  Workshop  in  September  2002  in  Finland  to  provide  an  exchange  of
experience  between  the  Candidate  Countries  in  receipt  of  SAPARD  on  the  lessons  arising
from  Finland’s  experience  of  developing  local  initiatives.  Each  Candidate  Country  was
represented  by  a  delegate  from  its  national  administration  as  well  as  relevant  Non
Government Organisations. Detailed presentations on the structure of rural policy in Finland
were  provided  by  representatives  from  the  Ministry  of  Agriculture  in  Finland  including
officials  with  experience  of  working  with  local  action  groups.  Presentations  were  also
provided on the village movement in Finland. A range of problems were identified relating to
SAPARD  during  the  discussions  such  as  the  difficulty  of  securing  adequate  finance  to
establish  projects  and  the  obligations  placed  on  applicants.  Despite  these  difficulties,  a
number  of  countries  on  their  own  initiative  commented  on  the  success  of  SAPARD.
Representatives  of  Non  Governmental  Organisations  in  the  Candidate  Countries  expressed
their  desire  for  greater  local  involvement  in  SAPARD.  The  Commission  explained  the
possibilities for improving partnership in Monitoring Committees including proposals in  the
draft Annual Finance Agreement for 2002 for greater local involvement in decision-making.

In October 2002, a representative from the Commission, at the invitation of the Slovak Rural
Parliament, addressed its Second General Assembly. The desire for greater recognition to be
given  to  the  micro-regions  and  partnerships  of  micro-regions  as  eligible  beneficiaries  of
public  or  state  aid  was  highlighted.  Considerable  interest  was  expressed  by  a  number  of
participants in the potential for local initiatives. Following the conclusion of the seminar, the
Rural Parliament arranged for the Commission representative to attend meetings with mayors
of villages in the Velka  Fatra area followed by a tour of the micro region  of Rimava which
included  a  meeting  in  one  village  which  had  recently  been  included  in  a  micro-regional
development  strategy  based  on  participatory  methods  involving  the  local  community  in
drawing  up  a  detailed  socio-economic  analysis  and  the  formulation  of  a  development
strategy19.

19

A  development  from  this  was  the  seminar  on  “Developing  and  promoting  local  initiatives  in  the
Candidate Countries” in Pardubice (Czech Republic) in May 2003.

24

                                                
7.

INFORMATION  ON  EUROPEAN  ANTI  FRAUD  OFFICE  (OLAF)  ACTIVITIES
CONCERNING SAPARD

According  to  Article  15  of  the  SAPARD  basic  Regulation  and  to  Item  7,  Section  F  of  the
Multi-annual Financing Agreement, the beneficiary  countries are required to make quarterly
reports of irregularities involving Community co-financing.

In  2002,  all  Candidate  Countries  have  received  payments  from  the  Commission  and  were
therefore  obliged  to  inform  the  Commission  services  on  the  irregularities  occurred.  Latvia,
and  Romania  have  reported  that  no  irregularities  have  occurred  in  2002.  Bulgaria
communicated one irregularity, Slovenia nine.

The  Commission  services  intend  to  improve  the  quality  of  the  transfer  of  these
communications  by  using  the  Anti-Fraud  Information  System,  which  enables  the  Candidate
Countries to put forward the information on irregularities electronically and in a standardised
way20.

8.

PUBLIC PROCUREMENT

2002  was  the  first  year  during  which  public  procurement  rules  for  SAPARD  needed  to  be
applied,  including  the  publication  of  tender  notices.  These  rules  are  applicable  after  the
conferral  management  of  aid  for  the  relevant  SAPARD  measures  namely  those  involving
beneficiaries  other  than  private  ones.  The  most  important  measures  including  public
procurement  are  rural  infrastructures  and  for some  countries  the  mid-term  evaluation  of  the
programmes.

Among the criteria for accreditation of a SAPARD Agency, the rules for the procurement by
public bodies of services, works and supplies have to be respected for the relevant measures.
According  Article  14(2)(6)  of  the  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreement,  these  rules  shall  be
consistent  with  the  rules  set  out  in  the  Commission  manual  entitled  “Service,  Supply,  and
Work Contracts concluded within the Framework of Community Co-operation for the Third
Countries”.

Publication  of  tender  notices  is  a  legal  obligation  for  SAPARD.  All  service  contracts  of  a
value equal to or higher than the equivalent of € 200 000 and work contracts of a value equal
to or higher than € 5 000 000 are the subject of a specific procurement notice (“international
tender”), published by the Commission in the Official Journal of the European Communities,
on the Internet and in all other suitable media.

For  supply  contracts  of  a  value  equal  to  or  higher  than  € 30 000  and  lower  than  € 150 000,
and for work contracts of a value equal to or higher than € 300 000 and less than € 5 000 000,
the award of contracts is by public invitation to tender published locally (“local tender”). In
addition, the Commission publishes on the EuropeAid web site the reference for these “local”
tenders.

Consultation  of  the  web  site  demonstrates  that  a  significant  number  of  notices  have  been
published in particular from early 2003.

20

By  September  2003  all  Anti-Fraud  Co-ordination  Service  (AFCOS)  established  in  the  10  Candidate
Countries should be able to use the AFIS facilities.

25

                                                
9.

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM CANDIDATE COUNTRIES

By  letter  of  13  March  2003  the  Commission  invited  all  Candidate  Countries  to  submit
contributions  for  inclusion  in  this  report.  The  following  contributions  were  sent  by  the
Candidate Countries.

2003  will  be  the  first  year,  where  five  out  of  ten  countries,  namely  Bulgaria,  Estonia,
Lithuania, Latvia, and Slovenia are obliged to submit an annual report on implementation of
their  SAPARD  programme.  According  to  Article  8(1)  of  Section  B  of  the  Multi-annual
Financing  Agreement  these  reports  have  to  be  submitted  to  the  Commission  within  six
months from the end of each full calendar  year of implementation, which in  the  case of the
five countries mentioned is the end of June 2003. These reports will be made available on the
Commission’s web site:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/external/enlarge/index_en.htm

9.1

ESTONIA

The  paper  will  give  an  overview  of  the  program  progress  in  year  2002,  and  short  overall
assessment  to  the  program,  and  also  about  the  decisions  of  the  last  monitoring  committee
meeting.

Description of the program in 2002

The  reception  of  investment  support  applications  under  all  measures  began  on  11  February
2002. For measure 2 receptions of investment support applications were issued on 26 March,
for other measures the receptions of applications finished on 27 September 2002.

In  total  426  applications  were  received  in  the  framework  of  SAPARD  programme  in  2002
which is almost half more than during the previous year.

Under  the  investment  in  agricultural  holdings  288  applications  were  received,  from  which
265 applications  are  approved.  Under  the  improvement  of  agricultural  and  fish  products
processing  and  marketing  37  applications  were  received,  from  which  27  applications  are
approved and  17 are paid  out. Under the diversification  of rural  activities  and  promotion of
small business  80 applications were  received, from  which  68  applications  are  approved  and
14  are  paid  out.  Under  the  development  and  improvement  of  rural  infrastructure
21 applications were received, from which 19 applications are approved and 6 are paid out.

Diagram 1 – Received, approved and paid out applications

Applications received
Applications approved
Applications paid out

MEASURE 1 MEASURE 2 MEASURE 3 MEASURE 4
21
19
6

288
265
212

80
68
14

37
27
17

s
n
o
i
t
a
c

i
l

p
p
a

f
o

o
N

288

265

212

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0

37

27

17

80

68

14

21

19

6

MEASURE 1

MEASURE 2

MEASURE 3

MEASURE 4

Applications received

Applications approved

Applications paid out

26

 
 
The support of approved applications is around EEK 194 million21 and the support paid out in
total is approximately EEK 163 million. In year 2001 these numbers were EEK 124 million
and EEK 6 million.

Programme progress

Total budget in years 2000-2002 of the SAPARD programme is around EEK 748 million. The
commitment  in  years  2001-2002  (SAPARD  programme  started  in  year  2001  in  Estonia)  is
EEK 318 million and the cancelled commitment is EEK 5 million. The surplus of the budget
is EEK 435 million in year 2002. Therefore Estonia has used approximately 43% of a three-
year  budget  in  one  and  half  years.  In  order  to  assess  the  program  progress,  it  should  be
pointed  out  that  the  mid-term  evaluation  of  the  whole  program  will  be  carried  out  during
2003, therefore it is too early to make too wide conclusions at this stage. But shortly it can be
said  that  the  program  progress  has  been  satisfactory,  and  the  second  year  of  receiving
applications was more successful  when  compared  with  that  of  2001.  The  progress  has  been
different for different measures. The second measure is most used measure, where approved
applications are 95% of the received applications  and the support paid out is approximately
100%.  The  finances  for  measure  1  have  been  committed  also  quite  well,  while  measure  3
should  be  used  more.  Measure  4  is  less  used  -  under  the  measure  approximately  4%  of  the
support  is  paid  out.  In  order  to  improve  the  situation,  Ministry  of  Agriculture  has  held
discussions with the social partners and has already made some changes to the measure sheets
and  relevant  legislation.  Several  aspects  have  been  changed,  which  have  been  regarded  as
obstacles  in  applying  for  support  (such  as  the  maximum  investment  support  per  one
beneficiary for measure 3, etc.). Therefore the situation is expected to improve in 2003.

Monitoring Committee

The  third  meeting  of  the  Monitoring  Committee  (MC)  took  place  on  26 July  2002.  In  the
matter  of  changes  of  the  SAPARD  programme  Measure  Sheets,  members  agreed  and
approved  finally  all  changes  in  the  first,  second,  third  and  fourth  measure  sheets  of  Rural
Development Plan (approved by Managing Authority).

MC  also  decided  to  approve  the  following  new  measures:  measure  6,  which  is  investment
support  for  regeneration  and  development  of  villages  and  measure  8,  which  is  afforestation
investment aid. Measure 5, which is technical assistance, was approved at the second meeting
of monitoring committee.

The STAR Committee approved all the changes of the four measures and new measure sheets
in October 2002. Therefore national legislation for these measures is prepared and reception
of applications will start at the first quarter of the year 2003.

In  the  meeting  of  Monitoring  Committee  were  also  given  an  overview  of  preparations  of
measure  7,  which  is  agri-environment.  Members  of  MC  decided  that  preparation  of  the
seventh measure will continue. There were also given an overview of the preparations on the
mid-  term  evaluation  of  the  SAPARD  programme.  By  December  2003  the  monitoring
committee  should  make  the  adoption  of  the  final  report  and  submit  it  to  the  European
Commission.

21

€ 1 = EEK 15,6466 (rate constant since 1.1.1999).

27

                                                
9.2

BULGARIA

Progress in the implementation of SAPARD

State Fund “Agriculture” was accredited as the Bulgarian SAPARD Agency on 15 May 2001,
after  a  decision  by  the  European  Commission  for  conferring  management  of  aid  under  the
three  main  measures,  targeted  at  private  beneficiaries,  of  the  Bulgarian  National  agriculture
and  rural  development  plan  under  SAPARD:  measure  1.1.  “Investment  in  agricultural
holdings”; measure 1.2. “Improving the processing and marketing of agricultural and fishery
products”; measure 2.1. “Development and diversification of economic activities, provision of
for  multiple  activities  and  alternative  income”.  Since  the  programme  start-up  until
31 December  2002,  fifteen  meetings  of  the  Project  selection  Committee  have  been  held.  A
total of 298 projects amounting to € 107 888 836,05 have been approved for support under the
measures.  The  number  of  finished  and  reimbursed  projects  was  106,  amounting  to
€ 14 499 142,50 subsidy (Table 1).

Table 1. Approved and completed projects by measure until 31 December 2002 (€)

Measure

Measure 1.1

Measure 1.2

Measure 2.1

Total

Number of
approved
projects

Total eligible cost
committed by the
SAPARD Agency

Total
completed
projects

Total subsidy paid
(50% from the
eligible expenditure)

205

65

28

298

44 821 825,00

59 330 145,72

3 736 865,33

107 888 836,05

89

13

4

106

9 543 344,60

4 784 455,17

171 342,73

14 499 142,5022

The considerable progress achieved in the implementation of the programme and its lessons,
which  were  taken  into  account,  resulted  in  expanding  and  maintaining  adequate  capacity  in
managing the EU  funds. The SAPARD  Agency has used  the  experience  gained  to  intensify
the absorption of SAPARD funds in order to make full use of the granted financial assistance.

