Special Report No 16/2009 #The European Commission’s management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey
Date: 2009-10-22
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU control, EU financing, Türkiye, enlargement of the Union, management audit, pre-accession aid

european 
courT of audiTors

4
3
8
0
-
1
3
8
1
n
s
s

i

9
0
0
2

6
1
o
n

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
i
c
e
p
s

The european commission's 

managemenT of pre-accession 

assisTance To Turkey

en

 
 
 
 
special r eport no  16 

 2009

The european  
commission's 
managemenT  of 
pre-accession  
assisTance To Turkey

(pursuant to article 248(4), second subparagraph, ec )

european courT of audiT ors

european courT of audiT ors
12, rue alcide d e g asperi
1615 Luxembourg
LuXemBourg

Tel. +352 4398-1
fax +352 4398-46410
e-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu
internet: http://www.eca.europa.eu

special r eport no 16 

 2009

a great deal of additional information on the european union is available on the internet.

it can be accessed through the europa server (http://europa.eu).

cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.

Luxembourg : publications office of the european union, 2009

isBn 978-92-9207-569-9

doi:10.2865/61544

© european communities, 2009

reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Luxembourg

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

conTenT s

3

Paragraph

ABBREVIATIONS

I–VIII 

SUMMARY

1–7 

INTROdUc TION

8–10 

AUdIT  Sc OPE ANd  APPROAch

11–63 

OBSERVATIONS

11–19 
13–19 

20–35 
22–29 
30–35 

36–52 
38–47 

48–52 

53–63 
54–59 
60–63 

STRATEGIc  PLANNING
 counciL  and commission sTra Tegy  documenT s Were  insufficienT  in direcTing 
The eu assisT ance ToWards an achieVaBLe  seT of oBJec TiVes

PROJEcT  SELEcTION
 proJec Ts seLec Tion  under Tpa  Was noT rigorous enough
The  proJec T seLec Tion  process improVed  WiTh  The  inTroduc Tion  of The  ipa

dEcENTRALISEd IMPLEMENTATION SYSTEM (dIS)
 The  dis did noT achieVe  TimeL y impLemenT aTion  of The  proJec Ts audiTed  BuT  remediaL  acTion  has 
since Been  Taken
 The  inTended  ouTpuT s of audiTed  proJec Ts Were  eVenTuaLL y deLiVered  and The  resuLT s assessed 
as LikeL y To Be  susTained

 PERFORMANcE  MONITORING ANd  EVALUATION
 impLemenT aTion  proBLems  Were  noT aLWays reporTed
oVeraLL  daTa To assess proJec T resuLT s Was insufficienT

64–71 

cONcLUSIONS ANd  REc OMMENd ATIONS

65–68 

69–70 

71 

 dId ThE EUROPEAN cOMMISSION ENSURE ThAT EU ASSISTANcE WAS dIREcTEd TO ThE PROJEcTS ThAT 
Add MOST VALUE IN AchIEVING ThE EU’S AccESSION PARTNERShIP PRIORITIES?

 dId ThE EUROPEAN cOMMISSION ENSURE ThAT ThE dEcENTRALISEd IMPLEMENTATION SYSTEM 
RESULTEd IN TIMELY ANd SUccESSFUL AchIEVEMENT OF PROJEcT OUTPUTS ANd OBJEcTIVES?

 dId ThE EUROPEAN cOMMISSION ENSURE ThAT ThERE WAS AN EFFEcTIVE SYSTEM OF PERFORMANcE 
MONITORING ANd EVALUATION?

ANNEX I  —  LIST OF PROJEcTS  AUdITEd

REPLY OF ThE  cOMMISSION

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

aBBre ViaTions

5

AP: a ccession partnership

cFcU: c entral finance and contracts unit

dIS: d ecentralised i mplementation system

EAdP: eastern a natolia d evelopment programme

EU: e uropean union

EUSG: e uropean union s ecretariat-general

IPA: i nstrument for pre-accession assistance

JMc: Joint m onitoring committee

MIPd: m ulti-annual i ndicative planning d ocument

NP: national p rogramme

RAcER: r elevant, accepted, credible, easy and r obust

SMART: specific, m easurable, achievable, r elevant and Timely

TPA: Turkey pre-accession assistance

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

6

summary

I.
si n c e   2 0 0 2 ,   p r e - a c c e s s i o n   a s s i s t a n c e   t o 
Tur key has funded the implementation of 
projec ts aimed at suppor ting Turkey in its 
e f f o r t s   t o   m e e t   t h e   c o n d i t i o n s   r e q u i r e d 
for  accession  to  the  europe an  union   ( see 
paragraph s 1 to 7) .

II.
T h e   a u d i t   a d d re s s e d   t h e   fo l l o w i n g   t h re e 
quest ion s (se e paragraph 8 ):

(a)  di d   t h e   eu ro p e a n   co m m i s s i o n   e n s u re 
t h a t   e u  a s s i s t a n c e   w a s   d i r e c t e d   t o 
t h e   p r o j e c t s   t h a t   a d d   m o s t   v a l u e   i n 
ac hie ving  t he   e u’s  accession   par t ner-
sh ip pr ior ities?

(b)  di d   t h e   eu ro p e a n   co m m i s s i o n   e n s u re 
that the decentralised implementation 
system resulted in timely and success-
f u l   a c h i e v e m e n t   o f   p r o j e c t   o u t p u t s 
an d objec t ives ?

(c)  di d   t h e   eu ro p e a n   co m m i s s i o n   e n s u re 
t h a t   t h e re   w a s   a n   e f fe c t i ve   s ys t e m   o f 
p e r fo r m a n c e   m o n i t o r i n g   a n d   e v a l u a-
tion ?

III.
T h e   c o u r t ’s   a u d i t   e x a m i n e d   a   s a m p l e   o f 
c o m p l e t e d   p r o j e c t s ,   t h e   s y s t e m   f o r   p r o -
gramming new projec ts, and the func tion-
i n g   o f   t h e   d e c e n t r a l i s e d   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n 
system (see paragraphs 9 to 10).

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

77

summary

VII.
h o w e v e r,   t h e   c o u r t   i d e n t i f i e d   t h a t   t h e 
c o u n c i l   a n d   c o m m i s s i o n   s t r a t e g y   d o c u -
m e n t s   w e r e   i n s u f f i c i e n t   i n   d i r e c t i n g   t h e 
e u   a s s i s t a n c e   t o w a rd s   a n   a c h i e v a b l e   s e t 
o f   o b j e c t i v e s   w i t h i n   t h e   p r e - a c c e s s i o n 
p r o c e s s .   m o r e o v e r,   t h e   s t r a t e g i c   a n d 
p r o j e c t   o b j e c t i v e s   w e r e   n o t   s u f f i c i e n t -
l y   s p e c i f i c   t o   a l l o w   a s s e s s m e n t   o f   t h e 
p r o j e c t   o u t c o m e s .   T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   d i d 
n ot   h ave  th e  in for mat ion  to   demon st rate 
t h e   e f f e c t i v e n e s s   o f   t h e   p r e - a c c e s s i o n 
a s s i s t a n c e   ( s e e   p a r a g r a p h s   1 1   t o   1 9   a n d 
5 3 to 63 ).

VIII.
o n   t h e   b a s i s   o f   t h e s e   o b s e r v a t i o n s ,   t h e 
co u r t   re c o m m e n d s   t h a t   t h e   co m m i s s i o n 
a d d r e s s   t h e   r e m a i n i n g   w e a k n e s s e s   i n 
o v e r a l l   p r o g r a m m i n g   a n d   p e r f o r m a n c e 
man agem ent  (see  paragraphs 6 5  to  71 ) .

IV.
Th e   f i r s t   p re - a cce s s i o n   a s s i s t a n ce   p e r i o d 
( T pa   2 0 0 2 – 0 6 )   s u f fe re d   f ro m   m a ny   o f   t h e 
w e a k n e s s e s   c o m m o n   t o   p r e v i o u s   p r e -
a cce s s i o n   p ro gra m m e s :   exce s s i ve   d e l ays, 
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   p r o b l e m s ,   i n a d e q u a t e 
m o n i t o r i n g   a n d   e v a l u a t i o n   ( s e e   p a r a -
graphs  36 to  4 2 an d 53  to  61 ).

V.
n e v e r t h e l e s s ,   t h e   p r o j e c t s   a u d i t e d 
a c h i e ve d   t h e i r   i n te n d e d   o u t p u t s   a n d   t h e 
cour t assesses their results as likely to be 
s u s t a i n e d   i n   t h e   f u t u r e   ( s e e   p a r a g r a p h s 
48  to 52).

V I.
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   h a s   i n t r o d u c e d   m e a s -
u r e s   a i m e d   a t   a d d r e s s i n g   m a n y   o f   t h e 
w e a k n e s s e s   i n   t h e   d e c e n t r a l i s e d   i m p l e -
mentat ion  s ys tem,   in   p ar t icu l ar  s in ce   th e 
i n t r o d u c t i o n   o f   t h e   n e w   i n s t r u m e n t   f o r 
p r e - a c c e s s i o n   a s s i s t a n c e   ( i pa   2 0 0 7 – 1 3 ) . 
a l t h o u g h   t h i s   h a s   a l r e a d y   i m p r o v e d   t h e 
selec tion process, the full impac t of these 
c h a n g e s   c a n   o n l y   b e   a s s e s s e d   a s   t h e   i pa 
p ro j e c t s   a re   i m p l e m e n t e d   i n   t h e   c o m i n g 
years (see paragraphs 19, 30 to 34 and 43 
to 47 ).

Photo 1: O ne of the audited proj ec ts  contr ib ute d  to   th e  overall  o b je c t i ve   of  i m prov in g 
Turkish maritime safet y and  sea  pol l ution  p re ve nt i on   i n  li n e  wit h   EU   re qu i re m e nt s.

special report no 16/2009 — The european commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special report no 16/2009 — The european commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

S ource: european commission.
S ource: european commission.

inTroduc Tion

8

1. 

2. 

3. 

 Tu r k e y   i s   c u r r e n t l y   o n e   o f   t h r e e   c a n d i d a t e   c o u n t r i e s   f o r   m e m-
b e r s h i p   o f   t h e   e u,   a l o n g   w i t h   c r o a t i a   a n d   t h e   fo r m e r  yu g o s l a v 
r e p u b l i c   o f   m a c e d o n i a .   fo r   e a c h   c a n d i d a t e   c o u n t r y   t h e   e u   h a s 
a n   acc e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p.  Th e   acce s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   fo r  Tu r k e y 
wa s   a d o p te d   i n   2 0 0 1 ,   a n d   u p d ate d   i n   2 0 0 3 ,   2 0 0 6   a n d   2 0 0 8 .  Th i s 
is  t he  co un cil   dec is io n  that  s ets  o ut  th e  e u’s  accession   par t ner-
ship pr ior ities for Tur key to address in order to make progress in 
acces sio n ne g ot iations.

1 

ipa legal basis: council regulation 

(ec) no 1085/2006 of 17 July 2006 

establishing an instrument for  

pre-accession assistance (ipa) 

(oJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 82).

 i n   o r d e r   t o   h e l p   c a n d i d a t e   c o u n t r i e s   f a c e   t h e   c h a l l e n g e s   o f 
euro pe an integratio n and im plement  th e  refor ms n e ed e d to f ul-
fil the cr iter ia for eu membership, the eu provides financial sup -
por t. each year a national programme is drawn up which lists the 
pro jec t s to b e imp l emented.

 fo r  Tu r k e y,   t h e   2 0 0 2   to   2 0 0 6   n at i o n a l   p ro gra m m e s   we re   f u n d e d 
u n d e r   t h e   Tu r k e y   p r e - a c c e s s i o n   a s s i s t a n c e   ( Tpa )   s c h e m e   ( s e e 
Ta b l e   1) .   Tpa  w a s   r e p l a c e d   f r o m   2 0 0 7   b y   t h e  
i n s t r u m e n t   f o r  
pre -acces sio n a ss ist ance (ipa 1) .

TA B L E   1

E U -F U NdEd   P R O J Ec T S   A Nd   A N N UA L   B UdG E T S   U NdE R  T PA

National programme

Number of projects

Budget allocation (million euro)

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

18

26

38

38

44

126

145

237

278

463

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
9

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

 Th e   i pa  fo r  Tu r k e y   fo r   t h e   2 0 0 7 – 1 3   p e r i o d   w a s   s e t   a t   4   8 7 3   m i l-
lion  e uro.   i t   co ns ist s  o f  five  components,   th e   large s t  o f   whi ch   is 
component i: Transition assistance and i nstitution Building, with 
a n   a l l o c a t i o n   o f   1   6 6 5   m i l l i o n   e u ro 2.  Th i s   i s   a   k e y   co m p o n e nt   o f 
t h e   e u ’s   a s s i s t a n c e   t o   m e e t   t h e   p o l i t i c a l   a n d   e c o n o m i c   c r i t e r i a 
(as defined at the council meeting in copenhagen in June 1993) 3 
a n d   i m p l e m e n t   t h e   a cq u i s 4,   w h i c h   a re   i n d i s p e n s a b l e   co n d i t i o n s 
for eu access io n .