A key step for improving absorption of SAPARD funding was done with the amendments in
Ordinances 14, 15, and 16 on the terms and conditions of granting SAPARD aid. The official
adoption  of  these  amendments  meant  practical  implementation  of  the  decisions  taken  at  the
meeting  of  the  Monitoring  Committee,  held  in  June  2002  as  well  as  the  implementation  of
certain  modifications  in  the  procedures  of  the  SAPARD  Agency,  initiated  by  State  Fund
“Agriculture” and approved by the European Commission. The main modification concerned
projects  having  technical  deficiencies  in  the  application  documents.  Altering  the  hitherto
followed  practice,  applicants  were  given  a  10-day  period  to  rectify  these  deficiencies,  after
which the application processing procedure would resume.  In this way the applicants would
not  have  to  re-apply  anew  and  the  terms  for  project  approval  were  shortened.  Following
consultations with the European Commission,  the  number of Selection Committee meetings
per year was extended from 6 to 1223.

22

23

The € amount is calculated using the fixed exchange rate of 1,95583 BGN/€.
No  use  has  been  made  in  the  calendar  2002  year  of  the  modification,  through  AFA  2002,  of
Article 5(1)(b), Annex section A of MAFA.

28

                                                
The SAPARD Agency was constantly making efforts to improve up-take of funds, the main
of  them  being:  training  for  all  units  of  the  Agency  in  order  to  maintain  high  professional
standards  of  Agency  staff;  seminars  for  potential  applicants  with  the  participation  of  staff
from  SFA  regional  directorates  and  the  Ministry  of  agriculture  and  forestry;  processing  of
each  application  as  expediently  as  possible  so  that  the  period  between  its  filing  to  final
approval  is  shortened to the maximum;  continual supervision  of  approved  projects  to  check
their progress and to facilitate beneficiaries especially in view of subsidy reimbursement.

In  addition,  the  signed  memorandums  with  20  commercial  banks  on  co-operation  in  the
implementation of SAPARD  resulted  in  more  favourable  attitude  towards  crediting  projects
under  the  programme.  In  2002  the  number  of  projects  approved  per  Selection  Committee
meeting  grew  steadily  over  the  year.  This  testifies  that  the  administrative  capacity  of  the
Agency is strengthened and the procedure is adequate.

The  work  on  the  preparation  of  the  accreditation  of  another  six  measures  and  one  sub-
measure,  targeted  at  public  beneficiaries,  was  completed  and  the  national  accreditation  was
signed. Working groups were set up in the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry to prepare the
Ordinances for the implementation of these measures.

Progress in the monitoring, evaluation and publicity efforts under the SAPARD programme

(i)

Meetings of the SAPARD Monitoring Committee

In the 2002, the SAPARD Monitoring Committee held two more regular meetings. The third
meeting of the Monitoring Committee was  held on  28 June  2002. The  Committee  reviewed
Program  implementation  progress  on  the  basis  of  monitoring  data  for  the  three  accredited
measures.  The  monitoring  indicators  for  the  next  seven  measures,  in  preparation  for
accreditation,  were  also  reviewed.  The  Committee  members  were  also  briefed  on  the
European Commission  representatives’  mission  at  the  SAPARD  Agency  earlier  in  the  year,
which  concluded  that  there  were  no  substantive  shortcomings  in  the  implementation  of  the
Program. The fourth meeting of the Monitoring Committee was held on 10 December 2002.
The Committee adopted the final versions of measure 1.6 “Management of water resources”
and  measure  1.3.  “Development  of  environmentally  friendly  agricultural  practices  and
activities”  and  reviewed  progress  in  the  implementation  of  accredited  measures.  The
Committee was briefed on problems related to the reimbursement of completed projects and
the  progress  in  up-take  of  funds  available  under  the  SAPARD  budgets  for  years  2000  and
2001.  The  Committee  was  updated  on  the  preparations  for  the  mid-term  evaluation  of
SAPARD  as  well,  especially  with  a  view  to  the  participation  of  the  social  and  economic
partners  in  its  implementation.  The  Committee  discussed  the  proposals,  made  by  its
permanent  working  groups,  for  modifications  in  the  accredited  measures.  The  proposed
modifications  were  adopted  and  along  with  the  finalised  versions  of  measures  1.3  and  1.6
were included in a package of amendments to the Bulgarian agriculture and development plan
under SAPARD. Its approval by the European Commission is envisaged for first half of 2003.

In  accordance  with  the  Rules  of  Procedure  of  the  Committee,  the  meetings  of  the  two
permanent  working  groups  for  the  accredited  measures  preceded  the  meetings  of  the
Committee.  The  working  groups  initiated  a  number  of  proposals  for  modifications  in  the
measures, as pointed out above, aimed at facilitating programme implementation.

(ii)

Preparations for the mid-term evaluation of SAPARD in Bulgaria

In  view  of  the  complexity  of  the  mid-term  evaluation  and  the  time  needed  to  prepare  the
procedures  to  select  an  evaluator  and  to  carry  out  the  evaluation  itself,  the  Monitoring
Committee at its second meeting approved a Steering Committee to oversee the preparations

29

for  the  evaluation.  In  accordance  with  the  procurement  rules  of  the  EC  on  pre-accession
programs,  the  Steering  Committee  initiated  a  restricted  international  tender  procedure.  A
Contract  Forecast  was  published  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the  European  Communities  on
30 July  2002,  and  a  Procurement  Notice  was  published  on  17 September  2002.  Of  the
31 applicants,  who  sent  letters  of  interest,  eight  were  short-listed  by  mid  November  2002.
Meanwhile, the core aspects of the evaluation Tender dossier were reviewed by the Steering
Committee  and  the  dossier  was  finalised  in  accord  with  the  European  Commission
instructions  on  service  contracts,  concluded  in  the  framework  of  Community  co-operation
with third countries.

(iii)

SAPARD publicity campaign

The  publicity  campaign  under  SAPARD  continued  using  all  possible  methods  and  media
outlets. Efforts were focused, however, on information seminars with the direct participation
of potential applicants under the programme. Officials from the Ministry of Agriculture and
Forestry, the SAPARD Agency and from their regional units were continuously attending as
lecturers  such  seminars  throughout  the  country.  To  further  enhance  the  publicity  campaign
with regard to both general public awareness and also to the forthcoming accreditation of the
seven measures, which will increase the scope of the publicity effort by covering new types of
applicants and sectors, the Monitoring Committee approved a SAPARD Information strategy
by  end  of  December  2002,  which  entails  the  use  of  a  wide  array  of  information  outlets  –
seminars, discussion forums, print materials, Internet outlets, promotional newsreels, etc.

9.3

LITHUANIA

In  sum,  during  the  programme  implementation  year  2002,  there  were  594  applications
registered for € 187 575 000 of SAPARD support in Lithuania. The most actively applicants
participated in measure 1 “Investment in agricultural holdings” and measure 4 “Improvement
of rural infrastructure”. The number of submitted applications for measure 1 was 204 (more
that  1/3  from  the  total  submitted).  The  most  intense  request  for  support  was  in  measure  2
“Improving  the  processing  and  marketing  of  agricultural  and  fishery  products”,  where
€ 104 millions (almost 2/3 from the total applied amount) were applied.

The total request for SAPARD support (thousands €) and number of applications in 2002

Measure 1

Measure 2

Measure 3

Measure 4

Measure 7

Total

36 057 (204)

104 469 (69)

17 930 (96)

28 651 (171)

1 068 (54)

187 575 (594)

The  average  value  of  the  submitted  applications  was  more  than  €  600 000  and  varied  from
€ 1 000  (measure  7  “Vocational  training”)  to  €  11  million  (measure  2).  The  differences
between measures  are based on the nature of  a single project (i.e. projects in measure 2  are
more  complex  and  require  more  investments  than  a  single  project  in  measure  1)  and
maximum  value  of  support  (the  maximum  support  in  measure  2  is  € 5  million  while  in
measure 4 – € 250,000.

Taking into account that a big number of applications were registered at the end of 2002 and
due  to  the  complex  evaluation  procedures,  fully  evaluated  were  381  applications.  Totally,
227 applications were approved and the total committed amount of the SAPARD support was
€ 70 665 million.

In 2002, 130 applications were rejected. The main reasons to reject submitted applications as
ineligible are as follows:

30

1.

2.

3.

do not comply fully with criteria defining economically  viable  holding  (measures 1
and 2);

do  not  satisfy  the  requirements  of  final  beneficiary  (measure  3  “Development  and
Diversification of economic activities providing for multiple activities and alternative
income”);

restricted  time  span  to  submit  an  application  (once  in  3  years),  not  very  active
potential beneficiaries, i.e. farmers, rural dwellers and communities (measure 4).

In order to facilitate the approval of more applications, a number of steps were initiated. First
of  all,  the  Monitoring  Committee  changed  a  number  of  eligibility  criteria.  Moreover  the
Minister of Agriculture, by the order amended the definition of economical viability and the
SAPARD  Agency  initiated  a  number  of  publicity  actions  in  order  to  explain  the  modified
requirements and criteria for all potential applicants.

The committed SAPARD support (thousands €) and a number of approved projects in 2002

Measure 1

Measure 2

Measure 3 Measure 4

Measure 7

Total

19 037 (100)

42 631 (25)

2 631 (16)

5 629 (39)

737 (47)

70 665 (227)

The largest proportion of the committed support was for measure 2 – € 42,6 million (136% of
amount  available).  This  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  potential  beneficiaries  in  the  respective
measure are the most active. They have committed themselves before the date of accession to
implement Community environmental, veterinary, animal welfare and food safety standards.

The lowest demand for the support was registered in measure 4 – € 5,6 millions (41%) and the
reason is misleading expectation that the funds in this measure will be used at first (therefore
in the budget of 2000 the allocations for this measure are three times higher).

Utilisation of SAPARD allocations for 2000-2001 (thousands €)

Measure 1 Measure 2 Measure 3 Measure 4 Measure 7

Total

Allocated

Committed

Proportion

28 726

19 037

66%

31 333

42 631

136%

4 773

2 631

55%

13 855

5 629

41%

1 420

737

52%

80 107

70 665

88%

In  2002,  the  SAPARD  Agency  started  to  pay  the  SAPARD  support  funds  to  the  final
beneficiaries. There were 107 payments to the beneficiaries made; the total amount paid was
€ 9 828  million  (€  7 371  millions–  Community  support,  €  2 457  million  –  national  co
financing).

The SAPARD support paid (Community support) in 2002 (thousands €)

Measure 1

Measure 2

Measure 3

Measure 4

Measure 7

Total

3 979 (2 984)

3 755 (2 816)

1 326 (995)

637 (478)

131 (114)

9 828 (7 371)

Beneficiaries started projects’ implementation in the year 2002. Obviously claims have been
presented  only  for  trance  payments.  Fully  completed  were  16  projects,  which  received  the
final payments.

31

The completed projects (SAPARD support paid) in 2002 (thousands €)

Measure 1

Measure 2

Measure 3

Measure 4

Measure 7

Total

4 (786)

0 (0)

3 (625)

3 (64)

6 (27)

16 (1 502)

16 projects were fully implemented, therefore it  is too  early  to  evaluate the  effectiveness of
the programme. Only several progress indicators, such as “number of projects supported” and
“total public cost of project supported” could be measured and interesting  for consideration.
Taking into account the respective progress indicators provided in the Agriculture and Rural
Development programme, measures 2 and 7 were intensively implemented.

9.4

LATVIA

2002 is the first full year of SAPARD operating in Latvia. It has been especially important for
the  Latvia’s  administrative  structures  to  gain  experience  on  actually  managing  EU  funds.
Although by the end of 2002 only 66% of the available funding was committed, the number
of approved projects was high, especially due to large activity in measure 1.1 “Modernisation
of  agricultural  machinery,  equipment  and  construction  of  buildings”  and  3.1  “Development
and  diversification  of  economic  activities  providing  alternative  income”.  Therefore  the
SAPARD  funding  has  been  distributed  to  a  wide  range  of  applicants.  Great  effort  has  been
made to inform  the public  about  the  financing  available,  consultations  and  discussions  with
socio-economic partners.