 While the commission retains overall responsibilit y for the man -
a g e m e n t   o f   t h e   p r e - a c c e s s i o n   a s s i s t a n c e ,   t h e   Tpa  a n d   i pa  a r e 
managed by Turk ish authorities under a decentralised implemen -
t a t i o n   s y s t e m   (d i s) .  T h e   m a i n   b e n e f i c i a r y   o f   e a c h   p ro j e c t   ( u s u-
ally a ministr y or other public body) is responsible for proposing 
projec t ideas, specifying the requirements and then for managing 
the project activities. new Turk ish institutions were set up: the eu 
s ecret ar iat- g ene ral  (eus g),  respon sible main ly for   proje c t  i d en-
tification and monitoring, and the central finance and contrac ts 
un i t   ( c f c u) ,   w h i c h   i s   t h e   c o n t r a c t i n g   a g e n t   f o r   a l l   e u- f u n d e d 
pro jec t s.

 The  co mmis sio n  was  resp o nsible  for   giv i ng   approval  (a cc red it a-
tion) to the dis institutions and the projec t management system 
befo re th ey co u l d b eco me ope rati on al. Th e commiss ion  als o ap -
proves the annual national programme (comprising the individual 
pro jec t s  sel ec ted  for   eu  fu nd ing) ,  an d  the  commiss ion’s  staf f  in 
ank ara  give pr ior ap p roval  for  the  te nde r in g  and  cont rac ti ng.

 Th e   J o i n t   m o n i t o r i n g   co m m i t t e e   ( Jm c )   fo r  Tu r k e y   m o n i t o r s   t h e 
f u n c t i o n i n g   o f   t h e   d i s.   i t   i s   c h a i r e d   j o i n t l y   b y   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n 
a n d   t h e  Tu r k i s h   a u t h o r i t i e s   a n d   i n c l u d e s   s e n i o r   re p re s e n t at i ve s 
of al l  t he rel eva nt b o dies.

2  The other components are 

the cross-border cooperation 

component, which applies to border 

regions between beneficiaries from 

candidate and potential candidate 

countries and between them and 

eu member states (ipa-ii); and the 

regional, human resources and  

rural development components 

(ipa iii, iV and V).

3  The copenhagen political criteria 

require stability of institutions 

guaranteeing democracy, the rule 

of law, human rights and respect 

for and protection of minorities. 

The economic criteria require the 

existence of a functioning market 

economy and the capacity to cope 

with competitive pressure and 

market forces within the european 

union. for more information on 

accession negotiation see:  

http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/

accession_criteria_copenhague_

en.htm

4  The acquis communautaire — from 

hereon referred to as acquis — is the 

entirety of eu law and constitutes 

about 100 000 pages of primary 

and secondary legislation. Turkey’s 

administrative and judicial authorities 

must be trained to implement and 

enforce the new eu legislation.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
 
audiT  scope and approach

10

8. 

 The objec tive of the audit was to assess how well the commission 
m a n a g e d   t h e   p re - a cce s s i o n   a s s i s t a n ce   to  Tu r k e y   i n   te r m s   o f   t h e 
foll ow ing qu est i on s:

(a)  did t he eu rop ea n co mm ission ensure th at e u as sistan ce was 
direc ted to the projec ts that add most value in achieving the 
eu’s  a cces sio n p ar t nersh ip pr ior it ies ?

(b)  did  t he  eu rop ea n  co mm ission  ensure  th at  t he  dece nt rali s ed 
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   s y s t e m   r e s u l t e d   i n   t i m e l y   a n d   s u c c e s s f u l 
ac hieveme nt  of p ro jec t  outputs  an d o bjec t ives ?

(c)  did the european commission ensure that there was an effec -
t ive s ys tem o f p er for m an ce  mo ni to r in g  an d  evaluati on ?

9. 

 The co ur t  audited a samp le o f 11  of th e 8 2 Tpa proj ec ts  from t he 
2002 to 2004 national programmes (np), as projec ts from more re -
cent years were not complete at the time. The projects were exam-
ined to assess the extent to which they had delivered their outputs 
and met their objec tives. This examination also provided evidence 
of t he t ype s o f weak ness es in t h e program mi ng,  i mpl em ent ati on 
and   mo nito r ing   systems. The  sam ple   covere d  a  ran g e   of   proje c t s 
i n   te r m s   o f   n at u re,   s i ze   a n d   g e o gra p h i c a l   l o c at i o n .  Th e   s i m p l e s t 
p r o j e c t   i n   t h e   s a m p l e   c o n s i s t e d   o f   a   s i n g l e   c o n t r a c t ,   w h i l e   t h e 
largest projec t had 312 grants. The value of the eu funding with -
i n   t h e   s a m p l e d   p ro j e c t s   r a n g e d   f ro m   1 , 5   t o   4 5   m i l l i o n   e u ro   ( s e e   
A nnex  I).

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
11

10.  

 The audit also examined the strategic planning and the procedures 
fo r   s e l e c t i n g   n e w   p ro j e c t s   fo r   t h e   f i r s t   p ro gra m m i n g   ye a r   ( 2 0 0 7 ) 
of co mp o nent  i o f th e ipa , u ntil d e ce mbe r  2 0 0 8 .  Th is  compon e nt 
was selec ted as it was the largest of the five components (52 % of 
the   to tal   2007  b udg et   fo r Tu r key )   an d  th e   m ost   comparable   wi th 
the  Tpa.

M ap of Tu rkey — showin g  th e  on -t he -s p o t   au d it   s ite s

S o urce: european court of auditors.

special report no 16/2009 — The european commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special report no 16/2009 — The european commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
5  article 33 of the financial 

regulation (and article 24 of the 

implementing rules) requires activity 

statements containing information 

on the achievement of all previously 

set specific, measurable, achievable, 

relevant and timed objectives.

6  The most recent activity statement 

for the enlargement dg is at 

page 667 of document referenced 

sec(2008) 514: preliminary draft 

general Budget of the european 

commission for the financial year 

2009 — Working document part i.

oBser VaTions

12

11.  

12.  

13.  

14.  

S T R AT E G Ic   P L A N N I N G

 a c c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   p r i o r i t i e s   a r e   n o t   o n l y   t o   b e   a d d r e s s e d 
through eu assistance, but also from national resources and other 
don or  ass is tance, and  t hro u gh n at ion al pol ic y  a nd  le gis lati on .

 T h e   c o u r t   e x a m i n e d   t h e   s t r a t e g y   d o c u m e n t s   a n d   t h e   p r o g r a m-
ming system operating for the 2007 national programme to assess 
whether the commission had a systematic approach to direc t the 
eu financial assistance to where it could add most value in achiev -
ing t he p r io r itie s.

cO U NcI L   A Nd   cO M M I S S I O N   S T R AT E G Y   dOcU M E N T S 
W E R E   I N S U F F IcI E N T   I N   dI R Ec T I N G  ThE   E U   A S S I S TA NcE 
TO WA RdS   A N   A c hI E VA B L E   S E T   O F   O B J Ec T I V E S

 Th e   fi n a n c i a l   r e g u l at i o n 5  re q u i re s   s ma r T   ( s p e c i f i c,   m e a s u ra b l e, 
a c h i e v a b l e ,   r e l e v a n t   a n d   t i m e - b o u n d )   o b j e c t i v e s   t o   b e   e s t a b  -
l i s h e d  f o r   a l l   p o l i c y   m e a s u r e s   c o v e r e d   b y   t h e   e u  b u d g e t .   T h e y 
should be set out in the annual ac tivit y statements 6 as par t of the 
a c t i v i t y   b a s e d   b u d g e t i n g   a n d   m a n a g e m e n t   p ro ce s s e s.   howe ve r, 
t h e   c o m m i s s i o n   d i d   n o t   i n c l u d e   s u c h   o b j e c t i v e s   i n   t h e   a c t i v i t y 
statem ent s fo r p re -accessio n ex pen dit ure  in  Tur k ey.

 Th e   2 0 0 6   ac c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   h a d   2 3 6   p r i o r i t i e s   fo r  Tu r k e y   t o 
m e e t   t h e   a cq u i s  re q u i re m e n t s   a n d   a d d re s s   t h e   co p e n h a g e n   c r i-
t e r i a .  T h e re   w a s   n o   i n d i c a t i o n   o f   t h e   re l a t i ve   i m p o r t a n c e   o f   t h e 
p r i o r i t i e s   l i s t e d ;   t h e   o n l y   d i f fe re n t i a t i o n   w a s   i n   t h e i r   t i m e s c a l e. 
The 2006 accession par t nersh ip indicated t hat  sh or t-te r m pr i or i-
ties should be achieved within one or two years and medium-term 
pr ior itie s wit hin  three to fou r ye ar s.

15.  

 Th e   ac c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   p r i o r i t i e s   we re   n o t   c o n s i s t e n t l y   s t a t -
e d   i n   s p e c i f i c ,   m e a s u r a b l e   t e r m s .   i t   p r o v e d   t o   b e   u n r e a l i s t i c   t o 
ach ieve the m al l  w ithin  the time  per i od s  spe c if ie d i n  th e council 
decisio n.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
 
 
13

16.  

17.  

18.  

 i n 2007, the commission assessed the ex tent to which Turkey had 
m e t   a c c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   p r i o r i t i e s .  T h i s   r e v e a l e d   t h a t  Tu r k e y 
ha d  al re ady  m et  s ome  60  p r ior it ie s,   3 0   %  of   th os e  due   to  be   me t 
according to the timeframes set in the accession par tnership. The 
cour t ’s analysis confir med this. o f the 2006 shor t-ter m pr iorities, 
67 % were also found in the 2008 accession par tnership indicating 
th at  they  had no t b een comp l ete d wi th in  th e plann e d t im ef ram e 
(Tabl e 2) .

7  national programme for the 

adoption of the Acquis.

 fo r   e x a m p l e ,   t h e   2 0 0 1   a c c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   s e t   a   p r i o r i t y   f o r 
t h e  ‘ f i g ht   a g a i n s t   o rg a n i s e d   c r i m e,   d r u g s,   t ra f f i c k i n g   i n   p e r s o n s, 
f r a u d,   c o r r u p t i o n   a n d   m o n e y - l a u n d e r i n g’  t o   b e   a c h i e ve d   w i t h i n 
t wo years. This has been repeated in ever y subsequent accession 
par tnership. The two year timescale was clearly not achievable for 
a pr ior it y of  s uch  magnit ud e.

 i n res po nse  to  e ach acces sio n par t ne rsh ip, Tur key  is ex pec ted to 
d e ve l o p   a   p l a n   w i t h   t h e   m e a s u re s   fo re s e e n 7.  Th e s e   p l a n s   d o   n o t 
s p e c i f y   t h e   a c t i v i t i e s   fo r   w h i c h   e u   f i n a n c i a l   a s s i s t a n ce   wo u l d   b e 
req uired.

TA B L E   2

cO M PA R I S O N   O F  2006  A P   A Nd   2 00 8   A P   ShO R T-T E R M   P R I O R I T I E S

The 2006 AP listed 155 short-term priorities and the 2008 AP listed 139.

Of the 2006 AP short-term priorities:
80 (52 %) were repeated with little or no change in the 2008 AP.
24 (15 %) were repeated in the 2008 AP but with more precise or strengthened wording.
51 (33 %) were not included in the 2008 AP.

35 of the 2008 AP short-term priorities were new or were previously medium-term priorities. 

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
14

19.  

 i n   2 0 0 7 ,   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n   i n t r o d u c e d   a   m u l t i - a n n u a l   i n d i c a t i v e 
p l a n n i n g   d o c u m e n t   ( m i p d ) .   T h i s   i s   a   b r o a d   s t r a t e g y   d o c u m e n t 
intended to set the main prior ities that should be addressed with 
t h e   i pa  f u n d s   ove r   t h e   fo l l ow i n g   t h re e   ye a r s.  Th e   m i p d  i s   a n   e s-
sential tool for this pur pose and has potential to better direc t eu 
f u n d i n g.   howe ve r,   t h e   l e ve l   o f   a g gre g at i o n   l i m i te d   h ow   s p e c i f i c 
it could be. for some areas, the document did little more than re -
state the relevant accession par tnership priorities, and in one case 
s u m m a r i s e d   s e ve n   p r i o r i t i e s   i n   a   s i n g l e   p o i n t :  ‘ s t re n g t h e n i n g   o f 
legal and judicial protec tion of religious freedoms’. consequently, 
t h e   m i p d   d i d   n o t   d e f i n e   t h e   o b j e c t i ve s   fo r   e u   f u n d i n g   i n   a   m o re 
s p e c i f i c ,   m e a s u r a b l e   o r   a c h i e v a b l e   m a n n e r   t h a n   t h e   a c c e s s i o n 
par t nersh ip.

P R O J Ec T   S E L Ec T I O N

20.  

 pr o j e c t s   a r e   c o n s i d e r e d   f o r   s e l e c t i o n   j o i n t l y   b y   t h e   Tu r k i s h   a u-
thor ities and the commission, and included in a financing agree -
ment signed by both par ties af ter adoption of the cor responding 
natio na l pro gramm e by the c ommiss ion .

21.  