General application conditions and time limits for projects are published by the Rural Support
Service in the official newspaper “Latvijas Vēstnesis” and in the newspaper “Lauku Avīze”.
General information and awareness raising has been done in regional media.

Special  information  “Information  on  pre-accession  measures  for  agricultural  and  rural
development” has been prepared within the Danish-Latvian project “Assistance to SAPARD
Program implementation” for potential beneficiaries as well as informative seminars has been
organised.  All  relevant  information  on  requirements  and  particularly  conditions  of  the
Program, planned and current amendments are regularly published on the Ministry’s Internet
web  site  www.zm.gov.lv,  on  the  Rural  Support  Service  (RSS)  Internet  web  site
www.lad.gov.lv,  and  on  the  Latvian  Agricultural  Advisory  Center  (LAAC)  web  site  -
www.llkc.lv.

The  Latvian  Agricultural  Advisory  Center  and  Latvian  Agricultural  Joint  Consultative
Council are involved in information and training campaign as well as helping in elaboration
of the SAPARD projects.

forum 

for  discussions  and  questions  on  SAPARD  has  been  maintained 

A 
in
http://qp.llkc.lv.quickplace/sapard/.  This  interactive  Internet  web  site  providing  information
on  SAPARD  “Questions  and  answers”  was  prepared  in  co-operation  with  the  Ministry  of
Agriculture, the Rural Support Service and the Latvian Agricultural Advisory Center.

It has been a challenge for the administrative bodies to apply the conditions in the SAPARD
programme,  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreement  and  respective  EU  regulations  into  real
operation. The Ministry of Agriculture being the Managing institution is in charge of one of
the  most  important  tasks  to  ensure  a  successful  implementation  of  SAPARD.  Problems
associated with SAPARD implementation have been identified during the implementation of
the programme, which has been corrected through amendments to the SAPARD programme,
procedures and national legislation. The process is ongoing and shall continue till the end of
the SAPARD programme.

32

Continuous efforts were made to get approval to SAPARD measures, which have not yet been
approved. During  year 2003 the Monitoring Committee approved the supporting measure 2.
“Technical  assistance”;  measure  1.2.  “Land  reparcelling”.  The  Ministry  of  Agriculture  was
obliged  further  to  these  measures  to  get  approval  by  the  Commission.  The  Monitoring
Committee approved conceptually the measures 5.1. “Preservation of biological diversity and
rural  landscape”  and  5.2.  “Reduction  of  agricultural  run-off”  and  obliged  the  Ministry  of
Agriculture to prepare detailed requirements for implementation of these measures. Now the
agri-environmental  programmes  have  been  approved  by  the  European  Commission  and  the
administrative  procedures  are  in  the  process  of  elaboration.  The  approval  of  agri-
environmental programmes is especially important as regards the accession to EU, where the
agri-environment is essential part of rural development programming.

Unfortunately  there  were  no  projects  submitted  under  supporting  measure  “Vocational
Training”.  This  measure  is  important  for  overall  success  of  the  SAPARD  programme.  The
Ministry  of  Agriculture  in  co-operation  with  its  partners  is  trying  to  find  solution  and
hopefully during the 2003 the first projects under this measure will be carried out.

However the SAPARD programme is gaining its momentum and year 2003 can be predicted
as the most active year of SAPARD implementation in Latvia. The interest in the programme
is increasing and the remarkable 313 applications for the first round of applications in January
2003 indicate that Latvia shall be able to utilise the resources available.

9.5

CZECH REPUBLIC

In the Czech Republic the SAPARD programme was launched 15 April 2002. The Regional
Offices  as  well  as  potential  beneficiaries  were  prepared  because  in  2001  and  early  2002
preparatory  works  and  consultations  concerning  the  SAPARD  programme  administration
were organised on a large scale, as well as through seminars with information provided on the
SAPARD  programme  measures  and  administration  rules.  In  2002,  the  conferral  of
management to the SAPARD Agency included seven out of nine measures of the SAPARD
plan.

In  2002,  three  calls  for  applications  took  place  in  the  Czech  Republic.  The  high  number  of
applications suggests that there is a  great  interest  in  the  SAPARD  programme  in  the  Czech
Republic.

The  first  call  for  applications  started  15  April  and  ended  on  15  May  2002.  A  total  of
881 applications  for  financial  aid  were  submitted.  The  National  SAPARD  selection
Committee  recommended  465  projects  for  funding  from  the  programme  with  the  total
financial  support  amounting  to  over  €  49  million.  Since  two  applicants  have  rescinded  the
contract, 463 contracts were signed by the Director General of the SAPARD Agency and the
beneficiaries.

The second call for applications started 25 September and ended 6 November 2002. A total of
908  applications  for  financial  aid  was  submitted.  Subsequently,  the  National  SAPARD
Selection  Committee  recommended  435  projects  for  funding  from  the  programme  with  the
total financial support amounting to € 45 million.

In August 2002, the Czech Republic suffered from an extraordinary natural disaster and was
one of the most severely flood-affected countries in Europe. Thanks to the efforts undertaken
by DG AGRI and the Commission changes to the Council Regulation (EC) No 1268/1999 and
the  amendments  to  the  Multi-annual  Financing  Agreement  were  negotiated  and  approved
18 November 2002 by the STAR Committee. The “floods related” call for applications under

33

simplified conditions took place between 2 December and 13 December 2002 for applicants
in  those  NUTS  II  regions  that  were  directly  affected  by  floods  –  Prague,  Central  Bohemia,
Northwest,  Southwest  and  Southeast.  In  total,  190  applications  for  financial  aid  were
received.

The Czech Republic made a special effort to increase the number of measures covered by a
conferral  of  management  decision.  On  24 July  2002  the  measure  “Agricultural  production
methods designed to protect the environment and maintain the countryside” was unanimously
approved  by  the  STAR  Committee.  An  audit  mission  by  representatives  of  the  European
Commission  for  measure  2.3  took  place  on  2-5 December  2002.  On18  November  2002  the
measure “Vocational training” was also unanimously endorsed by the STAR Committee.

For the selection of the most appropriate evaluator the Steering Committee for the evaluation
of the SAPARD programme was established. The Steering Committee is made up of members
of  the  Interdepartmental  Decision-Making  Group  of  the  Managing  Authority  and  two
additional experts, representatives of the Research Institute of Agricultural Economics and the
Czech Statistical Office. The tender procedure started in September 2002.

In  2002,  two  meetings  of  the  National  SAPARD  Monitoring  Committee  took  place.  The
Committee  members  were  informed  of  the  SAPARD  programme’s  progress  not  only  in  the
Czech Republic as a whole, but also at regional level. The Committee discussed and approved
all relevant documents as required by Multi-annual Financing Agreement.

Large publicity campaigns continued throughout the year. In co-operation with the Managing
Authority  the  Czech  TV  prepared  and  broadcast  three  TV  programmes  on  SAPARD  –
“Czechs for Europe”, “Europe for Czechs” and “First projects co-financed from the SAPARD
Programme” in 2002. Brochures and other publications were produced entitled for example:
“SAPARD Programme in the Czech Republic”, “Instructions for the applicants for  financial
aid  from  the  SAPARD  Programme”,  “Application  for  financial  aid  from  the  SAPARD
Programme”,  “The  rules  laying  down  the  conditions  for  the  granting  of  financial  aid  for
projects  under  the  SAPARD  Programme”  in  Czech  and  Bilingual  “Annual  Report  on  the
SAPARD  Programme  in  the  Czech  Republic  in  2001”  were  prepared  and  published.
Promotion folders on the SAPARD Programme in Czech and English covering all measures
were  printed  both  in  Czech  and  in  English  and  a  series  of  articles  on  experience  with  the
SAPARD Programme in the Czech Republic was published in the main agricultural weekly.
The  SAPARD  Programme  was  promoted  at  the  Czech  Republic’s  three  most  important
agricultural fairs.

All  the  basic  information  on  the  SAPARD  programme,  in  Czech  as  well  as  in  English,  is
available on the web sites of the SAPARD Agency – www.sapard.cz.

9.6

SLOVAKIA

9.6.1

Programme implementation by 31 December 2002

Basic Information

The main condition for the implementation of the SAPARD Programme was the accreditation
of the SAPARD Agency (SA). The national accreditation for measures 1, 2, 4(a), 5 and 7 was
granted by the Competent Authority (Ministry of Finance of the SR, the National Fund unit)
on 10 December 2001. From 28 January to 1  February  2002 the  EC auditors performed the
accreditation audit in the SA, the National Fund and the Supreme Audit Office. Subsequently
a  Commission  Decision  No  299/2002  conferring  the  management  of  aid  on  the  Slovak

34

implementation institutions was taken on 15 April 2002. This Decision covered five measures
of the in the Programme, namely measure 1 “Investments in agricultural enterprises”, measure
2  “Improved  processing  and  marketability  of  agricultural  and  fish  products”,  measure  4(a)
“Diversification activities in rural areas- investments not involving infrastructure”, measure 5
“Forestry” and measure 7 “Land Consolidation”.

9.6.2

Submitting and processing of projects

Following  the  conferral  of  management  decision,  the  SAPARD  Agency  published  during
2002, four Calls for submission of applications for financial aid by: 30 June, 31 August; 30
September  and  30  November  2002.  A  total  number  of  111  applications  were  received,  of
which  45  projects  were  approved,  involving  public  expenditure  from  the  SAPARD
Programme  of  €  6  052  000,  representing  13%  of  the  disposable  public  funds  of  the
programme  for  the  accredited  measures  (AFA  2000  and  2001).  In  terms  of  the  numbers  of
applications received and subsequently approved for each measure were as follows:

-29 projects submitted; 16 projects approved
-55 projects submitted; 20 approved

Measure 1:
Measure 2:
Measure 4(a): -19 projects submitted; 4 projects approved
-8 projects submitted; 5 projects approved.
Measure 5:

The average size of approved projects was € 268 000.

9.6.3 Measures undertaken to improve the absorption of the programme funds

The relatively modest numbers of projects submitted and approved during 2002 results from a
combination  of  factors  that  arose  during  the  years  2001  and  2002  reflecting  a  range  of
economic, legislative, organisational and other influences. These include the following:

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

A  lack  of  private  financial  sources  of  the  financing  of  projects  incluidng  alos  the
difficulties  faced  by  agricultural  and  food  processing  establishments  in  accessing
credit finance and investment capital.

Many of the potential applicants were in the first half of the year 2002 discouraged
by  the  restricted  geographical  allocations  at  the  beginning  of  the  programme
implementation (not effective since July 2002).

Geographical  allocations:  Many  of  the  potential  applicants  were  in  the  first  half  of
the year 2002 discouraged by the restricted geographical allocations at the beginning
of  the  programme  implementation  (subsequently  this  restriction  was  relaxed  by  a
programme modification in July 2002).

Conferral  of  management:  In  total  only  4  of  the  nine  measures  of  the  SAPARD
Programme  were  implemented  as  these  measures  were  covered  in  the  conferral  of
management Decision taken by the Commission on 15 April 2002. (It is hoped that
the  full  implementation  of  all  programme  measures  can  start  from  1  July  2003
including any programme modifications).

Measure  7  “Land  Consolidation”:  In  the  case  of  the  accredited  non-profitable
measure  No  7  the  non-acceptance  of  the  allocation  of  the  financial  means  for  the
primary  projects  financing  by  the  MoF  SR  in  the  years  2002  and  2003  had  an
influence on the number of projects submitted and consequently on the volume of the
funds absorbed.

35

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

National  Subsidies:  During  2002,  it  was  possible  for  entrepreneurs  to  obtain
subsidies  within  national  schemes  under  less  difficult  conditions  compared  to  the
conditions attached to the SAPARD Programme.

Lack  of  experience  on  the  part  of  potential  applicants:  A  combination  of  a  lack  of
experience  on  the  part  of  potential  beneficiaries  coupled  with  more  demanding
criteria for the processing of the application for the financial aid under the SAPARD
Programme also resulted in a lower than  anticipated take-up of funds. (The SA has
continuously  simplified  its  methodology  and  the  internal  working  procedures  –  by
the end of 2002 they were considerably simplified which facilitated an acceleration
in the processing of projects. The period for the project processing is approximately
30 days in the Slovak Republic, i.e the time taken from the submission of the project
until the contract with a beneficiary is signed). The average period of time between
the payment claim being received and the funds being paid was 35 days.