 The cour t assessed whether the projec t selec tion process ensured 
that  financed  p roj ec ts:

(a )  dire c tl y a ddressed a cces sion  p ar t ne rsh ip pr ior itie s;

(b)  h a d   s p e c i f i c   o b j e c t i ve s   a n d   p rov i d e d   fo r   p e r fo r m a n ce   m o n i-

to r ing ;

(c)  were  wel l  p lan ned and feasible  to  i mple m ent.

P R O J Ec T   S E L Ec T I O N   U NdE R  T PA  WA S   N OT   R I G O R O U S 
E N O U Gh

T PA   p r o j e c t   s e l e c t i o n   w a s   n o t   s u f f i c i e n t l y   g u i d e d   b y   t h e 
Accession Par tnership prioritie s

22.  

 a n   e f fe c t i v e   p r o c e s s   i s   n e c e s s a r y   t o   e n s u r e   t h a t   t h e   b o t t o m - u p 
pro jec t  identific atio n  int rodu ced   wit h   t h e  dis   results  in   proje c t s 
b e i n g   d e v e l o p e d   a n d   a p p r o v e d   t h a t   a r e   d e s i g n e d   t o   a c h i e v e 
acces sio n p ar t nersh ip  pr io r it i es.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
 
15

23.  

24.  

25.  

26.  

 T h e   c o u r t ’s   a u d i t   o f   t h e   p r o j e c t s   f r o m   t h e   2 0 0 2 – 0 4   n a t i o n a l 
programmes found that there was no such process at that time, and 
for o ne o f t he 11 p roj ec ts there was no  cor re spo nd i ng access ion 
par t nersh ip  p r ior it y 8.  Whil e t his was clear ly  a wor thwhi l e pro je c t 
( s e e   p a r a g r a p h   5 1   a n d  Te x t b ox   5 ) ,   t h e r e   w a s   n o   m e n t i o n   o f   t h e 
need for it any where in the accession par tnership and at the same 
t i m e,   t h e re   we re   ove r   1 0 0   o t h e r   p r i o r i t i e s   fo r   w h i c h   n o   p ro j e c t s 
we re   s e l e c te d.  Th e   o b j e c t i ve s   a n d   s co p e   o f   a   f u r t h e r   fo u r   o f   t h e 
aud ite d p rojec t s 9,  did no t direc t ly  addres s access ion  par t ne rsh ip 
pr ior itie s.

TPA projec t objec tives and indic ators were insufficient for 
p er forma nce monitoring

8  The project involved creating 

a probation service as part of the 

Turkish prison reform to provide 

a range of services to the judicial 

authorities and to the prison service. 

in this new system, an alternative 

to prison was introduced giving the 

opportunity for offenders to serve 

their sentences in the community.

9  Police Forensic, Cultural Rights, Road 

Transport, and the Eastern Anatolia 

Development Programme.

 for ever y projec t included in a national programme a full projec t 
d e s c r i p t i o n   k n o w n   a s   a   p r o j e c t   f i c h e   i s   r e q u i r e d .   T h e s e   s h o u l d 
set  o u t t he p ro je c t ’s ob jec t ives, expe c ted  res ult s a n d o bje c t ive ly 
ver if iab le indicato rs  as  wel l  as i mplem e nt at ion  mil es to ne s.

 The cour t tested project fiches to check whether project objectives 
an d  exp ec ted   res ul t s  were  smar T  (spec ific,  m easurable,  ac hiev-
able,   r el evant,  and Tim e - b ou nd)   and  th e  i ndi cator s  for   m on i tor-
i n g   t h e   p ro j e c t ’s   p e r fo r m a n c e   we re   r ac e r  (r e l e v a n t ,   ac c e p t e d, 
cred ibl e,  easy, and r o b us t).

 a l t h o u g h   t h e   p r o j e c t   f i c h e s  p r o v i d e d   t h e   b a s i s   o f   a   p e r f o r m -
a n c e   m o n i t o r i n g   s y s t e m ,   t h e   c o u r t   f o u n d   t h a t   o n l y   t w o   o f   t h e 
1 1  p ro j e c t s   (Co n s u m e r   Pro te c t i o n  a n d   Pro b a t i o n   S e r v i ce  f ro m   t h e 
2 0 0 4   n p )   h a d   s ma r T   o b j e c t i ve s   a n d   r ac e r   p e r fo r m a n ce   i n d i c a -
to r s.  Th e   p ro b at i o n   s e r v i ce   p ro j e c t   f i c h e,   fo r   ex a m p l e,   s e t   s e ve n 
i n d i c a to r s   to   m e a s u re   t h e   i m p a c t   o f   p ro b a t i o n   a s   a n   a l te r n a t i ve 
to p r is o n se ntencing.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
 
16

27.  

 Th e   a b s e n c e   o f   b a s e l i n e s   —   t h e   s t a r t i n g   p o i n t   a g a i n s t   w h i c h  t o 
m e a s u r e   i m p r o v e m e n t   —   m a d e   a n y   a s s e s s m e n t   o f   t h e   e x -
t e n t  t o   w h i c h   p r o j e c t s   a c h i e v e d   t h e i r   o b j e c t i v e s   a l m o s t   i m p o s-
s i b l e .   Te x t b o x  1  s h o w s   t h a t   t h e   ea s t e r n   a n a t o l i a   d e v e l o p m e n t 
programme’s component objec tives could have been measurable. 
howe ve r,   t h e   p roj e c t   f i c h e  g ave   n e i t h e r   i n d i c ato r s,   n o r   b a s e l i n e s 
agains t w hich to  demonst rate  a ch ie ve m e nt s,   or   se t  any  t arge t s.

TE X T B O X   1

EAsT Er n   A nAT o lI A   DE vElo p mEnT   p r o g r Am mE   ( E A Dp)

The 45 million euro eadp had four components whose objectives were:

Agriculture: improve rural people and organisations’ agricultural capacities, income levels and quality 
of life in the programme area. (no indicators or baseline data on agricultural capacity, incomes, etc. 
were given.)

SME:  stimulate small and medium-sized enterprise activity by capacity building at both central and 
local level in the application of new methodologies to long-term innovative regional development. (no 
indicators or baseline data on sme activity were given.)

Tourism:  promote the region as a national and international tourist destination and help preserve the 
natural and historical sites. (no indicators or baseline data on national/international tourist numbers 
were given.)

Social development: redress the balance in favour of women’s access to literacy and income generating 
activities. (no indicators or baseline data on women’s participation were given.)

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
17

28.  

29.  

30.  

31.  

TPA  p rojec t  fea sib ilit y was  no t  s uffic ie nt ly  co ns id ere d

 once project objectives have been determined, the equipment, fa-
cilities, ac tions and ac tivities to be under taken within the projec t 
h a v e   t o   b e   s p e c i f i e d .   o f   t h e   1 1   a u d i t e d   p r o j e c t s ,   o n l y   t w o   f u l l y 
e s t a b l i s h e d   t h e   s p e c i f i c   p r o j e c t   r e q u i r e m e n t s :   m a r i t i m e   s a f e t y 
f ro m   t h e   2 0 0 2   n a t i o n a l   p ro gra m m e   a n d   t a x   a d m i n i s t r a t i o n   f ro m 
t h e   2 0 0 4   n a t i o n a l   p ro g r a m m e.   sp e c i f i c a t i o n s   fo r   t h e   o t h e r   n i n e 
proj ec t s we re inadeq uate to  var y i ng  de gree s.

10  The Phytosanitary acquis project 

aimed at alignment with eu plant 

health legislation and practices.

 fo r   e x a m p l e,   i n   t h e   p h y t o s a n i t a r y   a cq u i s 1 0  p ro j e c t ,   t h e   f a c i l i t i e s 
to be provided by the Turk ish author ities had not been given due 
consideration. i t was found only af ter the projec t had star ted that 
totally new buildings and significant changes in work ing practices 
w o u l d   b e   r e q u i r e d .  T h i s   s c a l e   o f   w o r k   c o u l d   n o t   b e   u n d e r t a k e n 
w i t h i n   t h e   b u d g e t   a n d   t i m e s c a l e   e s t a b l i s h e d   fo r   t h e   p ro j e c t .   as 
a  re su lt,  t he  p rojec t  did   no t  ac h ie ve   th e   inten de d  labo rator y   ac -
creditat ion,  thou gh   the  eu-fu n ded  eq uipment  and  traini n g  were 
delive red as inten ded.

ThE   P R O J Ec T   S E L Ec T I O N   P R OcE S S   I M P R O V Ed  W I Th  ThE 
I N T R OdUc T I O N   O F  ThE   I PA

 T h e   c o u r t ’s   a u d i t   o f   t h e   p r o j e c t   s e l e c t i o n   p r o c e s s   f o r   t h e   2 0 0 7 
n at i o n a l   p ro gra m m e   fo u n d   t h at   t h e   co m m i s s i o n   h a d   i nt ro d u ce d 
systematic and documented checks on each project proposal prior 
to it  be in g co ns idered fo r inc l usio n  in  t he  program me.

 a s   a n   i l l u s t r a t i o n ,   c h e c k s   w e r e   m a d e   a t   a n   e a r l y   s t a g e   t h a t   t h e 
p r o j e c t   c o r r e s p o n d e d   t o   a   p r i o r i t y   s t a t e d   i n   t h e   m i p d   a n d   t h e 
acce s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p.   pro j e c t   p ro p o s a l s   w h e re   co r re s p o n d e n ce 
coul d  no t b e estab l ish ed were re jec te d.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
 
18

32.  

33.  

34.  

35.  

36.  

 Th e   co m m i s s i o n   a l s o   re co gn i s e d   t h e   n e e d   to   i m p rove   i n d i c ato r s 
in order to better measure the achievement of projec t objec tives 
and introduced checks on their quality. guidance was given to the 
bene ficiar ie s on  how  to def ine  c le ar   obj e c ti ve s  and  in dic ator s to 
mea su re t hem.

 i n   a d d i t i o n ,   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n   o b l i g e d   t h e   Tu r k i s h   a u t h o r i t i e s   t o 
prepare needs assessments or feasibilit y studies for each projec t, 
and introduced checks to ensure that this was done. The commis-
sion  re comm ended  an   eco no mic  ass es s ment  ( usu ally   in   t he   for m 
of a cost–benefit analysis) of investment projec ts. i t also required 
m a r k e t   s t u d i e s   fo r   t h e   s u p p l y   co m p o n e nt s   o f   p ro p o s e d   p ro j e c t s 
to assess the real necessit y and the appropriate budget for equip-
m e n t .  Th e   co m m i s s i o n   g ave   g u i d a n ce   to   t h e  Tu r k i s h   a u t h o r i t i e s 
on  how  to  prep are su c h s tu die s.

 The cour t ’s analysis showed that the new measures had been fol -
lowed  fo r th e 2007 nat ion al  p rogram me, bu t t h ere  was  st ill  room 
for imp rove me nt in their ap p lic ati on.  proje c t proposals  were n ot 
asses sed   fo r  how   effec t ive  and   e f fi c ie nt   t h ey   we re   li k e ly   to  be   in 
achi ev i ng a p r io r it y.   suc h an a ssessment would allow m ea nin g f ul 
c o m p a r i s o n   b e t w e e n   a l t e r n a t i v e s   a n d   t h e   s e l e c t i o n   o f   p r o j e c t s 
like ly  to  have t he greatest impa c t.

 The new measures should enable the commission to select projects 
in a way that would reduce the problems noted in the audit of the 
2002–04 national programme projec ts. however, the impac t of the 
i m p r o v e m e n t s   c a n   o n l y   b e   c o m p l e t e l y   a s s e s s e d   w h e n   t h e   2 0 0 7 
natio nal  p rogramme p ro jec ts  are f ul ly  i mpl eme nte d  ( 20 12 ) .

dEcE N T R A L I S Ed   I M P L E M E N TAT I O N   S YS T E M   (dI S )

 The   di s  p rovides   t he  l egal   an d  admin i st rat ive  f ra me wor k  for   th e 
Tu r k i s h   a u t h o r i t i e s   t o   m a n a g e   e u- f u n d e d   p r o j e c t s   u n d e r   c o m-
m i s s i o n   s u p e r v i s i o n .   T h i s   r e q u i r e s   a p p r o p r i a t e   a n d   a d e q u a t e l y 
re s o u rc e d   a d m i n i s t r a t i ve   b o d i e s   —   i . e.   t h e   e u s g  a n d   c f c u  ( s e e 
paragrap h 5) — and su fficient be ne f ic i ar y capa c it y  to i mple me nt 
pro jec t s.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
 
 
19

37.  

 T h e   c o u r t   a s s e s s e d   w h e t h e r   t h e   d i s  s u c c e s s f u l l y   m a n a g e d   t h e 
proj ec t s t hro u gh:

(a)  t i m e l y   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   o f   t h e   a u d i t e d   p r o j e c t s   f r o m   t h e  

200 2–04 nat ion al p rogrammes;

(b)  ac hieveme nt   of   the  intended  out put s,   an d  po te nti al  for   sus-

t ainab l e o utco mes.

ThE   dI S   dId   N OT   Ac hI E V E  T I M E LY   I M P L E M E N TAT I O N 
O F  ThE   P R O J Ec T S   AUdI T Ed   B U T   R E M EdI A L   A c T I O N   hA S 
S I NcE   B E E N  TA K E N

38.  

 i n   2 0 0 3 ,   t h e   co m m i s s i o n   a s s e s s e d   t h e   c a p a c i t y   o f   t h e   d i s  s t r u c -
t u r e   a n d   s t a f f i n g   a s   s a t i s f a c t o r y   a n d   g a v e   a p p r o v a l   f o r   t h e   d i s 
to  i mp l ement  t he Tpa  o n  this   bas is.   howe ver,  in  prac tice  th e  dis 
h a d   i n s u f f i c i e n t   q u a l i f i e d   a n d   p r o p e r l y   t r a i n e d   s t a f f   t o   p r o c e s s 
t h e   vo l u m e   o f   b u d g e t   a n d   p ro j e c t s   a d o p t e d   i n   t h e   2 0 0 2 – 0 4   na-
tional programmes, (see Tex tbox 2).  despite this, the commission 
a d o p te d   n at i o n a l   p ro gra m m e s   w i t h   i n c re a s e d   f i n a n c i a l   a m o u nt s 
and  numb er s of  p rojec ts  eac h  ye ar   (s ee  Tabl e  1 ).

TE X T B O X   2

EX A M P L E S   O F   dE L AYS   c AU S Ed   BY   I N S U F F IcI E N T   dI S   S TA F F I N G   A Nd 
E X P E R I E NcE

road Transport project from the 2004 National Programme

The technical specifications were drafted at the end of 2004, but due to staff shortages it took the cfcu 
seven months to provide its comments. in total, finalising and approving the tender documents took 
more than a year and a half.

phytosanitary acquis project from the 2002 National Programme

The contract preparation for the technical assistance for the project took a year in total, with 10 draft 
versions because of the beneficiary’s inexperience in drafting such contracts. This delayed the technical 
assistance by some 11 months.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
20

39.  

40.  

41.  

 in response to the back log, the cfcu prioritised the tendering and 
contracting for the older projects so as not to miss the contracting 
deadlines and thereby lose the eu financial allocation. The result 
w a s   t h a t   t h e   c u r re n t   ye a r   p ro j e c t s   d i d   n o t   p ro g re s s   a s   p l a n n e d, 
leading to systematic delays 11. as a consequence, the implementa-
tion  p er iod fo r ever y Tpa nation al program me f rom  20 0 2  to 2 0 0 5 
h a d   to   b e   ex te n d e d   by   o n e   ye a r.   pa r t   o f   t h e   2 0 0 6   n p  a l s o   h a d   to 
be ex tended.

 T h e   c o u r t   i d e n t i f i e d   t h a t   t h e   d i s  d i d   n o t   a c h i e v e   t i m e l y   i m p l e -
ment at io n  fo r  7  o f  t he  11  p ro je c ts   a udi ted  from  th e  20 0 2 –0 4   n a-
t i o n a l   p r o g r a m m e s   a n d   d i d   s o   o n l y   p a r t i a l l y   f o r   t h e   o t h e r   f o u r 
pro jec t s.

 T h e   f i r s t   s t e p   i n   t h e   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   o f   a   p r o j e c t   i s   t e n d e r i n g , 
which can commence once the commission has approved the na-
tion al  p rogramme.  s eve n  o f   th e  proj ec ts  audite d  were  n ot  re ad y 
for tende r ing at  that  stage : t h e ben e f ic iar y  mi n ist r y  h ad n ot  suf-
f i c i e nt l y   p re p a re d   t h e   p ro j e c t   s p e c i f i c at i o n   a n d   o t h e r   d o c u m e n-
t a t i o n   t o   b e   a b l e   t o   p u b l i s h   t h e   t e n d e r   n o t i c e s   re q u i re d   t o   f i n d 
suitable contrac tors. for example, there was a delay of 17 months 
from the approval of the projec t in the 2004 national programme 
to tender ing for both the Customs Mo dernisation and the  Cultural 
R ights p rojec t s.

11  previous court reports found 

similar problems in pre-accession 

assistance: 

special report no 12/2008 

concerning the instrument for 

structural policies for pre-accession 

(ispa), 2000–2006; 

special report no 4/2006 concerning 

phare investment projects in Bulgaria 

and romania;  

special report no 5/2004 concerning 

phare support to prepare candidate 

countries for managing the structural 

funds;  

special report no 6/2003 concerning 

twinning as the main instrument 

to support institution-building in 

candidate countries.

TE X T B O X   3

C u sT o m s   m oD Er nIs AT Io n   P R O J Ec T   F R O M  ThE   20 04   NAT I O N A L  
PR O G R A M M E

The 2004 np was approved in January 2005. The procurement notice for vehicles and equipment (includ-
ing x-ray scanners) was not published until 31 august 2006 and the contract was concluded on the last 
possible day, i.e. on 30 november 2006. Two of the procurement lots had to be cancelled because the 
offers had not met specifications. as there was no time to relaunch the tendering procedure, the delays 
resulted in the cancellation of some 3,7 million euro (21 % of total equipment budget of 18 million euro). 
The commission had to grant a one-year extension of the implementation period (to 30 november 2008) 
to enable the remaining part of the project to be completed.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
21

42.  

 T h e   c o n t r a c t i n g   p h a s e   c o m p r i s e s   t h e   e x a m i n a t i o n   o f   t h e   o f fe r s 
received, the selec tion of the contrac tor and the signature of the 
c o n t r a c t .   T h i s   i s   m a i n l y   t h e   c f c u ’s   r e s p o n s i b i l i t y.   n o n e   o f   t h e 
supply contrac ts from the audited sample were signed according 
t o   s c h e d u l e.   d e l a y s   i n   t e n d e r i n g   o r   c o n t r a c t i n g   c a u s e   a   c o r r e s -
ponding reduc tion in the remaining time available to execute the 
p ro j e c t   a c t i v i t i e s,   w h i c h   h a d   s i gn i f i c a n t   co n s e q u e n ce s   fo r   s o m e 
of the  p roj ec ts ( see Tex t b ox 3) .

Photo 2: For the Customs Mo dernisa ti on p ro je c t,  th e  E U -f un de d  s c a n n e rs  at  po r ts  an d  bo rd e r p o s ts  to  ex am in e  veh ic les for 
ille gal  traffickin g of  hum an s, drug s  an d  gun s.

S o urce: Turkish customs authority.

Photo 3: S uspicious content s dete c te d by   th e  E U -fu n d ed   sc an n er s.

S ource: Turkish customs authority.

special report no 16/2009 — The european commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special report no 16/2009 — The european commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
22

43.  

44.  

45.  

 fo l l o w i n g   t h e   p r o b l e m s   t h a t   a r o s e   f r o m   l o w   s t a f f i n g   l e v e l s   a t 
t h e   c f c u,   t h e   co m m i s s i o n   m a d e   a p p rov a l   o f   t h e   2 0 0 5   a n d   2 0 0 6 
nat io nal p rogram mes co nd it ion al on in c re as ed  st af f  le vel s at t h e 
cfcu: to 80 for the 2005 national programme and 100 for the 2006 
nat io nal p ro gramm e.

 i n order to reduce the r isks associated with last-minute contrac t -
i n g ,   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n   i n t r o d u c e d   i n t e r i m   d e a d l i n e s .   T h i s   b e g a n 
with the 2005 national programme, but was more effec tive for the 
2 0 0 6   n at i o n a l   p ro gra m m e,   a l t h o u g h   t h i s   wa s   i n   t h e   co ntex t   o f   a 
lower n umbe r o f contrac ts to pro ces s  (s e e Ta bl e  3).

 new checks were also introduced into the projec t selec tion proce -
dure for  t he 2007 national  p rogra mm e  (s e e paragraph  3 0 ) , wh i ch 
aime d to  redu ce the incidence  of  de lays. an  as sessment of bene -
f i c i a r y   a b s o r p t i o n   c a p a c i t y   w a s   m a d e   a n d   a t   t h e   f i n a l   s t a g e   o f 
t h e   p r o j e c t   s e l e c t i o n   p r o c e d u r e  ‘p r o j e c t   m a t u r i t y ’  w a s   c h e c k e d 
to  e nsu re  that  t he  p ro jec t  was  rea dy  fo r   im med i ate  i mple me nt a-
tion .

TA B L E   3

cO N T R Ac T I N G   d ATA

Programme

Contracting deadline

Total number of contracts

Last month contracting

2002 NP

2003 NP

2004 NP

2005 NP

2006 NP

30.11.2004

30.11.2005

30.11.2006

30.11.2007

30.11.2008

351

501

752

604

378

287

454

688

470

85

82 %

91 %

91 %

78 %

22 %

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
23

46.  

47.  

 The commission also introduced new procedures to give the head 
of the cfcu responsibility for ensuring that beneficiar y ministries 
h ave   t h e   n e ce s s a r y   c a p a c i t y,   i n c l u d i n g   s t a f f,   to   i m p l e m e nt   t h e i r 
p r o j e c t s .   W i t h   e f f e c t   f r o m   t h e   2 0 0 7   n a t i o n a l   p r o g r a m m e ,   a f t e r 
s e l f - a s s e s s m e n t s   b y   t h e   b e n e f i c i a r y   m i n i s t r i e s ,   t h e   h e a d   o f   t h e 
cfcu u nder tak es ‘m ini-acc reditati on s’.

 as t his p ro cess  was stil l  ongo ing at th e t im e of  t he  audi t,  th e  im-
pac t  of   th is   measu re  canno t  yet   be   ass e ss ed.   howe ver,  t he  com-
m i s s i o n   h a s   a l re a d y   fo u n d   t h at   t h e   b e n e f i c i a r i e s   d i d   n o t   re ce i ve 
clear guidelines and that the cfcu had no satisfac tor y procedure 
to te st  t he s elf- asses s ments.

ThE   I N T E NdEd   O U T P U T S   O F   AUdI T Ed   P R O J Ec T S  W E R E 
E V E N T UA L LY   dE L I V E R Ed   A Nd  ThE   R E S U LT S   A S S E S S Ed   A S 
L I K E LY  TO   B E   S U S TA I N Ed

48.  

 projec ts use resources (inputs) to produce output and achieve ob -
jec tives (intended results and outcomes). These terms are defined 
in Tex tb ox  4.

TE X T B O X   4

d E F I N I T I O N   O F   P R O J Ec T   O U T P U T S   A Nd   O B J Ec T I V E S

Outputs — That which is directly produced or accomplished with the resources allocated to a project.
examples: provision of laboratory equipment (Phytosanitary Acquis); delivery of training courses (EADP).

Results — i mmediate changes that arise from the implementation of a project.
examples: use of laboratory equipment to test plants for diseases; women who have learned a new skill 
through participation in a training course.

Impacts — Longer-term consequences that can be observed after the completion of the project.
examples:  reduced  occurrence  of  plant  diseases;  improved  access  for  women  to  income -generating  
activities.

Outcomes — r esults and impacts.

Objective — statement of the outcomes intended to be achieved.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
24

49.  

50.  

 a s   d e s c r i b e d   i n   p a r a g r a p h s   2 4   t o   2 7 ,   t h e r e   w a s   a n   a b s e n c e   o f 
s ma r T   p ro j e c t   o b j e c t i ve s   a n d   i n d i c ato r s   s o   t h e   co m m i s s i o n   wa s 
u n a b l e   t o   d e m o n s t r a t e   t h e   e x t e n t   o f   p r o j e c t   m a n a g e m e n t   s u c -
cess in achieving objec tives. The cour t ’s assessment was therefore 
l i m i t e d   t o   e x a m i n i n g   w h e t h e r   t h e r e   w a s   e v i d e n c e   t o   s h o w   t h a t 
projec ts had achieved their intended outputs. The assessment was 
b a s e d   o n   a   re v i e w   o f   t h e   m o n i to r i n g   re p o r t s,   i nte r v i e ws   w i t h   a l l 
11 main beneficiar y ministries and 19 site visits by the cour t audi-
tors to  o bt ain eviden ce of  the out puts  de livered.

12  Maritime Safety (2002 np),  

Customs Modernisation (2004 np)  

and Probation Service (2004 np).

 The cour t found no significant weaknesses in the deliver y of project 
outputs: they were delivered fully in 3 12 out of the 11  projec ts for 
the contrac ts audited and largely in the other eight (see Table 4). 
The  few  p rob l ems found  re su lted  from  we ak n es s es  in  th e  proje c t 
d e s i g n   a n d   s e l e c t i o n   p h a s e   ( s e e   p a r a g r a p h s   2 0   t o   2 9 )   a n d   f r o m 
th e d el ays expe r ienced du r ing  ten de r in g  and  contrac tin g.