Lack  of  information:  Insufficient  information  for  entrepreneurs  on  the  SAPARD
Programme from the side of the Slovak Agriculture and Food Chamber. In both 2000
and  2001,  there  was  limited  involvement  in  the  programme  within  the  majority  of
professional  unions  and  associations.  Since  2002  a certain  improvement  has  been
observed in this field.

Insufficient  qualitative  level  of  advisory  services  in  the  SR:  this  factor  reflects  the
inexperience of advisors in elaboration of SAPARD type projects. The SA regularly
organises training for advisors.

Lack of MoA employees in both the Managing Authority and the SA in the years of
2001 and 2002 (related to a need of principal organisational changes within relevant
sectors – MoA SR began with the organisational changes at the end of 2002).

Since  the  beginning  of  the  SAPARD  programme  implementation  (15  April  2002)  many
measures have been undertaken and realised in order to increase the absorption capacity of the
Programme.  In  2002  the  Managing  Authority  (MoA  SR)  proposed  several  modifications  to
the programme. After detailed discussion within the Monitoring Committee for the SAPARD
Programme these modifications were unanimously approved by the EC STAR Committee on
20 February 2002, on 24 July 2002 and on 18 November  2002. The modifications involved
mainly  the  extension  of  the  programme  implementation  to  the  whole  territory  of  the  SR,
changes in economic viability criteria (since September 2002), new beneficiary determination
within  the  non-profitable  measure  7  –  Land  Consolidation,  revisions  to  the  list  of  eligible
costs  as  well  as  changes  in  volumes  of  the  financial  means  allocated  within  individual
measures.  Following  the  approved  modifications  the  SAPARD  Agency  completed  the
manuals and  methodology  guidelines.  Furthermore, the SA markedly  simplified  its  working
processes and procedures for project selection, control and refunding.

Current state (31 May 2003)

By  the  end  of  May  2003,  197  projects  had  been  received,  (with  16  rejected),  of  which  115
were approved in a total amount of public support of € 15 262, i.e. 33% of annual limits 2000
and 2001.

Measure 1 – 47 projects submitted, 31 projects approved

Measure 2 – 105 projects submitted, 61 projects approved

Measure 4(a) – 32 projects submitted, 15 projects approved

Measure 5 – 13 projects submitted, 8 projects approved.

36

9.7

SLOVENIA

Adjustment of national legislation

The  progress  of  the  Republic  of  Slovenia  in  the  area  of  adjustment  of  legal  bases  for  the
purpose of the implementation of the Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural
Development (SAPARD) and the operation of the SAPARD Agency involves the following:

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

publication of the Decree on the agricultural structural policy measures of the Rural
Development programme 2000-2006 (SAPARD) (Ur. l. RS 107/01, 74/02);

publication  of  the  Ordinance  on  the  amount  of  funds  granted  for  SAPARD
programme measures (Ur. l. RS 77/02);

an open invitation to tender for the purpose  of allocation of SAPARD  funds (Ur. l.
RS 2/2002);

Signing  of  the  Annual  Financing  Agreement  2001  (19  March  2002)  and  its
ratification  by  the  National  Assembly  –  publication  of  the  Act  Ratifying  the  2001
Annual Financing Agreement (Ur. l. RS International Agreements No. 16/02);

publication  of  the  second  open  invitation  to  tender  for  SAPARD  programme
measures (Ur. l. RS 97/02);

signing of the 2002 Annual Financing Agreement (7 April 2003).

Results of the SAPARD programme implementation

On  the  basis  of  the  Agriculture  Act  (Ur.  l.  RS  54/00)  and  in  connection  with  the  Rural
Development programme 2000-2006 (SAPARD programme) and the provisions of the Multi-
annual  Financing  Agreement,  the  Slovenian  Government  issued  on  13  December  2001  the
Decree on the agricultural structural  policy measures of the Rural  Development Programme
2000-2006  (SAPARD),  laying  down  the  measures,  purpose,  beneficiaries  and  the  general
requirements for the granting of SAPARD pre-accession aid. The  Decree  provides  the legal
basis for the publication of the Ordinance on the amount of funds granted for the agricultural
structural policy measures of the Rural Development Programme 2000-2006 (SAPARD) and
the publication of open invitations to tender.

So  far,  SAPARD  Agency  has  published  two  open  invitations  to  tender  (January  2002  and
November 2002) for four measures laid down in the Rural Development Plan (other than the
technical  assistance  measure):  investments  in  agricultural  holdings  (livestock  breeding  and
processing); investment in restructuring and adaptation of the food-processing industry (milk,
meat  and  fish);  support  for  economic  diversification  of  farms  (on-farm  tourism  and
handicraft); and rural infrastructure as the fourth measure (water supply infrastructure, theme
trails and road infrastructure).

As  a  result  of  (two)  open  invitations  to  tender,  applications  received  include  Multi-annual
investment projects. All together, 112 applications had been received by 11 April 2003. Data
in the Table below show in detail the status of applications according to specific measures.

37

Measure

TOTAL

Decisions on
allocation

Concluded
contracts

Cancelled
contracts

Claims for
payment

Rejected

Refused

I.

Investments in
agricultural holdings

II. Investments in food
processing industry

III. Economic diversi-
fication of farm

IV. Development and
improvement of
rural infrastructure

20

19

49

24

TOTAL

112

13

11

32

14

70

13

11

27

14

65

/

/

5

/

5

17

12

25

23

77

/

7

4

4

5

/

8

/

15

13

In  all,  65  contracts  were  concluded  with  the  SAPARD  Agency  for  the  implementation  of
investments. The total value of assumed obligations amounts to SIT 2,5 billion.

MEASURE

Purpose

No of
concluded
contracts

Total amount of
allocated funds
(in SIT24)

National funds

EU funds

I.

Investments in
agricultural holdings

bovine animals

pigs

sheep and goats

Total

II. Investments in pro-
cessing and market-
ing of agricultural
and fishery products

milk

meat

Total

III. Economic

tourism

diversification of
farm

handicraft

Total

IV. Development and

water supply

improvement of rural
infrastructure

theme trails

Total

TOTAL

9

3

1

13

5

6

11

27

0

27

14

0

14

65

228 031 054

76 010 351

152 020 703

76 187 610

25 395 870

50 791 740

6 981 543

2 327 181

4 654 362

311 200 207

103 733 402

207 466 805

286 081 838

95 360 613

190 721 225

975 678 572

325 226 191

650 452 381

1 261 760 410

420 586 803

841 173 607

447 925 509

149 308 503

298 617 006

0

0

0

447 925 509

149 308 503

298 617 006

549 552 507

183 184 169

366 368 338

0

0

0

549 552 507

183 184 169

366 368 338

2 570 438 633

856 812 878

1 713 625 755

Monitoring Committee and proposals for programme changes

At the second session (10 December 2002), members of the SAPARD Monitoring Committee
were informed of the status of the implementation of the SAPARD measures with regard to
the  indicators  adopted  for  the  monitoring  of  the  implementation  of  the  measures  and  the
proposal for amendments to the SAPARD programme.

24

€ 1 = SIT 232,5825.

38

                                                
In  2002  and  the  beginning  of  2003,  the  MAFF,  as  the  Managing  Body  for  SAPARD
Programme,  worked  on  the  drafting  of  the  proposal  for  amending  the  current  eligibility
criteria  for  individual  measures  of  the  SAPARD  Programme.  The  amendments  apply  in
particular  to  measure  1,  where  the  number  of  received  applications  for  tendered  funds  has
been much smaller than expected. In order to increase the interest in these funds, a proposal
for the amendment of the criteria has been drafted in  agreement  with the SAPARD Agency
and the Agricultural Extension Service. The proposal of the amendments was transmitted to
the Commission (DG AGRI, F4 – SAPARD Programme  Section)  and presented in  detail to
the members of the Monitoring Committee at their second session of 10 December  2002.  It
was agreed at this session that the documents  should  be  supplemented  and  the  proposals  of
social  partners  considered  before  the  documents  are  re-examined  at  the  session  of  the
Monitoring Committee in a written procedure. The agreed proposal was approved on 8 April
2003  by  the  members  of  the  Monitoring  Committee  and  transmitted  to  the  Commission  for
harmonisation  within  the  services  of  the  Commission  and  for  further  consideration  by  the
STAR Committee.

The  more  important  amendments  concern  the  criteria  relating  to  measure  1  “investments  in
agricultural holdings”.

The  following  has  been  proposed:  abolishment  of  the  beneficiaries’  age  limit;  inclusion  of
support  in  the  area  of  horticulture;  reduction  of  the  minimum  size  of  agricultural  holdings
eligible for support to 3 ha; the purchase of agricultural machinery should not be tied to the
investment;  increase  of  the  scope  of  investment  and  the  highest  possible  amount  of  public
support per programme period; construction and in particular adaptation of stables should not
be tied only to free range rearing, but to all forms of rearing, in compliance with the standards
relating to the protection of animals.

39

Slovenia – Financial monitoring (cumulated data: 31 December 2002, in SIT)

SAPARD Programme 2000 – 2006

Decision No C(2000) 3138

of 27 October 2000

MEASURES

Total eligible cost

a

Total

b

EU

c

Public

No of
projects

Investment in agricultural holdings

10 867 233 321,00

4 890 255 215,00

3 260 170 143,00

Processing  and  marketing  of  agriculture  and  fishery
products

15 968 181 136,00

5 588 863 103,00

3 725 908 735,00

Diversification  of  activities,  providing  alternative
income

3 912 345 528,00

1 956 172 764,00

1 304 115 176,00

Rural infrastructures

Technical Assistance

1 862 954 368,00

1 862 954 368,00

931 477 184,00

110 251 164,00

110 251 164,00

82 688 636,00

SAPARD Agency Commitments

Eligible costs

Public

Total

f

EU

g

Total

e

588 751 446,00

271 183 555,00

180 789 036,70

3 586 488 009,00

1 253 544 610,00

835 563 073,00

665 664 528,00

332 832 265,00

221 888 177,00

464 350 201,00

348 262 652,00

232 175 101,30

--

--

--

d

12

10

21

10

-

Total

32 720 965 517,00

14 408 496 614,00

9 304 359 874,00

53

5 305 254 184,00

2 205 823 082,50

1 470 415 388,00

40

Slovenia – Financial monitoring (cumulated data: 31 December 2002, in SIT)

Execution

Eligible costs

No of
projects
completed

Borne by beneficiaries

Public contribution paid
to the beneficiaries

Total declared

Subsidy claim

Total subsidy

h

i

j

k

EU

l

Indicators of execution

%
of projects
completed

Eligible
costs
committed
as % of
total
eligible
costs in the
programme

%
of
payments
to
beneficiari
es against
commit-
ments

%
of
payments
to benefi-
ciaries
against
claims

% of cost
paid by
benefi-
ciaries
against
cost
committed

%
of EU
funds
committed
against
foreseen
in the
programme

EU paid /
EU
foreseen
in the
programme
(15=8/2)

m = h/d

n = e/a

o = k/f

p = k/j

q = i/e

r = g/c

s = l/c

Investment in
agricultural
holdings

Processing and
marketing of
agriculture and
fishery products

Diversification
of activities,
providing
alternative
income

Rural
infrastructures

Technical
Assistance

Total

0

0

1

0

-

1

345 668 151,90

158 699 096,84

142 339 124,00

94 892 749,40

0,0%

5,4%

52,5%

89,7%

58,7%

5,5%

2,9%

590 515 221,30

195 000 000,00

195 000 000,00

130 000 000,70

0,0%

22,5%

15,6%

100,0%

16,5%

22,4%

3,5%

146 905 889,10

73 532 763,22

51 692 452,50

34 461 636,00

4,8%

17,0%

15,5%

70,3%

22,1%

17,0%

2,6%

323 685 624,20

191 382 284,00

191 382 284,00

111 561 457,00

0,0%

24,9%

55,0%

100,0%

69,7%

24,9%

12,0%

--

--

--

--

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

1 406 774 886,50

618 614 144,06

580 413 860,50

370 915 843,10

1,9%

16,2%

26,3%

93,8%

26,5%

15,8%

4,0%

41

prop.
(%)

37,7

28,8

38,1

9.8

HUNGARY

The SAPARD Agency called for SAPARD application on 26 September 2002, following the
national accreditation. The applicants  had relative short period to prepare their  applications.
Despite this short period and complexity of requirements of applications, the regional offices
and the Food Processing Unit received an extremely large number of applications. However
almost every  applicant  had  to  supplement  deficiencies,  therefore  the  effective  processing  of
the applications submitted could start only after closing the supplement of deficiencies.