TA B L E   4

OU T P U T S   A Nd   SU S TA I N A B I L I T Y

y
t
e
f
a
s
e
m

i
t
i
r
a
M

Y

Y

s
i
u
q
c
a
y
r
a
t
i
n
a
s
o
t
y
h
P

/

N

c
i
s
n
e
r
o
f
e
c
i
l
o
P

/

Y

s
t
h
g
i
r

l
a
r
u
t
l
u
C

/

/

Projects

n
o
i
t
c
e
t
o
r
p
r
e
m
u
s
n
o
C

/

/

r
e
t
a
w
d
n
a
s
e
d
i
c
o
i
B

/

/

n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
r
e
d
o
m

s

m
o
t
s
u
C

Y

/

n
o
i
t
a
r
t
s
i
n
m
d
a
x
a
T

i

/

Y

t
r
o
p
s
n
a
r
t
d
a
o
R

/

/

e
c
i
v
r
e
s
n
o
i
t
a
b
o
r
P

Y

Y

P
D
A
E

/

/

Outputs delivered and  
contributed to objectives

Project likely to be sustainable

Criteria:
Y  = entirely met;  /  = mostly met;  N  = not met.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
25

51.  

52.  

 a  p ro j e c t   i s   s u s t a i n a b l e   w h e n   i t   co nt i n u e s   to   d e l i ve r   re s u l t s   a n d 
achieve impac ts after the eu funding has stopped. Within the con-
straints of its work due to the maturity of the projects audited, the 
cour t assessed that the results of 10 out of the 11 projects audited 
are likely to be sustained (see Table 4). The only exception was the 
phyto sanita r y a cqu is p rojec t  from th e 2 00 2  n ati on a l program me. 
a l t h o u g h   i t   a c h i e ve d   m o s t   o f   t h e   i n t e n d e d   o u t p u t s,   t h e r e   we r e 
risks to its sustainabilit y as it had not achieved accreditation (see 
paragraph 29), there were staff shor tages at the laborator ies and 
t h e   s u p p l i e r   o f   t h e   l a b o rato r y   e q u i p m e nt   wa s   n o t   p rov i d i n g   t h e 
cont ra c ted maintenance.

 fur thermore, a projec t is more likely to be sustainable when there 
i s   a   h i g h   l e ve l   o f   o w n e r s h i p   o n   t h e   p a r t   o f   t h e   b e n e f i c i a r y   a s   i s 
i l l u s t r a t e d   i n   Te x t b o x   5.   a  s e n s e   o f   o w n e r s h i p   a r i s e s   w h e n   t h e 
b e n e f i c i a r y   fe e l s   a c t i ve l y   i nvo l ve d   i n   t h e   i n i t i a t i ve,   fo r   e x a m p l e 
w h e n   t h e y   h ave   p ro p o s e d   i t   t h e m s e l ve s,   h ave   p rov i d e d   i n p u t   to 
the planning and design, have managed the implementation and 
b e l i e v e   t h a t   t h e y   b e n e f i t   f r o m   i t s   c o n t i n u a t i o n .   T h e   l i k e l i h o o d 
t h a t   t h e s e   c o n d i t i o n s   a r e   m e t   i s   f a v o u r e d   b y   t h e   d i s  s y s t e m   i n 
Tur k ey  w it h  it s  b o tto m-up   p roj ec t   i denti fi c at ion   and   ben e fi c iar y 
m a n a g e m e nt   o f   p ro j e c t   i m p l e m e n t at i o n .   a l t h o u g h   ow n e r s h i p   i s 
o n l y   o n e   o f   s e ve r a l   f a c t o r s   i n f l u e n c i n g   s u s t a i n a b i l i t y,   t h e   co u r t 
found that suitable conditions for sustainability — projec t owner-
ship  cou pl ed w ith the del iver y  of  plan n e d outputs  —  exi sted.

TE X T B O X   5

p r o b AT Io n   s Er vI C E   P R O J Ec T   F R O M  ThE   20 04   NAT I O N A L   PR O G R A M M E

The technical assistance — by far the most important element of the project — was implemented efficiently 
and on time. however, there were delays in the supply of office equipment: the procurement notice was 
published over 17 months later than foreseen in the project fiche. The impact of the delay was minimised 
as the ministry of Justice supplied alternative equipment from Turkish national funds so that the probation 
offices could become operational.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
26

P E R F O R M A NcE   M O N I TO R I N G   A Nd   E VA LUAT I O N

53.  

 pe r f o r m a n c e   m o n i t o r i n g   a n d   e v a l u a t i o n   i s   n e c e s s a r y   t o   i n f o r m 
d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g   a n d   d e m o n s t rate   s o u n d   f i n a n c i a l   m a n a g e m e nt. 
Th e   co u r t   ex a m i n e d   w h e t h e r   t h e   co m m i s s i o n   h a d   a   s o u n d   b a s i s 
on which to review the implementation of projec ts and assess the 
a c h i e ve m e n t   o f   p ro j e c t   o b j e c t i ve s   a n d   t h e   i m p a c t   o f   e u - f u n d e d 
pro jec t s in ac hie vin g a cces sion p ar t ne rsh ip pr ior itie s.

54.  

55.  

I M P L E M E N TAT I O N   P R O B L E M S  W E R E   N OT   A LWAYS 
R E P O R T Ed

 The dis monitored whether projects were on track through regular 
mee t ings an d monito r ing  rep or t s.

 meetings were chaired by the beneficiar y of each projec t to moni-
t o r   p r o g r e s s   a n d   r e s o l v e   p r o b l e m s   f a c e d   d u r i n g   p r o j e c t   i m p l e -
m e n t a t i o n .   T h e   c o m m i s s i o n ,   c f c u  a n d   e u s g  w e r e   a l l   r e q u i r e d 
to   at te n d   t h e   m e e t i n g s   to   re ce i ve   a n d   p rov i d e   u p - to - d ate   i n fo r-
m a t i o n .   m i n u t e s   o f   m e e t i n g s   w e r e   n o t   a l w a y s   p r e p a r e d   b u t   t h e 
cour t examined a small sample of those available for the audited 
pro jec t s.  Th ese co nfir med  th at day- to - d ay i mple me nt at ion  prob -
l e m s   we re   i d e n t i f i e d   a n d   fo l l ow - u p   m e a s u re s   we re   d e c i d e d,   b u t 
some impor tant issues were not documented. although the eusg 
i s   r e s p o n s i b l e   f o r   r e v i e w i n g   p r o g r e s s   i n   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   a n d , 
where necessar y, recommending cor rec tive measures to the Jmc, 
th e  co ur t   ide nt ified  that  the  e usg  was  not   pres ent   at  any   of  th e 
mee t ings in t he  s am p le.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
27

56.  

57.  

 T h e   d i s  p r o d u c e d   t w o   t y p e s   o f   p r o j e c t   m o n i t o r i n g   r e p o r t .   on e 
was the cfcu’s monthly repor t on tendering, contrac ting and pay-
m e nt.  Th e s e   we nt   to   t h e   e c   d e l e g at i o n   fo r   a n   o p e rat i o n a l   c h e c k 
a n d   to   t h e   co m m i s s i o n’s   fi n a n ce   un i t,   fo r   a   f i n a n c i a l   c h e c k .  Th e 
o t h e r   wa s   t h e   b e n e f i c i a r y ’s   s i x- m o nt h l y   re p o r t   o n   t h e   exe c u t i o n 
of p ro jec t  a c tivities w hich went to th e e usg.   howe ver, th e  cour t 
i d e n t i f i e d   t h a t   a   n u m b e r   o f   s i g n i f i c a n t   d e l a y s   a n d   p r o b l e m s   i n 
projec t implementation were not mentioned in these repor ts (see 
Table   5).

 T h e   r e p o r t s   p r o v i d e d   a n   o p p o r t u n i t y   f o r   m o n i t o r i n g   p r o g r e s s 
a g a i n s t   t h e   m i l e s t o n e s   e s t a b l i s h e d   i n   e a c h   p r o j e c t   f i c h e  fo r   t h e 
different stages of projec t implementation. however, this was not 
d o n e   e x c e p t   f o r   t h e   p r o j e c t   s t a r t   a n d   e n d   d a t e s :   t h e r e   w a s   n o 
repor ting of the date when each inter im milestone was achieved. 
c o n s e q u e n t l y,   t h e r e   w a s   n o   c o m p l e t e   r e c o r d   a t   t h e   e n d   o f   a 
p ro j e c t   o f   t h e   e x te nt   to   w h i c h   i t   wa s   i m p l e m e n te d   a cco rd i n g   to 
pla n.

TA B L E   5

WE A K N E S S E S   N OT   M E N T I O N Ed   I N   B E N E F IcI A R Y ' S   P R O J Ec T 
M O N I TO R I N G   R E P O R T S   A Nd   F O L LO W-U P   Ac T I O N  TA K E N

Biocidals and Water

Phytosanitary Acquis

Customs Modernisation

Weaknesses relating to the laboratory facilities provided were not mentioned in the  
beneficiary’s monitoring report, but were detailed in the quarterly report by the EU consultant. The 
beneficiary took remedial action (financed by Turkish funds) and the project was successfully completed.

Provision of inappropriate laboratory equipment and inadequate laboratory facilities was revealed by 
the auditors (see paragraphs 29 and 51, Textbox 2 and Table 4). The beneficiary took remedial action to 
refurbish the proposed laboratory facilities at one site after the Commission’s on-site visit.

Delays in the installation of the x-ray scanner were not mentioned in the beneficiary’s report, as the  
beneficiary had not planned the construction of an additional fitting for the scanner to be mounted, 
which it then did out of its own funds.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
28

58.  

59.  

 ‘i nter im  evalu at ion   rep or t s’  were  prepared   for   t h e  Jm c  e ac h   ye ar 
b y   a n   e x t e r n a l   c o m p a n y   c o n t r a c t e d   b y   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n .   T h e s e 
summarised all projec ts that were ac tive, i.e. in the process of be -
ing implemented at the cut- off date for the repor t. Their pur pose 
w a s   t o   r e v i e w   t h e   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   o f   e a c h   p r o j e c t   i n   t e r m s   o f 
relevance, efficienc y and likely effec tiveness, impac t and sustain-
ability. This was done primarily on the basis of the dis monitoring 
repor t and inter views. an overall repor t was also prepared, which 
m a d e   re co m m e n d at i o n s   fo r   i m p rove m e n t s   to   t h e   f u n c t i o n i n g   o f 
t h e   d i s  s y s t e m s   a n d   p ro g r a m m i n g.  T h e s e   re c o m m e n d a t i o n s   l e d 
to s eve ral  Jmc d ecisio ns.

 a s   t h e   i n t e r i m   e v a l u a t i o n   re p o r t s   we re   a n n u a l   a n d   d i d   n o t   g i ve 
any  ass ess ment of t he finis hed pro jec t s, t he  info r mati on was  n o t 
t i m e l y   o r   co m p l e te   e n o u g h   fo r   p e r fo r m a n ce   m a n a g e m e nt .   co m-
bined  w ith the  weak n esses  id e nt if ie d i n  th e  dis proj ec t monitor -
ing repor ts and the lack of aggregation of the data that was avail-
able, there was no useful monitoring information on the stages at 
which delays occurred or by how much. consequently there was a 
lack of complete, reliable and timely management information for 
s c h e d u l i n g   t h e   c f c u   a n n u a l   wo r k l o a d,   t o   m i n i m i s e   b o t t l e n e c k s 
a n d   b a c k l o g s   a n d   t o   a l l o w   r a p i d   i n t e r ve n t i o n   w h e re   m i l e s t o n e s 
were  no t b eing  met.

O V E R A L L   d ATA  TO   A S S E S S   P R O J Ec T   R E S U LT S  WA S 
I N S U F F IcI E N T

60.  

 i n   a d d i t i o n   t o   t h e   we a k n e s s e s   i n   t h e   fo r m u l a t i o n   o f   p ro j e c t   o b -
jec tives and indicators identified in paragraphs 24 to 27, the per-
fo r m a n c e   i n d i c a t o r s   d e f i n e d   i n   t h e   p r o j e c t   f i c h e s  we r e   n o t   u s e d 
i n   t h e   m o n i to r i n g   re p o r t s   fo r   1 0   o f   t h e   1 1   p ro j e c t s   a u d i te d.  Th i s 
inclu ded t he t wo  p roj ec ts that d i d h ave  so me well - d e ve lope d i n-
dicators (see paragraph 26). consequently, the commission lacked 
information on how successful the projects were in achieving their 
obj ec t ives.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
29

61.  

62.  