The  aim  of  this  analysis  is  to  present,  how  many  applications  in  what  value  have  been
submitted  concerning  the  3  accredited  measures,  what  are  the  main  parameters  of  the
applicants, i.e. who and from which region had submitted applications.

9.8.1 Main parameters of applications submitted

The regional offices received 1 160 applications. Their distribution according to measures is
contained in the following table.

Applications

Project

Support

Average (eFt)

Description of the measure

num-
ber

distri-
bution
(%)

value

claim

project

support

(‘000 HUF)

(‘000 HUF)

value

claim

111

Investments in agricultural holdings

308

26,6

14 667 700

5 526 576

47 622

17 943

1111 Purchase of machines

59

5,1

1 778 931

512 100

30 151

8 680

1113 Building development

152

13,1

8 199 265

3 126 885

53 943

20 572

1114 Other  investments  associated  with

agricultural facilities

114 Processing 

and  marketing  of

agricultural and fishery products

1308 Development  and  improvement  of

rural infrastructure

97

8,4

4 689 504

1 887 591

48 345

19 460

40,3

251

21,6

25 023 701

9 733 201

99 696

38 778

38,9

601

51,8

14 778 828

10 523 396

24 590

17 510

71,2

TOTAL

1 160

100,0

54 470 229

25 783 173

More  than  50%  of  applications  had  been  submitted  for  the  measure  “Development  and
improvement of rural infrastructure”. While many applications have been submitted for food
industrial  improvements,  there  has  been  only  a  small  interest  concerning  the  measure
“Purchase of (agricultural) machines”. The reason of this might be the strict conditions or the
support for agricultural machines performed in 2002.

In case of the measure 111 “Investments in agricultural holdings” the average project value is
effectively  less  than  the  maximum  value.  In  case  of  the  measure  1308  “Development  and
improvement  of  rural  infrastructure”  the  support  value  claimed  could  be  between
HUF 6 million25 and HUF 60 million as well, therefore no conclusion can be drawn from the
average values.

Comparing the planned resources and the applications submitted for the certain measures of
the SAPARD Plan, we can observe, that:

25

€ 1 = HUF 245,6800.

42

                                                
– 

– 

– 

participation of food industrial improvements exceeds the budget estimated;

claim of infra-structural improvement is extremely high;

need of agricultural holdings is under possibilities.

The  reason  is  that  the  high  support  level  and  the  significant  support  amount  are  attractive
concerning measures 114 and 1308.

The  following  figure  represents  the  distribution  of  applications  according  to  quantity  and
value per measures.

Distribution of applications submitted

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Applications

Project Value

Support Claim

1308 Development and improvement of rural infrastructure

114 Processing and marketing of agricultural and fishery products

111 Investments in agricultural holdings

9.8.2 Regional distribution of applications submitted

We  can  presume  that  the  greater  mood  for  applying  relates  to  the  economic  situation  of
certain  areas.  The  fewest  number  of  applications  originated  from  the  Central-Hungarian
Region, the reason might be, that it has the smallest area among the seven regions.

The  more  applications  concerning  the  measure  “investment  in  agricultural  holdings”  came
from  the  North  Great  Plain  Region.  Only  33  applications  came  from  the  North  Hungarian
Region, the reason might be partly the unfavourable relations of agricultural production.

43

The distribution of submitted applications according to regions is presented by the following
figure.

number

Applications per measure and per region

250

200

150

100

50

0

West
Transdanube

South
Transdanube

Central
Transdanube

Central Hungary

North Hungary

North Great Plain South Great Plain

111 Investment in agricultural holdings

114 Processing and marketing of agricultural and fishery products

1308 Development and improvement of rural infrastructure

The food industrial investments are concentrated in the Eastern part of Hungary, the reason of
it might be the tradition.

The more unexpected is the great interest for infra-structural developments. 135 applications
came from the North-Hungarian Region, the greatest amount has been claimed by the North-
Great Plain Region.

We examined  the  average support claim according to regions  and measures as well. On the
basis  of  this  the  total  support  claim  per  projects  is  29%  higher  in  the  Central-Hungarian
Region than in the country. In case of the West-Transdanube Region this indicator is 11,5%
less than the average support claim per project.

9.8.3

Participants of the first round of application procedure

51,4%  of  the  applications  have  been  submitted  by  companies.  Together  with  co-operatives
649  joint  companies  took  part  in  the  application  procedure.  The  individual  entrepreneurs
submitted 290 applications, which is 25% of total applications. The local authorities prepared
195  applications,  all  of  them  except  one  being  submitted  for  measure  “Development  and
improvement  of  rural  infrastructure”.  The  other  organisations  (e.g.  non-governmental
organisations)  submitted  26  applications,  a  little  bit  more  than  2%  of  the  total  number  of
applications.

For  measures  111  more  than  50%  of  applications  have  been  submitted  by  companies,  for
measure  114  more  than  75%.  About  5%  of  the  applications  have  been  submitted  by  co-
operatives,  which  is  quite  a  low  rate  concerning  especially  measure  “investment  in
agricultural holdings”.

44

The  individual  entrepreneurs  have  been  quite  active:  40%  of  the  applications  submitted  for
measure “Investments in agricultural holdings” have been prepared by them.

However,  a  low  proportion  of  applications  for  “Improvement  of  infrastructure”  have  been
submitted  by  local-governments  (194  applications).  For  this  measure  234  applications  have
been submitted by companies, while 123 applications by individual entrepreneurs.

The value of the projects and the support claim are in tune with the expected economic power
of  certain  economic  types.  Applications  with  the  highest  value  have  been  submitted  by
companies with legal entities.

The absolute  value of applications  submitted  by  individual  entrepreneurs  and  by  companies
without legal entities is only 40% of the value of applications submitted by companies with
legal  entities.  The  situation  is  the  same  in  the  case  of  measures  111  and  114.  The  value  of
projects submitted for measures 111 and 114 by co-operatives is nearly the same as the value
of projects of companies with legal entities.

9.8.4

Summary

The first  round  of  the  application  procedure  started  on  26  September  2002  and  finished  for
some measures on 16 November and for some other measures on 1 December. In this period
more  applications  were  submitted  to  the  regional  offices  of  the  SAPARD  Agency  than
expected.

More  than  50%  of  1 160  applications  were  submitted  by  companies.  In  case  of  measures
related  to  improvement  of  condition  of  production,  especially  in  case  of  improvements  of
agricultural holdings, the individual entrepreneurs submitted a lot of applications as well.

In case of development of rural infrastructure the companies were more active than the local
governments.

Further analysis of applications and applicants is necessary, to determine how the SAPARD
plan has been implemented.

Concerning the five new measures:

– 

– 

on 31 January 2003 the National Authorising Officer received the documentation of
the five new measures;

on the basis of this, the National Audit Office started the accreditation procedures in
the Agency on 1 April 2003.

9.9

ROMANIA

The  European  Union  will  annually  allocate  about  € 153  million  to  Romania,  for  a  seven
years’ period, as non reimbursable funds, in order to facilitate the adoption of the Community
acquis in the field and to improve competitiveness for the agricultural sector.

9.9.1

The SAPARD institutional system

– 

The  SAPARD  Agency  represents  the  public  legal  entity,  subordinated  to  the
Ministry  of  Agriculture,  Food  and  Forests,  responsible  for  the  technical  and
financial implementation of the programme;

45

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

the  Competent  Authority  is  the  General  Directorate  National  Fund  within  the
Ministry of Public Finance and examines the structures and the procedures of
the Agency with respect to the administrative, accounting, paying and internal
audit settlements;

the  Management  Authority  is  organised  within  the  Ministry  of  European
Integration  and  is  responsible  for  the  efficiency  and  the  correctness  of  co-
ordination  and  reporting  with  respect 
to  programme  monitoring  and
assessment;

the Certifying Body is the Romania’s Court  of Accounts and its main  powers
cover  the  external  audit  and  certification  of  annual  accounts  of  the  SAPARD
Agency;

the  Monitoring  Committee  consists  of  representatives  of  governmental
institutions in charge with the field covered by the programme, social partners
and  observers  from  the  European  Commission  and  has  been  established  in
order  to  ensure  the  supervision,  efficiency  and  quality  of  the  programme
implementation;

the delegated bodies have been established by the SAPARD Agency in order to
properly  implement  the  measure  1.1  “Improvement  of  processing  and
marketing of the agricultural and fishery products” and 2.1 “Development and
improvement of rural infrastructure” and to deal with checking the eligibility of
the financing applications and payment requests. The two delegated bodies are
the  Ministry  of  Agriculture,  Food  and  Forestry  and  the  Ministry  of  Public
Works, Transports and Housing.

9.9.2

Publicity for the SAPARD programme

The publicity campaign for the SAPARD programme in Romania started in September 2001
and  consisted  in  providing  all  the  people  and  public  institutions  who  were  interested  in  the
programme  with booklets,  folders  and  other  informative  materials,  such  as  the  “Applicant’s
Guide”.

With a view to promote the programme “Regional seminars and conferences of information in
Community  Programmes  and  Policies”  have  been  organised  at  the  level  of  the  8  regional
SAPARD Offices.

9.9.3

The implementation of the SAPARD programme

Starting  from  2001,  in  accordance  with  Community  Regulations  and  following  a  strategy
corresponding  to  the  status  of  developing  country  in  progress  to  EU  accession,  legal  and
institutional measures have been promoted which allow for the creation and consolidation of
administrative framework in view of SAPARD programme implementation in Romania.

At  the  same  time  with  the  preparation  for  external  accreditation  of  central  and  regional
structures of SAPARD Agency and technical delegated Services, during 2002, in compliance
with Law no. 316/2001 for  ratification of Multi-annual  Financing Agreement, the  following
specific actions were undertaken:

– 

ratification of 2001 Annual Financing Agreement and preparation of documentation
needed  for  signature  of  2002  Annual  Financing  Agreement,  organisation  and
carrying out of meetings of the Monitoring Committee for the SAPARD programme
and preparation and carrying out of specific procedures as regards the up-dating and

46

amendment  of  the  National  Programme  for  Agriculture  and  Rural  Development
(NPARD)26  as  well  as  preparation  for  accreditation  of  other  measures  in  the
Programme;

preparation  of  mid-term  evaluation  of  SAPARD  Programme  which  has  to  be
finalised up to 31 December 2003;

monitoring of implementation of measures and sub-measures in the Programme and
evaluation of registered progress;

other  institutional  and  legislative  adjustments  imposed  by  the  accomplishment  of
objectives specific to the SAPARD Programme and efficiency of pending activities.

– 

– 

– 

9.9.4

The accreditation of the SAPARD Agency

On 31 July 2002 the European Commission issued Decision 638/31/EC of July 2002 whereby
the  relevant  authorities  in  Romania  are  conferred  the  management  of  SAPARD  assistance,
SAPARD  Agency  is  accredited  for  the  technical  and  financial  implementation  of  measures
1.1  “Improvement  of  processing  and  marketing  of  the  agricultural  and  fish  products”,  2.1
“Development and improvement of rural infrastructure” and 4.2 “Technical Assistance”.

9.9.5 Overview of SAPARD programme in Romania

From 1 August 2002,  the  official  submission and registration of the  Financing  Applications
(projects) from potential beneficiaries have been set out in view of achieving the investments
pertaining to measures 1.1 “Improvement of processing and marketing of the agricultural and
fish products” and 2.1 “Development and improvement of rural infrastructure”. Submission of
Financing Applications to the Regional Offices for Implementation of SAPARD Programme
(BRIPS) is taking place in monthly sessions.

The  SAPARD  Agency  have  signed  a  total  number  of  414  contracts  with  the  beneficiaries
from the public and private sectors for the August and September sessions (394 contracts for
measure 2.1 and 20 contracts for measure 1.1), with a total eligible cost of € 325,8 million.

For  October  session  the  SAPARD  Agency  have  signed  8  contracts  for  measure  1.1  with  a
total eligible cost of € 6,9 million and selected 43 projects for measure 2.1 with a total eligible
cost of € 36,47 million.