63.  

 i n   m a n y   c a s e s   t h e   r e s u l t s   a n d   i m p a c t s   o f   p r o j e c t s   w i l l   n o t   b e 
achie ved  u nt il   so me  time  af ter  t he   f in al  pay me nt   for   th e   proj ec t 
has been made, although this is key for assessing the per formance 
o f   s p e n d i n g.   a s   t h e r e   w a s   n o   f i n a l   p r o j e c t   r e p o r t ,   t h e   c o m m i s -
s i o n   d i d   n o t   h ave   a   s ys te m   fo r   co l l e c t i n g   d at a   fo r   t h e   i n d i c ato r s 
s e t   o u t   i n   t h e   p r o j e c t   f i c h e  a t   p r o j e c t   c o m p l e t i o n .  T h e r e   w a s   n o 
p rov i s i o n   fo r   m o n i to r i n g   a n d   re p o r t i n g   t h e   s u s t a i n a b i l i t y   o f   t h e 
pro jec t and t he ac hievement of  proj ec t  obj ec ti ves  af te r  th e f ina l 
paym ent  date.

 i n   t h e   s i x   y e a r s   o f   e u  p r e - a c c e s s i o n   a s s i s t a n c e   t o  Tu r k e y,   t h e r e 
h a s   b e e n   n o   s y s t e m   o f   e x   p o s t   e v a l u a t i o n   o f   i n d i v i d u a l   p ro j e c t s 
o r   o f   t h e   e f fe c t i ve n e s s   o f   t h e   p ro gra m m e   a s   a   w h o l e   i n   te r m s   o f 
m e e t i n g   t h e   acce s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   p r i o r i t i e s   a n d   o f   p ro gre s s i n g 
Tur key  towards eu acces s ion .

 fur th er m ore,  th e  fac t  that  most  s trategi c  obje c ti ve s   for   t he   pre -
a c c e s s i o n   f i n a n c i a l   a s s i s t a n c e   w e r e   n o t   s p e c i f i c ,   m e a s u r a b l e   o r 
achievable in the time set, means that there was insufficient basis 
fo r   m o n i to r i n g   p e r fo r m a n ce   o f   t h e   s p e n d i n g   i n c l u d i n g   va l u e   fo r 
money.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
concL usions and 
recommendaTions

30

64.  

 The cour t found weak nesses in the commission’s management of 
pre -acce ssio n  a ssist ance  to  Tur key   i n   t he  Tpa  pe r io d.   sin ce  th en, 
t h e   co m m i s s i o n   h a s   t a k e n   a c t i o n   to   i m p rove   p ro ce d u re s   fo r   t h e 
i pa ,   a l t h o u g h   t h e   e f f e c t i v e n e s s   o f   t h e   c h a n g e s   c a n   o n l y   b e   a s -
sessed in the future. i mprovements are still required in establish-
ing p r io r it ie s fo r and asses s ing  t he   effe c t ive n es s  of  th e  f un di n g.

65.  

66.  

67.  

68.  

dId  ThE  E U R O P E A N   cO M M I S S I O N  E N S U R E  ThAT  E U 
A S S I S TA NcE WA S  dI R Ec T Ed  TO ThE P R O J Ec TS ThAT 
A d d   M O S T  VA LU E   I N   A c h I E V I N G  T h E   E U ’S   A cc E S -
S I O N   PA R T N E R ShI P   P R I O R I T I E S ?

 There was no mechanism to ensure that the projects proposed and 
selec ted were those that represented the best use of eu financial 
res ou rces in ach ieving th e a cce ssion p ar t ner sh ip pr ior it ies.

 T h e   a c c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   s e t s   a   m u l t i t u d e   o f   p r i o r i t i e s   t o   b e 
achieved to prepare Turkey for eu membership.  eu assistance aims 
t o   c o m p l e m e n t  Tu r k e y ’s   o w n   e f fo r t s   t o   a c h i e ve   t h e s e   p r i o r i t i e s. 
T h e r e   w a s   n o   c l e a r   h i e r a r c h y   o f   o b j e c t i v e s   f r o m   t h e   a c c e s s i o n 
pa r t n e r s h i p   d ow n   t h ro u g h   t h e   a n n u a l   n at i o n a l   p ro gra m m e s   a n d 
approved projects to the individual project components and activ-
itie s.  There was a l ac k of  s p ecific  c r ite r ia an d a  ro bus t f ram ewor k 
to  de ter mine  t he  p r ior it ies  to  wh ic h   th e   e u  ass istan ce  sh ould  be 
direc ted.  sp ecif ic,  measu rab le  and ac hievable  obj e c ti ve s for  th at 
assist ance were n ot  s et and t ime sc a les  were  no t re ali st ic.

 consequently, there was not a sound basis for monitoring per form-
an ce.

 al t h o u g h   p ro j e c t   s e l e c t i o n   p ro ce d u re s   we re   i m p rove d   co n s i d e r -
ably with the ipa, proposals were still not assessed for how effec -
t i ve   a n d   e f f i c i e n t   t h e y   we re   l i k e l y   t o   b e   i n   a c h i e v i n g  a   s t r a t e g i c 
o b j e c t i ve,   t h e re by   a l l ow i n g   m e a n i n g f u l   co m p a r i s o n   b e t we e n   a l -
ter natives o r t he s el ec t ion of proj e c ts  li k e ly  to have  th e  greates t 
imp ac t.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
 
 
 
31

REc O M M E Nd AT I O N   O N 
ST R AT E G Ic   OB J Ec T I V E S

T h e   co m m i s s i o n   s h o u l d   i m p r o v e   p r o g r a m m i n g   w i t h   a   r o b u s t 
m e th o d o l o g y to d e te r min e,  th e s tr ate gi c  o bj e c ti ve s f o r  w hi ch 
th e   eu  f in a n cia l   assis t a n ce   is   m os t   n e e d e d .   T h e   m e th o d o l o g y 
s h o u l d   e n s u r e   t h a t   t h e   l o g i c   f o r   eu  i nte r ve nt i o n   i n   a c h i e v i n g 
e a ch s tr ate gi c  o bj e c ti ve is  cl e ar l y  d e m o ns tr ate d .

REc O M M E Nd AT I O N   O N   
A c T I V I T Y   S TAT E M E N T S

T h e   co m m issi o n   s h o u l d   d e te r m i n e   sp e ci f i c   o bj e c t i ve s   f o r   t h e 
p r e - a c c e s s i o n   f i n a n c i a l   a s s i s t a n c e   p r o g r a m m e   a n d   i n c l u d e 
t h e s e   o b j e c t i v e s   i n   t h e   a c t i v i t y   s t a t e m e n t   t h a t   a c c o m p a n i e s 
th e p re limina r y dr af t b u d g e t .

REc O M M E Nd AT I O N   O N
P R O J Ec T   P R O P O S A L S

T h e   co m m i s s i o n   s h o u l d   e n co u r a g e   t h e   Tu r k i s h   a u t h o r i t i e s   to 
develop projec t proposals such that the strategic objec tives for 
eu f u n d in g c an b e a chi eve d w i thin  re alis ti c   tim e s c al e s .

dId   ThE   E U R O P E A N   c O M M I S S I O N   E N S U R E   ThAT 
ThE   dEcE N T R A L I S Ed   I M P L E M E N TAT I O N   S Y S T E M 
R E S U LT Ed   I N   T I M E LY   A Nd   S Uc cE S S F U L   A c hI E V E-
M E N T   O F   P R O J Ec T   O U T P U T S   A Nd   O B J Ec T I V E S ?

69.  

 despite having been approved by the commission, the dis institu-
tions were understaffed for the 2002 to 2004 national programmes 
and did not achieve timely implementation of the projects audited 
or   fo r  t he  p ro grammes   as  a  w ho le.   ne ver th eless,  alt hough  bes et 
by implementation problems and delays, the dis ensured that the 
aud ite d  p ro jec t s   m os t l y  ac hieved  th ei r   plann ed   ou tputs   an d  th e 
res ul t s were l ikel y to  b e su stain ed.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
32

70.  

 T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   h a s   i n t r o d u c e d   m e a s u r e s   a i m e d   a t   a d d r e s s i n g 
m a ny   o f   t h e   we a k n e s s e s   i n   t h e   d i s.  Th e   f u l l   i m p a c t   o f   t h e s e   i m-
p ro ve m e n t s   c a n   o n l y   b e   a s s e s s e d   a s   t h e   i pa  p ro j e c t s   a re   i m p l e -
mented in the co ming  year s.

REc O M M E Nd AT I O N   O N   
P R O J Ec T   d E S I G N

T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   s h o u l d   c o n t i n u e   w i t h   i n i t i a t i v e s   t o   i m p r o v e 
p r o j e c t   d e s i g n   a n d   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   b y   t h e   d i s  i n s t i t u t i o n s . 
m e a s u r e s   s u c h   a s   c o m p u l s o r y   n e e d s   a s s e s s m e n t s   a n d   b e t t e r 
s ch e du lin g  o f co nt r a c tin g sh o ul d  b e  ap p ro p r iate l y  ap p li e d .

dId   ThE   E U R O P E A N   c O M M I S S I O N   E N S U R E   ThAT 
ThE R E   WA S   A N   E F F Ec T I V E   S Y S T E M   O F   P E R F O R M-
A NcE   M O N I TO R I N G   A Nd   E VA LUAT I O N ?

71.  

 The commission did not have the information to demonstrate the 
effectiveness of the pre -accession assistance. The cour t found that 
t h e   p r o j e c t   f i c h e s   p ro v i d e d   t h e   b a s i s   o f   a   p e r fo r m a n c e   m o n i t o r-
ing system by setting out projec t objec tives and expec ted results 
w i t h   o b j e c t i v e l y   v e r i f i a b l e   i n d i c a t o r s .   ho w e v e r,   t h e   o b j e c t i v e s 
set were of ten not specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and 
time -bound and the indicators were not sufficient to monitor the 
ach ieveme nt  of t he ob jec tives.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

 
 
33

REc O M M E Nd AT I O N   O N   
P R O J Ec T   PE R F O R M A NcE

The commission should ensure that individual projec t pro posals 
have specif ic, measurable, achievable, relevant and time -bound 
o b j e c t i v e s   i n   o r d e r   t h a t   t h e i r   c o n t r i b u t i o n   t o   a c h i e v i n g   t h e 
s tr ate gi c  o bj e c ti ve s c an b e d e m o ns t r ate d .

T h e  co m missi o n sh o u l d imp rove th e  m e ch anism f o r  re p o r tin g 
o n   t h e   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   o f   p r o j e c t s   a n d   t h e   d e l i v e r y   o f   t h e i r 
ac tivities and outputs, and should ensure that projec t per form -
an ce   is   m o ni to re d  usin g  in di c ato r s  s e t   o u t  in  th e  p ro j e c t  f ich e 
to d e m o ns t r ate th e a chi eve m e nt   o f   th e p roj e c t   o bj e c ti ve s .

The   co mmis sio n  s ho ul d  ens ure  that  pro je c t   outcom e s  ( re sul ts 
and impac ts) are repor ted at the end of each projec t and at ap -
pro pr iate inter val s thereaf ter  in  orde r  to provid e pe r for ma nce 
infor m at io n to  info r m fut ure  plann i ng.

REc O M M E Nd AT I O N   O N   
PR O G R A M M E   E V A L U AT I O N

T he commission should launch an evaluation of the entire pro -
gr am m e o f  p re - a cce ssi o n assis t a n ce  to  Tur key.

This report was adopted by the court of auditors in Luxembourg at its 
meeting of 22 o ctober 2009.

Fo r  th e  Co u r t  o f  Au d ito r s

Vítor m anuel da silva c aldeira 
Presi d e nt

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

34

Budgeted EU
(million euro)

Contracted  
(million euro)

Paid EU
(million euro)

A N N E X  I

L I S T   O F   P R O J Ec T S   AUdI T Ed

Project name

Maritime Safety

Phytosanitary Acquis

Police Forensic

Cultural Rights

Consumer Protection

Biocides and Water

Customs Modernisation

Tax Administration

Road Transport

Probation Service

Eastern Anatolian Development Programme 
(EADP)

TOTAL cost to EU

TOTAL cost to Turkey

2

4

5

3

3

5

17

5

5

2

45

95

11

EU + national contributions

106

2

3

4

2

1

4

12

5

4

1

43

82

8

90

2

3

4

1

1

4

11

5

3

1

43

78

7

85

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

35

repLy of The 
commission

SUMMARY

IV.
The commission recognises that there has 
b e e n   a   l e a r n i n g   p r o c e s s   i n   t h e   m a n a g e -
m e n t   o f   t h e   d e c e n t r a l i s e d   i m p l e m e n t a-
tion system in Tur key in place since 2003. 
however, in  spite of init ial weak n es s es  at 
p r o j e c t   a n d   p r o g r a m m e   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n 
level,  projec t s  have  been  compl ete d  suc -
c e s s f u l l y   a n d   t h e   m a j o r i t y   o f   o u t c o m e s 
are s ust ainable.

VI.
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   c o n s i d e r s   t h a t   t h e   s e t -
t i n g   o f   s t r i c t   c o n d i t i o n s   fo r   t h e   a c c r e d i-
tation of the Tur k ish implementation sys-
tem and the rigorous monitoring of these 
c o n d i t i o n s   w i l l   e n s u r e   e f f i c i e n t   i m p l e -
mentation of pre - accession  assi s ta nce.

VII.
The commiss ion  e stablish ed an inte r ve n-
t i o n   l o g i c   fo r   f i n a n c i a l   a s s i s t a n c e   b a s e d 
o n   a n   a c c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   ( a p )   a n d   a 
m u l t i - a n n u a l   i n d i c a t i v e   p l a n n i n g   d o c u-
m e n t   ( m i p d )   a n d   n a t i o n a l   s t r a t e g i e s 
w h i c h   i t   c o n s i d e r s   a n   a d e q u a t e   f r a m e -
w o r k .   T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   r e c o g n i s e s   t h a t 
s t r a t e g i c   o b j e c t i v e s   a n d   i n d i c a t o r s   o f 
m i p ds   u n d e r   t h e   i pa  i n s t r u m e n t   c a n   b e 
f u r t h e r   i m p r o v e d ;   w o r k   o n   t h i s   i s   u n d e r 
w a y.   W i t h   i pa,   i t   h a s   b e c o m e   a   r e q u i r e -
m e n t   fo r   p r o j e c t s   t o   h a v e   s m a r T   o b j e c -
t i v e s   a n d   r a c e r  i n d i c a t o r s   a n d   t h i s   i s 
b e i n g   s ys te m a t i c a l l y   ve r i f i e d.   as   fo r  Tpa, 
a l r e a d y,   e v a l u a t i o n   o f   e f f e c t i v e n e s s   o f 
p r e - a c c e s s i o n   a s s i s t a n c e   u n d e r   i pa   w i l l 
b e   d o n e   a t   s e c t o r   o r   p r o g r a m m e   l e v e l 
a s   i t   i s   n o t   c o n s i d e r e d   c o s t - e f f i c i e n t   a t 
projec t  leve l.