In  November  and  December  sessions,  21  projects  for  measure  1.1  and  394  projects  for
measure 1.2, with a total eligible cost of € 321,4 million, have been submitted and registered
with the Regional Offices for Implementation of SAPARD programme.

At  present,  a  priority  of  Romanian  authorities  is  represented  by  the  establishment  and
preparation of other measures in  the NPARD in  view  of  their  accreditation,  particularly  the
measures  3.1  “Investments 
in  agricultural  exploitations”,  3.4  “Development  and
diversification of economic activities to generate multiple activities and alternative incomes”
and 4.1 “Improvement of vocational training”.

26

On 26 June 2002 in Brussels the EU STAR Committee examined the Romanian proposals concerning
the amendment of the National Programme for  Agriculture and Rural Development (NPARD). Based
on the favourable opinion of STAR Committee the Decision CE/H/2002/1936 of 11.7.2002 was issued
to amend NPARD approved by Commission Decision C(2000) 3742 final of 12 December 2000.

47

                                                
9.9.6 Mid-Term Evaluation of SAPARD programme

In  December  2002  the  SAPARD  Agency,  as  Contracting  Authority,  and  the  Ministry  of
European  Integration,  as  Beneficiary  of  the  measure  4.2  “Technical  Assistance  within  the
SAPARD  programme”  have  signed  the  Framework  Contract  for  the  project  “Mid-Term
Evaluation of SAPARD Programme in Romania”.

The  period  of  execution  of  the  service  contract  for  the  Mid-Term  Evaluation  of  SAPARD
Programme in Romania has been established for 9 months from the commencement date and
shall be carried on over the period May-December 2003.

9.10

POLAND

9.10.1 Preparation

The  implementation  of  SAPARD  programme  in  Poland  started  after  the  European
Commission  had  issued  the  Decision  conferring  management  of  aid  on  implementing
agencies for pre-accession measures in agriculture and rural development in the Republic of
Poland in the pre-accession period of 2 July 2002 (OJ L 173, 3.07.2002, p. 41) for five out of
seven measures corresponding to 87% of the amount available.

On 9 July 2002 (Official Journal of the Republic of Poland No 102, item 928) the Regulation
of the Council of Ministers on detailed scope and directions and methods of implementation
of tasks of the Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture with respect to the
management of financial resources originating in the European Union was promulgated. It is
the  basic  national  legal  act  governing  the  principles  of  granting  financial  aid  under  the
SAPARD Programme.

9.10.2 Early stage of implementation

On  9  July  2002  a  press  announcement  was  published  by  the  President  of  the  Agency  for
Restructuring  and  Modernisation  of  Agriculture  informing  potential  beneficiaries  about  the
deadlines for submission of applications for financial aid.

As  a  result  of  an  incomplete  use  of  financial  resources  in  measure  1  and  the  fact  that  the
amount applied for under measure 3 exceeded the amounts available for that measure within
the  framework  of  the  AFA  2000  and  2001  the  Team  –  SAPARD  Monitoring  Committee
adopted Resolution No 16 of 5 November 2002 on the shifting of funds between measures of
the SAPARD Programme, on the basis of the 10% flexibility rule included in the Programme,
allowing to increase the amount of funds available for payments for particular measure by up
to 10% of the total amount for that measure in the period 2000 – 2006: in accordance to this
resolution, the amount of € 47 349 252 [€ 35 511 939 (EU funds) + € 11 837 313 (national co-
financing)]  was  shifted  from  measure  1  to  measure  3,  and,  the  amount  designated  to
measure 3 within the framework of AFA 2000 and 2001 was increased from € 187 827 131 to
€ 235 176 383 (EU funds + national co-financing).

Following  the  above  shift  of  financial  resources  from  measure  1  to  measure  3,  it  will  be
possible,  on  the  basis  of  applications  for  financial  aid  submitted  and  registered  as  for
31 December  2002  under  the  SAPARD  Programme,  to  sign  agreements  with  beneficiaries
(after finishing the public procurements in measure 3) for  an amount exceeding  the level of
60% of total resources available under Annual Financing Agreements for 2000 and 2001.

48

9.10.3 Problems related to already accredited measures

Measure 1 – Improvement in processing and marketing of food and fishery products

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

difficult financial situation in food processing industry,

unstable situation on the market in order to assure market outlets for food and fishery
products,

high costs of obtaining the bank guarantee for credits,

obligation put in the programme to apply only for one of three available investment
categories  A - Investments  strictly  aimed  at  adjustment  to  the  EU  requirements,
B - Investments strictly aimed at increase of value added, quality improvement, etc.,
and C - Investments strictly aimed at decreasing negative impact on the environment,
with  different  rate  of  co-financing  without  possibility  to  combine  the  above
mentioned categories within one project,

short project duration (the deadline for submission of payment claims under Annual
Financing  Agreements  2000  and  2002  is  under  Polish  law  10  August  2003)  as  a
result deadlines for commitments (2003) prescribed in Annual Financing Agreements
2000 and 2001,

reimbursement of part of eligible expenditure after projects completion,

big  number  of  obligatory  supporting  documents  required  under  Polish  rules  to  be
attached to the application,

extended and detailed application form to be filled in.

Measure 2 – Investments in agriculture holdings

Because of their age many farmers may not pass their farm on to their inheritors (they are too
young  to  be  granted  agricultural  pension),  but  the  fact  that  they  are  over  50  years  old
eliminates  them  under  Polish  rules  from  participation  in  this  measure,  as  described  in  the
programme.  Some  young  farmers,  in  turn,  are  not  able  for  similar  reasons  to  prove
sufficiently long experience in managing a farm on their own (sometimes, for reasons relating
to pension entitlement, a given agricultural holding formally has still the parents as its owners
and managers although those are the children that actually run the farm).

Based on contacts and enquiries with farmers the following main factors discourage farmers
from applying for SAPARD Programme:

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

difficult financial situation of agricultural holdings,

costs of credits involving refunding,

the  arrangement  that  the  costs  incurred  are  reimbursed  only  after  project's
completion,

lack of own funds,

unstable situation on the market, apprehension relating to possible lack of outlets for
given products,

short project duration (the deadline for submission of payment claims under Annual
Financing  Agreements  2000  and  2002  is  under  Polish  law  10  August  2003)  as  a
result  deadlines  for  commitments  (2003)  prescribed  in  the  Annual  Financing
Agreements 2000 and 2001,

49

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

low eligible initial and target production levels,

low volume of financing,

formal difficulties relating to collection of supporting documents (validity period of
documents  that  must  be  enclosed  to  a  business  plan  being  only  one  month,  costs
related to obtaining of enclosures),

possibility  of  project  financing  from  other  sources  (national  preferential  credits,
where it is much easier to comply with the formalities),

difficulties  to  meet  formal  criteria  relating  to  age,  education,  requirement  to  be
ensured in the Social Agricultural Insurance Fund or experience in agriculture.

Within measure 3 – Development of rural  infrastructure there was a  very  good response of
the applicants in terms of the number and quality of applications submitted. The main reason
is  that  municipalities  and  local  authorities  have  already  a  broad  experience  in  applying  for
public assistance both national and EU pre-accession instruments (PHARE, ISPA).

However the following problems can also be named:

– 

– 

short  project  duration  (the  deadline  for  submission  of  payment  claims  under  AFA
2000  and  2002  is  under  Polish  law  10  August  2003)  as  a  result  deadlines  for
commitments (2003) prescribed in AFA 2000 and 2001;

the  arrangement  that  the  costs  incurred  are  reimbursed  only  after  project's
completion.

9.10.4 Measures to be accredited

Measure 4 – Diversification of economic activities in rural areas

It is in the final stage of preparation for implementation. A new description of that measure in
the  SAPARD  Operational  Programme  was  accepted  by  the  Monitoring  Committee  on
7 February 2002 and on 20 March 2002 by the STAR Committee, and approved on 4 April by
a decision taken by the European Commission. Procedures for this measure were prepared by
the Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture in September 2002 and sent
to  the  National  Authorising  Officer.  Basing  on  the  pre-accreditation  report  drawn  up  by  an
external  auditor,  the  National  Authorising  Officer  has  taken  on  11  June  a  decision  on  the
issuance of a national accreditation act for measure 4.

Measure 5 – Agri-environmental measure (pilot projects)

The  removal  of  former  “afforestation  scheme  (pilot  projects)”  has  been  approved  by  the
Team - SAPARD  Monitoring  Committee  in  7  February  2002.  On  the  following  meeting  on
21 June  2003  the  removal  of  former  “Agri-environmental  measure  (pilot  projects)”  was
approved  in  the  resolution  No  14/2002.  At  its  meeting  held  on  18  December  2002,  this
Committee  adopted  the  Resolution  No  18/2002  on  implementation  of  Scheme  “Agri-
environmental  measure  (pilot  projects)”  under  measure  5  of  the  SAPARD  Operational
Programme. It was a result of long negotiations between Poland and European Commission
after previous decision to remove measure 5 from the Programme.

The resolution  resulted from  the need to prepare  and  experiment  an  institutional  framework
for the agri-environmental programme to be implemented after the accession of Poland to the
European  Union.  This  in  line  with  the  National  Agri-environmental  programme  to  be
implemented under the future Rural Development Plan 2004 – 2006.

50

The  description  of  this  scheme  has  been  presented  and  voted  at  the  meeting  of  the  Team
SAPARD Monitoring Committee on 4 June 2003, with the objective to start implementation
of measure 5 in autumn 2003.

9.10.5 Amendments to the programme accepted by the Team – SAPARD Monitoring

Committee of 18 December 2002

In  order  to  improve  the  accessibility  and  attractiveness  of  assistance  under  SAPARD
programme the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and Agency for Restructuring
and Modernisation of Agriculture (SAPARD Agency) already in 2002 took actions to modify
the Programme and simplify implementing procedures.

In  case  of  measure  2  the  initial  and  target  milk  and  pig  production  limits  were  raised  (and
lowered too in the case of milk production) and, proportionally, grant levels were increased in
order to allow a larger number of farms to apply for assistance. The requirement for farmers
to  be  insured  only  under  Social  Agricultural  Insurance  Fund  was  withdrawn  from  the
programme.

In  case  of  measure  1  the  possibility  to  combine  different  categories  of  investments  and
uniform level of co-financing (up to 50% of eligible expenditure) was introduced (deleting the
division into categories A, B, C listed as one of the main problems).

The  amendments  to  the  Programme  were  accepted  by  the  Team  –  SAPARD  Monitoring
Committee on the session held in 18 December 2002.

All mentioned adjustments to the programme are expected to be approved by decision of the
Commission  in  the  first  half  of  2003,  after  transmission  by  the  Polish  authorities  of  the
relevant changes to the accredited procedures.

As a result, it is expected to see a significant increase in the number of beneficiaries and in the
amount of financial commitments under SAPARD in Poland in 2003.

51

ANNEX A – Calendar of events concerning the Multi-annual Financing Agreement (MAFA) and Annual Financing Agreements (AFA)

Financing Agreements

to

on 

draft

agreement 

consultation 

Implementing

Adoption  of  Financial 
Regulation (Reg. (EC) No 2222/2000)
Inter-service 
Financing Agreement
Circulation  of  draft 
Candidate Countries (CC)
Launch  of  negotiations  on  Financing
Agreement with CC at work-shop
Circulation of re-drafted agreement to CC
taking account of work-shop discussions
Receipt of comments from CC
Launch of 2nd inter-service consultation
Circulation  of  re-drafted  agreement  to
candidate countries
Receipt  of  comments  from  Candidate
Countries
Launch of 3rd inter-service consultation
Circulation  of  re-drafted  agreement  to
candidate countries (provisional)
to 
Circulation 
Text put to Commission
Decision 
authorising 
signature of Financing Agreement
Agreement with candidate country
Signature  of  Multi-annual  Financing
Agreement
Signature 
of 
Agreement 2000
Conclusion of MAFA
Conclusion of AFA 2000
Commitment of 2000 funds (date)
AFA 2001
Circulation  of  draft  AFA  2001 
Candidate Countries (letter DG)
Receipt of comments on draft AFA 2001
from Candidate Countries

Commission

candidate 

Financing

countries

Annual 

to

Bulgaria

7.06.2000

Czech
Republic
7.06.2000

Estonia

Hungary

Latvia

Lithuania

Poland

Romania

Slovakia

Slovenia

7.06.2000

7.06.2000

7.06.2000

7.06.2000

7.06.2000

7.06.2000

7.06.2000

7.06.2000

12.07.2000

12.07.2000

12.07.2000

12.07.2000

12.07.2000

12.07.2000

12.07.2000

12.07.2000

12.07.2000

12.07.2000

20.07.2000

20.07.2000

20.07.2000

20.07.2000

20.07.2000

20.07.2000

20.07.2000

20.07.2000

20.07.2000

20.07.2000

27.07.2000

27.07.2000

27.07.2000

27.07.2000

27.07.2000

27.07.2000

27.07.2000

27.07.2000

27.07.2000

27.07.2000

3.08.2000

3.08.2000

3.08.2000

3.08.2000

3.08.2000

3.08.2000

3.08.2000

3.08.2000

3.08.2000

3.08.2000

28.08.2000
8.09.2000
29.09.2000

5.09.2000
8.09.2000
29.09.2000

2.09.2000
8.09.2000
29.09.2000

22.08.2000
8.09.2000
29.09.2000

18.08.2000
8.09.2000
29.09.2000

21.08.2000
8.09.2000
29.09.2000

21.08.2000
8.09.2000
29.09.2000

21.08.2000
8.09.2000
29.09.2000

22.08.2000
8.09.2000
29.09.2000

22.082000
8.09.2000
29.09.2000

9.10.2000

18.10.2000

20.10.2000

20.10.2000

9.10.2000

13.10.2000

15.11.2000

28.10.2000
10.11.2000

28.10.2000
10.11.2000

28.10.2000
10.11.2000

28.10.2000
10.11.2000

28.10.2000
10.11.2000

28.10.2000
10.11.2000

28.10.2000
10.11.2000

Oral “OK”
26.10. 2000
28.10.2000
10.11.2000

17.10.2000

18.10.2000

28.10.2000
10.11.2000

28.10.2000
10.11.2000

24.11.2000

24.11.2000

24.11.2000

24.11.2000

24.11.2000

24.11.2000

24.11.2000

24.11.2000

24.11.2000

24.11.2000

29.11.2000

29.11.2000

29.11.2000

29.11.2000

29.11.2000

29.11.2000

29.11.2000

29.11.2000

29.11.2000

29.11.2000

1.12.2000
18.12.2000

1.12.2000
5.02.2001

14.12.2000
25.01.2001

26.1.2001
1.03.2001

7.12.2000
25.01.2001

11.12.2000
5.03.2001

29.1.2001
25.01.2001

12.12.2000
2.02.2001

30.11.2000
26.03.2001

8.12.2000
5.03.2001

12.02.2001

5.02.2001

1.03.2001

1.03.2001

30.03.2001

5.03.2001

29.03.2001

27.02.2001

26.03.2001

5.03.2001

20.04.2001
20.04.2001
30.01.2001

10.12.2001
10.12.2001
31.01.2001

28.05.2001
28.05.2001
30.01.2001

15.06.2001
15.06.2001
13.02.2001

4.07.2001
11.05.2001
30.01.2001

29.08.2001
29.08.2001
13.02.2001

18.05.2001 17.1.2002 (SG) 16.05.2001
18.05.2001 17.1.2002 (SG) 16.05.2001
13.02.2001
13.02.2001
31.01.2001

28.08.2001
16.10.2001
13.02.2001

08.10.2001

08.10.2001

08.10.2001

08.10.2001

08.10.2001

08.10.2001

08.10.2001

08.10.2001

08.10.2001

08.10.2001

19.10.2001

22.10.2001
(e-mail)

29.10.2001

19.10.2001

30.11.2001

7.11.2001

26.10.2001

22.10.2001

26.10.2001

52

Financing Agreements

to

sent 

Annual 

Financing

authorising

from  SG  +  DG  AGRI  on

Reply to Candidate Countries
Final 
2001 
draft  AFA 
inter-service consultation
Commission 
decision 
signature of AFA 2001
Commitment of 2001 funds
(amount in € + date)
Signature 
of 
Agreement 2001
Letter 
procedures for conclusion of AFAs
Letter  from  SG  on  conclusion  of  AFA
2001
Conclusion of AFA 2001
Letter to Candidate Countries confirming
conclusion of AFA 2001
AFA 2002
Circulation  of  draft  AFA  2002 
Candidate Countries (letter DG)
Receipt of comments on draft AFA 2002
from Candidate Countries
Reply to Candidate Countries (letter DG)
Final 
to
inter-service consultation
Commission 
decision 
signature of AFA 2002
Commitment of 2002 funds
(amount in € + date)
Signature 
of 
Agreement 2002
Letter from AGRI on conclusion of AFA
2002
Conclusion of AFA 2002
Letter to Candidate Countries confirming
conclusion of AFA 2002

draft  AFA 

authorising

Financing

Annual 

2002 

sent 

to

Bulgaria

28.11.2001

Czech
Republic
23.11.2001

Estonia

Hungary

Latvia

Lithuania

Poland

Romania

Slovakia

Slovenia

05.12.2001

28.11.2001

21.12.2001

28.11.2001

23.11.2001

28.11.2001

5.12.2001

26.10.2001

26.10.2001

26.10.2001

26.10.2001

26.10.2001

26.10.2001

26.10.2001

26.10.2001

26.10.2001

26.10.2001

28.11.2001

28.11.2001

28.11.2001

28.11.2001

28.11.2001

28.11.2001

28.11.2001

28.11.2001

28.11.2001

28.11.2001

54.093.686
8.02.2002

22.896.727
18.04.2002

12.596.639
8.02.2002

39 492 002
14.05.2002

22 673 602
08.02.2002

30 956 192
08.02.2002

175 057 271
20.02.2002

156 328 303
06.03.2002

18 980 113
18.04.2002

6 576 465
08.02.2002

19.02.2002

30.10.2002

26.04.2002

07.10.2002

11.02.2002

29.04.2002

6.06.2002

30.01.2002

11.09.2002

19.03.2002

07.05.2002

21.11.2002

6.05.2002

20.11.2002

6.05.2002

6.05.2002

26.06.2002

6.05.2002

25.09.2002

6.05.2002

29.07.2002

19.06.2003

26.03.2003

30.05.2002

18.07.2002

10.06.2002

11.10.2002

4.11.2002

17.07.2002

19.09.2002

14.04.2003

25.06.2002

19.09.2002

19.11.2002

19.11.2002

19.11.2002

19.09.2002

10.10.2002

26.07.2002

12.07.2002

19.07.2002

12.08.2002

11.07.2002

16.07.2002

08.08.2002

05.08.2002

12.08.2002

19.07.2002

05.09.2002

23.07.2002

23.07.2002

23.07.2002

23.07.2002

23.07.2002

05.09.2002

13.09.2002

10.09.2002

05.08.2002

Letter 14299 of 13.06.2002

23 July and 24 September 2002

22 October 2002

55.582.227

23.526.795

12.942.243

40.578.737

23.297.531

31.808.039

179.874.468

160.630.119

19.502.405

6.757.436

4.04.2003

28.05.2003

26.06.2003

04.02.2003

17.02.2003

3.04.2003

1.04.2003

26.06.2003

07.04.2003

23.04.2003

18.06.2003

28.03.2003

1.04.2003

14.04.2003

23.04.2003

14.04.2003

6.06.2003

12.05.2003

6.06.2003

14.04.2003

12.05.2003

5.06.2003

22.05.2003

53

to

sent 

2003 

draft  AFA 

AFA 2003
Circulation  of  draft  AFA  2003 
Candidate Countries (letter DG)
Receipt of comments on draft AFA 2003
from Candidate Countries
Reply to Candidate Countries (letter DG)
Final 
to
inter-service consultation
decision 
Commission 
signature of AFA 2003
Commitment of 2003 funds
(amount in € + date)
Signature 
of 
Agreement 2003
Letter from AGRI on conclusion of AFA
2003
Conclusion of AFA 2003
Letter to Candidate Countries confirming
conclusion of AFA 2003

authorising

Financing

Annual 

Bulgaria

Czech
Republic

Estonia

Hungary

Latvia

Lithuania

Poland

Romania

Slovakia

Slovenia

25.04.2003
(e-mail)
27.05.2003

18.04.2003

28.04.2003

13.05.2003

22.04.2003

2.05.2003

7.05.2003

5.06.2003

5.06.2003

27.05.2003

27.05.2003

27.05.2003

27.05.2003

27.05.2003

27.05.2003

27.05.2003

27.05.2003

27.05.2003

Letter 8855 of 25.03.2003 ONLY for Romania and Bulgaria
Letter 8856 of 25.03.2003 for all the other 8 CCs

None

27 May 2003

56 133 539

23 760 154

13 070 615

40 981 231

23 528 615

32 123 538

181 658 615

162 223 385

19.695.846

6.824.462

23.07.2003

22.07.2003

28.07.2003

27.06.2003

4.06.2003

31.07.2003

22.07.2003

5.06.2003

10.06.2003

54

ANNEX B – Modification of programmes to the end of 2002

Bulgaria Czech Rep.

Estonia

Hungary

Latvia

Lithuania

Poland

Romania

Slovakia

Slovenia

Commission Decision approving the
SAPARD programme [C(2000)….]

20.10.2000
3058 final

26.10.2000
3105 final

17.11.2000
3321 final

18.10.2000
2738 final

25.10.2000
3097 final

27.11.2000
3329 final

18.10.2000
3040 final

12.12.2000
3742 final

17.11.2000
3327 final

27.10.2000
3138 final

1st  modifications  of  the  programmes
adopted by the Commission on

2nd modifications of the programmes
adopted by the Commission on

3rd modifications of the programmes
adopted by the Commission on

4th modifications of the programmes
adopted by the Commission on

21.05.2002 26.02.2002

26.11.2002 28.11.2001 23.12.2002 22.04.2002 11.07.2002 5.03.2002

31.07.2002

5.12.2002

31.07.2002

12.04.2002

31.07.2002

23.12.2002

55

Measures included in the Commission Decisions already taken conferring the management of aid for the Candidate Country concerned (C)
Measures for which the national accreditation has been granted (N)
Measures for which the Candidate Country has requested national accreditation (NR)
Measures not included in the SAPARD programme approved for CC concerned: (percentage of EU contribution allocated to the programmes 2000-2006 at 2000 prices according to the original approved programme)

ANNEX C – Conferral of Management - calendar and coverage

Measures according to Article 2
of Regulation (CE) No 1268/1999 (1)

BULGARIA

CZECH
REPUBLIC

ESTONIA

HUNGARY

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

POLAND

ROMANIA

SLOVAKIA

SLOVENIA

Situation on 16.6.2003

31% 1stC 16% 1stC 43% 1stC 28% 1stC 23% 1stC 47% 1stC 18% 1stC 15%
24% 1stC(4)

17% 1stC 18% 1stC 21% 1stC 26% 1stC 21% 1stC 38% 1stC 17% 1stC

28% 1stC 35% 1stC
26% 1stC 40% 1stC

- Investment in agricultural holdings
- Processing & marketing of agriculture and fishery products
- Structures for quality, veterinary controls, foodstuffs and

consumers

- Environmentally friendly agricultural practices
- Diversification of activities, providing alternative income
- Setting up farm relief and farm management services
- Setting up producer groups
- Renovation and devel. of villages, protection of rural heritage

- Land improvement and reparcelling
- Establish and updating of land registers
- Vocational training
- Rural infrastructures
- Agricultural water resources management
- Forestry, afforestation, investments, processing/marketing
- Technical assistance

TOTAL Programme
Total for measures for which conferral of management
has been granted

1% N
8% N

4% N
6% N
6%
8% N
4% N
100% 11

9% 1stC

2%
4%
6% 1stC 16% 1stC 18% 1stC 16%

3% 2ndC

2%

4%
24% 1stC

1%
2%
8% 1stC 11%

11% 1stC(2)
20% 1stC

4%

7%
9%

2%

3%

2%
10%

2%

3% N
11% 1stC(3) 14% 1stC

5% N

10% 1stC

2% N
4% N (3)

10% 1stC

2% N
4% 1stC
5% 1stC(2) 12% 1stC 12% 1stC 12% 1stC 16% 1stC 28% 1stC 28% 1stC

2% 1stC

2% 1stC

2%

5%

1% 1stC

1%
2%

1% 1stC

100% 9(2) 100% 8

100% 9

3% 1stC
2% N
100% 9

3% N
2% N
100% 8

1% 1stC

100% 7

3%
10%
5% 1stC
100% 11

8% 1stC
3% N

1%

100% 9 (3) 100% 5

61% 3

98% 9(2)

91% 4

62% 4

92% 6

94% 5

87% 5

50% 3

83% 5(3)

99% 4

Receipt of first accreditation package
Date of Commission decision conferring the management of aid (1st C)

18.12.2000
14.05.2001

13.11.2001
15.04.2002

5.02.2001
15.06.2001

01.10.2002
26.11.2002

27.06.2001
6.12.2001

24.07.2001
26.11.2001

20.09.2001
2.07.2002

12.06.2002
31.07.2002

Receipt of second accreditation package
Date of Commission decision conferring the management of aid (2nd C)

Receipt of third accreditation package
Date of Commission decision conferring the management of aid (3rd C)

28.01.2003

16.10.2002

26.03.2003

3.03.2003

19.02.2003

16.01.2003

7.01.2002
15.04.2002

31.03.2003

28.09.2001
19.11.2001

(1) The exact name of the measure in the relevant programme may be different from the names of the measure listed.
(2)

In Czech Republic both measures (renovation of villages + infrastructures) are included in their Measure 2.1: renovation of villages and rural infrastructure. Conferral of management includes both.