VIII.
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   h a s   l a u n c h e d   t o g e t h e r 
w i t h   t h e   Tu r k i s h   a u t h o r i t i e s   a   n u m b e r 
o f   m e a s u r e s   i n   2 0 0 8 / 0 9   t o   i m p r o v e   t h e 
p r o g r a m m i n g   a n d   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   o f 
p r e - a c c e s s i o n   a s s i s t a n c e .   fu r t h e r   m e a s-
ures are und er way.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

36

repLy of The 
commission

INTROdUc TION

OBSERVATIONS

3.
Tu r k e y   h a s   b e e n   i m p l e m e n t i n g   e c  f i n a n-
c i a l   a s s i s t a n c e   s i n c e   2 0 0 3   u n d e r   t h e   d e -
c e n t r a l i s e d   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   s y s t e m   ( a c -
credite d in o c to b er 20 03 ).

i pa  a s s i s t a n c e   h a s   b e e n   p ro v i d e d   t o  Tu r -
k e y   s i n c e   2 0 0 7 .   i t   b u i l d s   o n   a s s i s t a n c e 
p rov i d e d   u n d e r   t h e  Tu r k e y   p re - a cce s s i o n 
instr um ent  ( Tpa ) f rom  2002 to 2 00 6 .

f u r t h e r   t o   t h e   c o n c l u s i o n s   o f   t h e   d e -
c e m b e r   2 0 0 4   eu ro p e a n   co u n c i l   t h e   e u  i s 
pursuing a pre -accession strategy in rela-
tion  to Tur key   th at  is   b as ed  on  t h re e  el e -
m e n t s :   co n t i n u e d   m o n i to r i n g   o f  Tu r k e y ’s 
p r o g r e s s   i n   r e l a t i o n   t o   t h e   c o p e n h a g e n 
polit ical   cr ite r ia,  r ig oro us   conduc t  of   t he 
a c c e s s i o n   n e g o t i a t i o n s ,   a n d   t h e   p r o m o -
t i o n   o f   a n   e u -Tu r k e y   c i v i l   s o c i e t y   di a-
logu e.  This and the s tar t  of acce ss i on  n e -
g o t i a t i o n s   i n   o c t o b e r   2 0 0 5   h a v e   g u i d e d 
program ming  s in ce 20 04 /0 5.

4.
o v e r a l l ,   f r o m   2 0 0 7   t o   2 0 1 3 ,   4 , 9   b i l l i o n 
e u r o   i s   e a r m a r k e d   f o r   Tu r k e y   u n d e r   t h e 
i pa,   w h i c h   re p re s e n t s   a   m a r k e d   i n c re a s e 
c o m p a r e d   w i t h   1 , 2 5   b i l l i o n   e u r o   u n d e r 
t h e   Tu r k e y   p r e - a c c e s s i o n   i n s t r u m e n t   i n 
2002–06.

12.
The commission has established a strate -
gic planning framewor k for programming 
f i n a n c i a l   a s s i s t a n c e .   T h i s   i n c l u d e s   t h e 
m u l t i - a n n u a l   i n d i c a t i v e   p l a n n i n g   d o c u-
ment (mipd) as the multi-annual strategic 
planning framework , which — in addition 
t o   t h e   a c c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   —   g u i d e s 
programm in g unde r th e ipa  in  Tur k e y.

13.
T h e   a c t i v i t y   s t a t e m e n t s   (a s)   n e e d   t o   b e 
f u l l y   c o h e r e n t   w i t h   t h e   a n n u a l   m a n a g e -
m e n t   p ro g r a m m e   (a m p)   a n d   c o n t a i n   t h e 
same polic y objec tives and indicators. so, 
th e ‘s pecific ’ objec tives in  th e as nee d to 
b e   p o l i c y   r e l a t e d .   T h e   f i n a n c i a l   a l l o c a-
t i o n s   i n   s u p p o r t   o f   t h e s e   p o l i c y   o b j e c -
t i v e s   a r e   c a p t u r e d   i n   t h e  ‘m a i n   e x p e n d i-
ture -re lated outputs’.

T h e   a c t i v i t y   s t a t e m e n t s   re l y   o n   t h e   m u l-
t i - a n n u a l   i n d i c at i ve   p l a n n i n g   d o c u m e n t s 
(mipds) to specify planned areas of inter -
v e n t i o n   a n d   t o   s e t   c o n c r e t e   o b j e c t i v e s 
and priorities for ipa funding.  mipds are a  
l e g a l   o b l i g a t i o n   f ro m   t h e   i pa  re g u l a t i o n ; 
t h e y   a r e   a d o p t e d   b y   c o m m i s s i o n   d e c i-
sion  for  a t hree -year per iod. i t is  difficult 
to  ca pt ure   th e  finan cial  obje c t ive s  i n  th e 
a s,   w h i c h   re q u i re s   t h a t   t h e   o u t p u t s   l i s t -
e d   h a v e   a   b u d g e t   a l l o c a t e d   t o   t h e m   a l -
most   a  year  before  th e  budget ar y   year   i n 
q u e s t i o n .   T h i s   l e v e l   o f   b u d g e t a r y   b r e a k-
d ow n   i s   o n l y   e l a b o ra te d   a t   t h e   p ro gr a m -
m i n g   s t a g e,   w h i c h   i s   f i n a l i s e d   d u r i n g   t h e 
budget ar y  year.

T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   i s   l o o k i n g   f o r   w a y s   t o 
i m p r o v e   t h e   i n f o r m a t i o n   i t   p r o v i d e s 
w i t h i n   t h i s   co ntex t.   fo r   t h e   2 0 1 0   a c t i v i t y 
s t ate m e nt,   t h e   f i n a n c i a l   a l l o c at i o n s   we re 
a l re a d y   b ro k e n   d ow n   ( fo r   ye a r s   2 0 0 8   a n d 
2 0 0 9 )   b y   p r i o r i t y   a r e a   a n d   f u r t h e r   s t e p s 
can be made to provide more detailed in-
for mat ion .  a  wor k ing  group  h as  been   set 
u p   w i t h i n   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n   t o   f i n d   w a y s 
o f   i m p ro v i n g   a l l   t h e   a c t i v i t y   s t a t e m e n t s, 
i n c l u d i n g   t h o s e   r e l a t e d   t o   e n l a r g e m e n t 
polic y.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

15.
T h e   a c c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   ( a p )   i s   b a s e d 
o n   w h a t   ‘ i n   p r i n c i p l e ’  i s   r e a l i s t i c a l l y 
a c h i e va b l e.  Th e   m o s t   re ce nt   g a p   a n a l ys i s 
o f   t h e   a p   p r i o r i t i e s   m a d e   i n   2 0 0 7   i n d e e d 
r e v e a l e d   t h a t   a   l a r g e   p r o p o r t i o n   o f   t h e 
p r i o r i t i e s   a r e   n o t   m e t   i n   t h e   s e t   t i m e -
frame. This is  par tl y du e to t he s l owd ow n 
o f   p o l i t i c a l   r e f o r m s   i n   Tu r k e y   i n   r e c e n t 
ye a r s   a n d   w i d e r   c h a l l e n g e s   l i n k e d   t o   a c -
cession neg o tiat ion s w ith Tu r ke y.

16.
ac c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   ( a p )   p r i o r i t i e s   a re 
n o t   o n l y   t o   b e   m e t   t h r o u g h   i pa  a s s i s t -
a n ce,   b u t   a l s o   w i t h   n a t i o n a l   i n s t r u m e n t s 
a n d   o t h e r   d o n o r   a s s i s t a n c e   a s   w e l l   a s 
t h r o u g h   n o n - f i n a n c i a l   m e a n s ,   i . e.   p o l i c y 
i n s t r u m e n t s .   m o r e o v e r,   a   n u m b e r   o f   a p 
p r i o r i t i e s   d o   n o t   r e q u i r e   o r   l e n d   t h e m-
selves to ec financial assistance; legal re -
for ms  requ ire   p ol it ical   ( gover nm e nt,   par-
liament) decisions rather than institution 
Building  (iB ) su p p or t.

18.
a  c o m p r e h e n s i v e   n a t i o n a l   p l a n   f o r   t h e 
a d o p t i o n   o f   t h e   a c q u i s  (n pa a )   w a s   p r e -
p a r e d   b y   t h e   Tu r k i s h   g o v e r n m e n t   i n   r e -
s p o n s e   t o   t h e   2 0 0 8   a c c e s s i o n   p a r t n e r -
s h i p.   T h i s   n pa a   p r o v i d e s   i n d i c a t i o n s   o n 
the  finan cial ne eds by sec tor / are a.

37

repLy of The 
commission

19.
T h e   m i p d   p r o v i d e s   g u i d a n c e   o n   w h i c h 
o f   t h e   a p   p r i o r i t i e s   s h o u l d   a s   a   m a t t e r 
o f   p r i o r i t y   b e   a d d r e s s e d   w i t h   i pa  a s s i s t -
an ce.

fo r   t h e   o b j e c t i v e   o n   m e e t i n g   t h e   a cq u i s 
c r i t e r i a ,   t h e   m i p d   s p e c i f i e s   t h a t   s u p p o r t 
fo r   t h e   a d o p t i o n   a n d   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   o f 
t h e   a c q u i s   c o m m u n a u t a i r e  i s   p r o v i d e d 
a s   a   m a t t e r   o f   p r i o r i t y   i n   a r e a s   w i t h   v o -
l u m i n o u s   l e g i s l a t i ve   a l i g n m e n t   a n d   h i g h 
i n v e s t m e n t   n e e d s ,   i . e .   c h i e f l y   i n   t h e   a g-
r i c u l t u r a l   s e c t o r   a n d   t h e   Jf s  s e c t o r.   T h e 
h i g h e s t   v o l u m e   o f   f u n d i n g   h a s   i n d e e d 
b e e n   c o n c e n t r a t e d   o n   t h e s e   s e c t o r s   i n 
2 00 7– 09  program me s.

s i n ce   t h e   t i m e   o f   t h e   a u d i t ,   t h e   co m m i s -
s i o n   co nt ra c te d   a n   ex p e r t   te a m   i n   s p r i n g 
2 0 0 9   t o   u n d e r t a k e   a n   e v a l u a t i o n   o f   t h e 
inter vention logic for financial assistance 
i n   Tu r k e y.   T h i s   c o n c l u d e d   t h a t   t h e   m i p d 
fo r m s   p a r t   o f   a   c o h e re n t   s t r a t e g i c / i n t e r -
ve n t i o n   l o g i c.   i t   a l s o   s t a t e s   t h a t   t h e re   i s 
s co p e   fo r   i m p rov i n g   t h e   m e a s u ra b i l i t y   o f 
t h e   m i p d   o b j e c t i ve s   a l t h o u g h   t h e   m e a s -
u ra b i l i t y   o f   o b j e c t i ve s   i n   ce r t a i n   a re a s   o f 
a c t i o n   d e p e n d s   l e s s   o n   t h e   d e s i g n   t h a n 
on  polit ical suppor t ( r isks/assumpt io ns) .

Th e   co m m i s s i o n   i s   c o m m i t t e d   t o   f u r t h e r 
i m p r o v i n g   t h e   i n t e r v e n t i o n   l o g i c   a n d 
st rategic framewor k  for  pre -acce ss i on  i n-
st itution- buildin g  ass istance   to Tur k e y.   a 
fo l l ow- u p   to   t h e   e va l u at i o n   o n   t h e   i nte r -
v e n t i o n   l o g i c   f o r   p r e - a c c e s s i o n   f u n d i n g 
in  Tur k ey  is plan ned for  20 10.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

38

repLy of The 
commission

26.
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   a g r e e s   t h a t   i n d i c a t o r s 
a n d   b a s e l i n e s   o f   p a s t   p r o j e c t s   a r e   o p e n 
t o   i m p r o v e m e n t .   T h i s   h a s   b e e n   r e c o g-
n ised in  th e Tur k ey  program ming process 
d o c u m e n t ,   a g r e e d   b e t w e e n   t h e   Tu r k i s h 
a u t h o r i t i e s   a n d   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n ,   w h i c h 
from 2007 requires impac t and results in-
dicators of achievement to be quantified, 
ver ifiable and  time -bound.

sin ce th e audit,  from 2 00 9 proje c t  obje c -
tives and expec ted results are smar T and 
i n d i c a t o r s   f o r   m o n i t o r i n g   p r o j e c t   p e r -
for man ce are r ace r.

i n   t h e   c o n c l u s i o n s   o f   t h e   J a n u a r y   2 0 0 9 
J m c   c o n c e r n i n g   p r o g r a m m i n g ,   i t   w a s 
a g re e d   t h a t   t h e   e u s g  wo u l d   a s   f ro m   t h e 
2 0 0 9   n p  m o b i l i s e   te c h n i c a l   a s s i s t a n ce   to 
v e r i f y   w h e t h e r   p r o j e c t   p r o p o s a l s   h a v e 
s ma r T   o b j e c t i ve s   a n d   r ac e r   i n d i c a t o r s, 
as well as to provide assistance to benefi-
c i a r i e s   i n   i m p r o v i n g   t h e i r   p r o j e c t   f i c h e s 
in  th is respec t.