(3)

(4)

In Slovak Republic both measures (diversification + infrastructures) are included in their Measure 4: diversification of activities in rural areas. Conferral of management relates only to diversification.

In Bulgaria the sub-measure "Wholesale Markets" included in measure "processing and marketing" is presently on stage "N".

56

Cumulative amounts of approved commitments of SAPARD contribution made by the Candidate Countries under the SAPARD Instrument since the start.

(EUR)

Candidate Countries

Estonia

Slovakia

Lithuania

Poland

Slovenia

Romania

Czech Rep.

Bulgaria

Hungary

Latvia

Total

ANNEX D/1 – Data on commitments to final beneficiaries

SAPARD contribution
in AFA 2000
Situation per end month
June 2001
July 2001
August 2001
September 2001
October 2001
November 2001
December 2001
January 2002
February 2002
March 2002
April 2002
May 2002
June 2002
July 2002
August 2002
September 2002
October 2002
November 2002
December 2002
January 2003
February 2003
March 2003
April 2003
May 2003
June 2003

€
12 344 729

%
100

€
18 602 023

%
100

€
30 339 535

%
100

€
171 570 075

%
100

€
6 445 460

%
100

€
153 214 194

%
100

€
22 440 617

%
100

€
53 016 122

%
100

€
38 705 309

%
100

€
22 221 936

%
100

€
528 900 000

%
100

0

291 559

685 133

3 310 460

3 412 834

5 922 129

5 922 129

5 922 129

6 309 053

7 010 494

7 902 013

11 812 564

12 726 935

13 224 305

13 676 019

14 152 893

15 120 294

15 220 154

15 220 154

15 220 154

15 220 154

0

2

6

27

28

48

48

48

51

57

64

96

103

107

111

115

122

123

123

123

123

0

172 055

1 811 919

12 624 863

18 828 773

0 21 171 159

0 21 314 961

0 24 134 169

3 28 536 897

5 28 818 212

0

0

0

638 134

884 188

1 862 712

10 30 866 922

2 792 935

15 36 566 096

4 538 954

24 52 999 155

5 825 000

31 54 456 979

7 166 000

39 56 978 046

7 537 000

41 67 192 276

21 263 781

172- 10 505 000

56

25 336 673

29 310 443

205

237

-

-

-

-

0

1

6

42

62

70

70

80

94

95

102

121

175

179

188

221

-

-

0

0

0

80 736

1 740 370

2 593 328

3 077 906

3 412 434

4 098 112

4 830 193

5 224 522

5 853 883

5 950 641

6 339 587

6 644 461

7 529 627

7 755 457

12 046

192 732

565 643

1 063 133

6 800 175

38 144 001

39 374 158

42 687 749

107 431 347

0

0

0

1

4

22

23

25

63

185 757 245 108

7 872 467

220 224 705 128

8 078 466

0

0

0

1

27

40

48

53

64

75

81

91

92

98

103

117

120

122

125

834 978

3 586 510

3 586 510

3 586 510

3 580 322

6 023 662

8 248 833

8 094 954

10 074 484

10 028 034

14 109 903

0

0

0 17 605 139

0 19 962 765

7 678 468

34 24 215 788

0 25 071 857

112 28 028 385

0 35 473 179

158 28 877 521

0 35 894 537

160 32 363 158

0 37 818 772

169 33 021 942

0 37 807 067

168 38 492 964

0 37 807 067

168 38 471 406

0

0

0

0

0

0

93 790 219

61 76 461 349

341 46 991 702

99 049 718

65 76 653 478

342 52 406 666

2

7

7

7

7

11

16

15

19

19

27

33

38

46

53

54

61

62

73

73

89

99

-

-

-

-

76 653 478

76 892 164

-

342

343

-

-

-

-

-

834 978

3 586 510

3 878 069

4 271 643

6 890 782

9 436 496

14 170 962

14 220 247

18 538 743

29 772 896

42 797 453

54 092 948

63 694 841

80 835 125

109 112 565

125 506 146

133 674 171

144 980 839

176 490 956

213 893 434

360 255 328

386 374 935

475 056 823

591 561 116

646 645 658

0

3

3

5

22

34

39

43

57

57

57

66

79

79

79

116

130

135

0

1

1

1

1

2

3

3

4

6

8

10

12

15

21

24

25

27

33

40

68

73

90

112

122

31 109

730 211

730 211

1 107 913

4 821 309

7 526 645

8 667 331

9 502 829

12 754 102

12 743 784

12 743 784

0 14 681 846

0 17 629 240

0 17 629 240

0

0

0

620 177

2 17 478 090

5 853 168

15 25 820 575

32 083 261

83 28 916 090

-

-

30 057 953

57

Annex D/1: Cum ulative am ounts of approved com m itm ents of the Com m unity part of the SAP ARD contribution m ade on 
the level of the Candidate Countries (on a m onthly basis, since the start and in %  of AFA 2000).
S ituation at 30.06.2003.

343%

290%

237%

135%

125%

122%

99%

Estonia

Slovac Rep.

Lithuania

Poland

Slovenia

R om ania

C zeck R ep.

Bulgaria

H ungary

Latvia

All 10
countries

83%

65%

128%

56%

350%

340%

330%

320%

310%

300%

290%

280%

270%

260%

250%

240%

230%

220%

210%

200%

190%

180%

170%

160%

150%

140%

130%

120%

110%

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

0
0
0
2
A
F
A

f
o
e
g
a
t
n
e
c
r
e
P

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

N um ber of m onths after conferral of m anagem ent 

58

 
 
 
 
ANNEX D/2 – Data of commitments to final beneficiaries

Cumulative number of projects approved by the Candidate Countries under the SAPARD Instrument, since the start.

Candidate Countries

Estonia

Slovakia Lithuania

Poland

Slovenia Romania Czech Rep. Bulgaria Hungary

Latvia

Total

10
28
28
28
37
40
49
48
61
61
92
132
151
173
208
220
250
262
286
286
341
382
-
-
-

10
28
38
59
146
157
179
181
229
267
419
666
776
1 040
1 438
1 660
1 788
1 954
2 162
2 600
3 363
3 661
4 751
6 266

1
25
25
73
195
216
256
329
374
373
373
425
479
479
477
679
744
781

0
0
0
20
20
365
-

0
0
0
1
16
25
34
36
38
41
43
45
47
51
54
61
64
68
71

0
0
111
328
446
450
463
463
463
1 012
1 030
1 030
1 031
-

0
0
0
0
0
158
158
170
-
-
-

Situation per end month
June 2001
July 2001
August 2001
September 2001
October 2001
November 2001
December 2001
January 2002
February 2002
March 2002
April 2002
May 2002
June 2002
July 2002
August 2002
September 2002
October 2002
November 2002
December 2002
January 2003
February 2003
March 2003
April 2003
May 2003
June 2003

0
10
31
109
117
130
130
130
151
184
229
288
348
388
409
446
504
509
509
509
509
638
766
881

0
2
13
29
54
85
87
116
139
143
158
179
227
230
260
287
299
318
350

0
0
0
7
11
17
29
45
55
71
78
101
-
-

1
16
51
99
160
369
479
647
1 368
2 321
2 888

59

2900
2800
2700
2600
2500
2400
2300
2200
2100
2000
1900
1800
1700
1600
1500
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

d
e
v
o
r
p
p
a

s
t
c
e
j
o
r
p
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
N

Annex D/2: Cumulative number of projects approved by the Candidate Countries under the SAPARD Instrument since the start. 
Situation at 30.06.2003.

2.888

1.031

101

781

350

71

365

170

881

382

Estonia
Slovac Rep.
Lithuania
Poland
Slovenia
Romania
Czeck Rep.
Bulgaria
Hungary
Latvia

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Number of months after conferral of management

60

 
 
 
ANNEX E – Payments reimbursing expenditure declared to the Commission

Commitments

Payments made from the start of the programme

Country

Conferral
Decision

Following
AFA 2000

Following
AFA 2001

Following
AFA 2002

Following
AFA 2003

Payment on
account (2)

Reimburs.
3Q* 2001

Reimburs.
4Q 2001

Reimburs.
1Q 2002

Reimburs.
2Q 2002

Reimburs. 3Q
2002

Reimburs.
4Q 2002

Reimburs.
1Q 2003

Reimburs.
2Q 2003

Total Payments

Bulgaria

17.05.01

53 016 122

54 093 686

55 582 227

56 133 539 12 988 950,00

411 152,67 301 912,29

710 938,95

1 789 343,67

1 712 536,23

5 986 560,24

5 065 977,07

28 967 371,12

Czech Rep. 18.04.02

22 440 617

22 896 727

23 526 795

23 760 154 10 995 902,00 (2)

1 620 075,14

5 909 065,42 (4)

7 740 841,36 (5)

26 265 883,92

Estonia

19.06.01

12 344 729

12 595 639

12 942 243

13 070 615

6 048 917,00 (2)

21 570,00 273 132,00

468 569,00

344 129,00

2 443 678,00

4 536 792,00

1 749 573,00

Hungary

27.11.02

38 705 309

39 492 002

40 578 737

40 981 231

9 482 800,00

0,00

0,00

Lithuania

5.12.01

30 339 535

30 956 192

31 808 039

32 123 538 14 866 372,00 (2)

412 100,17

2 788 079,51

4 171 097,87

3 046 763,56

Latvia

12.12.01

22 221 936

22 673 602

23 297 531

23 528 615

5 444 374,00

344 518,32

2 453 052,36

1 688 718,25

2 506 390,13

Poland

3.07.02

171 570 075 175 057 271 179 874 468 181 658 615 42 034 668,00

Romania

3.08.02

153 214 194 156 328 303 160 630 119 162 223 385 37 537 477,00

18 584,34 (3)

449 316,46 (3)

0,00

0,00

Slovenia

24.11.01

6 445 460

6 576 465

6 757 436

6 824 462

3 158 275,40 (2)

94 196,50

1 595 972,89

490 068,30

Slovakia

18.04.02

18 602 023

18 980 113

19 502 405

19 695 846

4 557 496,00

518 296,00 (3)

665 357,00 (3)

15 886 360,00

9 482 800,00

25 284 413,11

12 437 053,06

42 502 568,80

37 537 477,00

5 338 513,09

5 741 149,00

Total

-

528 900 000 539 650 000 554 500 000 560 000 000 147 115 231,40

432 722,67 575 044,29 1 179 507,95

2 890 091,16

9 491 542,60

20 136 096,73

19 882 510,94

7 740 841,36

209 443 589,10 (1)

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
*

The total of € 209 443 589,10 is made up of payments of € 30 491 677,00 in 2001, € 123 759 277,07 in 2002 and € 55 192 635,03 in 2003.
Payments on account have been made in full (49% of AFA 2000) for Czech Republic, Estonia, Slovenia and Lithuania.
Payment request received and payment procedure in progress. Preliminary figures are the requested amounts.
Of which paid € 3 499 488,41 and proposed for payment € 2 409 577,01.
Proposed for payment.
Quarter

61