27.
identification wor k on the  easter n  anato -
l i a   d e v e l o p m e n t   pr o g r a m m e   (e a d p)   b e -
g a n   i n   2 0 0 0   w h e n   t h e r e   w a s   s t i l l   a   s t a t e 
o f   e m e rg e n c y   i n   t h e   re g i o n   a n d   n o   f re e -
dom of movement without militar y escor t 
w a s   p o s s i b l e .   u n d e r   t h e s e   c o n d i t i o n s   i t 
wa s   n o t   p o s s i b l e   to   c a r r y   o u t   a   t h o ro u g h 
assessment and per for m baseline sur veys 
t o   a r r i v e   a t   v a l i d   i n d i c a t o r s .   T h e   c h o i c e 
w a s   m a d e   n e v e r t h e l e s s   t o   d e s i g n   a   p r o -
g r a m m e   f o r   o n e   o f   t h e   p o o r e s t   r e g i o n s 
o f   Tu r k e y   a n d   t o   t a s k   t h e   t e c h n i c a l   a s-
s i s t a n ce  Te a m   w i t h   c a r r y i n g   o u t   a   s u r ve y 
a n d   n e e d s   a s s e s s m e nt   o f   r u ra l   co m m u n i-
t i e s   i n   t h e   fo u r   p rov i n c e s   i n   t h e   s t a r t - u p 
phase of the programme. This assessment 
f o r m e d   a   b a s i s   f o r   t h e   d e s i g n   ( i . e .   c o n-
t e n t )   o f   t h e   g r a n t   s c h e m e .   T h e   Tu r k i s h 
a u t h o r i t i e s   a r e   f u r t h e r m o r e   p l a n n i n g   t o 
c a r r y   o u t   a n   i m p a c t   a s s e s s m e n t   w h i c h 
w i l l   a s s e s s   t h e   e f f e c t i v e n e s s   o f   t h e   f o u r 
compone nt s.

23.
The  co mm issio n  con siders   th at  it  h as   e s-
ta blis hed  a  sat isfac to r y  p ro jec t  apprai s al 
s y s t e m   u n d e r   Tpa.   c o m p l i a n c e   w i t h   t h e 
ac c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   p r i o r i t i e s   w a s   u n-
d e r   t h e  Tpa  o n e   o f   t h e   s e l e c t i o n   c r i te r i a . 
P r o j e c t   f i c h e s  u n d e r   t h e   T pa   i n c l u d e d   a 
s e c t i o n   o n   t h e   l i n k   t o / r e l e v a n c e   f o r   t h e 
ac c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p /n pa a.   d u r i n g   t h e 
a s s e s s m e n t   o f   p r o j e c t   p r o p o s a l s ,   t h e 
c o m m i s s i o n   v e r i f i e d   w h e t h e r   p r o p o s a l s 
s u f f i c i e n t l y   m e t   a c c e s s i o n   p a r t n e r s h i p 
p r i o r i t i e s .   a c c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   p r i o r i-
ties are sometimes ver y broad and neces -
s i t a t e   a   c o m b i n a t i o n   o f   s e v e r a l   p r o j e c t s 
and  other me asu res.

u n d e r   t h e   i pa   i n s t r u m e n t ,   t h i s   s y s t e m 
w a s   f u r t h e r   d e ve l o p e d   a n d   i m p ro ve d   o n 
t h e   b a s i s   o f   p a s t   e x p e r i e n c e   w i t h   a   n e w 
p ro j e c t   a s s e s s m e n t   p ro ce d u re,   w h i c h   i n -
c l u d e s   f ro m   t h e   e a r l y   p ro j e c t   i d e a   s t a g e 
a systematic ver ification of the relevance 
o f   a   p r o j e c t   f o r   a c c e s s i o n   p a r t n e r s h i p 
pr ior itie s.

T h e   co m m i s s i o n’s   c h o i c e s   a re   g u i d e d   b y 
a n   a s s e s s m e nt   o f   p ro j e c t   s u i t a b i l i t y   w i t h 
r e f e r e n c e   t o   t h e   a c c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p, 
t h e   m i p d   a n d   av a i l a b l e   s e c t o r   s t r a  te g i e s 
and by the level of projec t maturit y, qual-
it y and  ow nership.

si n c e   t h e   t i m e   o f   t h e   a u d i t ,   f r o m   2 0 1 0 
p r o g r a m m i n g   ( l a u n c h e d   i n   J u l y   2 0 0 9 ) , 
s e c t o r   w o r k i n g   g r o u p s   a r e   e s t a b l i s h e d 
f ro m   t h e   b e g i n n i n g   o f   t h e   p ro g r a m m i n g 
process to under take sec tor needs assess-
m e n t s   a n d   t o   c o l l e c t / i d e n t i f y   t h e   m o s t 
appropr iate and highest pr ior it y projec ts 
in a given sec tor in line with sec tor strat-
e g i e s   ( a s   e x i s t i n g )   a n d   t h e   a c c e s s i o n 
p a r t n e r s h i p ,   t h e   n a t i o n a l   p l a n   f o r   t h e 
a d o p t i o n   o f   t h e   a cq u i s   (n pa a )   a n d   m i p d. 
projec t ideas are now identified over t wo 
years as  agains t one year in the   past.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

39

repLy of The 
commission

34.
s i n c e   t h e   t i m e   o f   t h e   a u d i t ,   a t   t h e   b e -
gi n n i n g   o f   2 0 0 9 ,   t h e   co m m i s s i o n   a gre e d 
w i t h   t h e  Tu r k i s h   a u t h o r i t i e s   o n   m e a s u re s 
t o   f u r t h e r   s t r e n g t h e n   t h e   p r o g r a m m i n g 
p r o c e s s   a n d   i t s   c o n s i s t e n t   a p p l i c a t i o n . 
i n   p a r t i c u l a r,   a g r e e m e n t   w a s   r e a c h e d   t o 
s i g n i f i c a n t l y   i n c r e a s e   t h e   t i m e   a v a i l a b l e 
f o r   t h e   i d e n t i f i c a t i o n   o f   p r o j e c t s   a n d   t o 
r e i n f o r c e   c o u n s e l l i n g   a n d   a d v i c e   f r o m 
t h e   e u s g  a n d   t h e   e c  t o   t h e   l i n e   m i n i s-
t r i e s   d u r i n g   t h e   i d e n t i f i c a t i o n   p h a s e   t o 
e n s u r e   t h a t   p r o j e c t s   i d e n t i f i e d   b e s t   r e -
s p o n d   t o   t h e   p r i o r i t i e s   o f   t h e   a c c e s s i o n 
p r o c e s s   a n d   t o   b e t t e r   a s s e s s   t h e   l i k e l y 
effec t iven ess  an d  ef fic ien c y   of  ide nt if ie d 
projec ts. The adoption of new le gi s lat ion 
fo r   t h e   e u s g  i n   J u l y   2 0 0 9   a n d   t h e   e n s u-
i n g   r e i n f o r c e m e n t   o f   i t s   s t a f f   w i l l   a l l o w 
m o re   h u m a n   re s o u rc e s   t o   b e   fo c u s e d   o n 
th is t ask .

38.
T h e   d i s   b o d i e s   w e r e   a s s e s s e d   a s   b e i n g 
a d e q u a t e l y   r e s o u r c e d   a t   t h e   a c c r e d i t a-
t i o n   s t a g e .   h o w e v e r,   s t a f f i n g   i n c r e a s e s 
l a g g e d   b e h i n d   f u n d i n g   i n c r e a s e s   d u r i n g 
t h e   i n s t r u m e n t ’s   s t a r t - u p   y e a r s   b e c a u s e 
o f   d e l a y s   i n   t h e   a d o p t i o n   o f   t h e   c f c u 
l a w.   T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   r e a c t e d   b y   s e t t i n g 
q u a n t i t a t i v e   t a r g e t s   f o r   a d e q u a t e   s t a f f-
i n g   l e v e l s   a s   a   c o n d i t i o n   f o r   a l l o c a t i n g 
fur ther funds to Tur key. The staffing level 
o f   t h e   c f c u   w a s   i n c r e a s e d   f r o m   a r o u n d 
2 0   i n   2 0 0 2   t o   m o r e   t h a n   1 0 0   i n   2 0 0 8   a s 
a   r e s u l t .   a c c o r d i n g   t o   t h e   n e w   l a w   o n 
th e  e usg  adopted  in  July   20 0 9,  th e  st af f-
i n g   l e ve l   o f   t h i s   i n s t i t u t i o n   w i l l   i n c re a s e 
f r o m   8 0   t o   3 0 0 ;   r e c r u i t m e n t   h a s   a l r e a d y 
st ar ted.

28.
o u t   o f   t h e   1 1   a u d i t e d   p r o j e c t s ,   t w o   d i d 
f u l l y   e s t a b l i s h   s p e c i f i c   p r o j e c t   r e q u i r e -
ment s  but  o ther s o nl y  p ar t ial l y.

a s   a   l e s s o n   l e a r n e d ,   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n 
m a d e   n e e d s   a n d   f e a s i b i l i t y   a s s e s s m e n t 
as well as necessar y design and technical 
s p e c i f i c a t i o n s   a   f o r m a l   r e q u i r e m e n t   f o r 
pre -acce ssio n assist ance since 2 0 04 /0 5 .

T h e   d e l i v e r y   o f   n e e d s   a s s e s s m e n t s ,   f e a-
s i b i l i t y   s t u d i e s   a n d   m a r k e t   s t u d i e s   a r e 
k e y   f a c t o r s   t o   s u p p o r t   t h e   m a t u r i t y   o f   a 
projec t.

29.
T h e   P h y t o s a n i t a r y  A c q u i s  p r o j e c t   a c h i-
eved all its objec tives except one, namely 
t h a t   t h e   l a b o r a t o r y   w o u l d   g a i n   a c c r e d i -
t a t i o n   w i t h i n   t h e   l i fe t i m e   o f   t h e   p ro j e c t . 
T h e   b i g g e r   l a b o r a t o r i e s   h a v e   b e e n   a c -
credited and made a substantial contribu-
t i o n   t o   t h e   i m p r o v e m e n t   o f   i m p o r t   c o n-
trols as they enabled a number of tests to 
b e   p e r f o r m e d   t h a t   c o u l d   n o t   b e   c a r r i e d 
o u t   p re v i o u s l y.  T h e   l a c k   o f   a c c re d i t a t i o n 
o f   t h e   s m a l l e r   l a b o r a to r i e s   h a s   n o t   j e o p -
a rd i s e d   t h e   o ve r a l l   b e n e f i t   d e r i ve d   f ro m 
th e pro jec t. 

30.
T h e   i pa   T u r k e y   p r o g r a m m i n g   p r o c e s s 
d o c u m e n t   s t a t e s   t h a t   p r o j e c t   f e a s i b i l-
i t y   i s   v e r i f i e d   a l r e a d y   a s   f a r   a s   p o s s i b l e 
at   t h e   p ro j e c t   i d e a   p h a s e   a n d   m o re   t h o r-
o u g h l y   a t   t h e   p ro j e c t   f i c h e  s t a g e,   i n c l u d-
i n g   a s s e s s m e n t   o f   f e a s i b i l i t y   s t u d i e s   a s 
requ ired.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

39.
an   ex te n s i o n   o f   t h e   co nt ra c t i n g   d e a d l i n e 
a t   p r o g r a m m e   l e v e l   w a s   o n l y   a g r e e d   f o r 
t h e   2 0 0 2   a n d   2 0 0 3   p r o g r a m m e s   t o   t a k e 
i n t o   a c c o u n t   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   d e l a y s   r e -
sulting from the delay in the accreditation 
o f   d i s  s t r u c t u re s.   fo r   t h e   2 0 0 4   a n d   2 0 0 5 
p r o g r a m m e s   a n d   s o m e   p r o j e c t s   i n   t h e 
2 0 0 6   p r o g r a m m e   o n l y   e x t e n s i o n s   o f   t h e 
implementation per iods were granted.

Textbox 2
Example s of  d elays c au se d  by i ns uffi-
cient dI S s taf f ing a nd  exp e rie n ce
i n   s p i t e   o f   t h e   d e l a y s   i n   t e n d e r i n g ,   t h e 
R o a d   Tr a n s p o r t  p r o j e c t   f r o m   t h e   2 0 0 4 
nat ion al pro gram me has  b een com plete d 
success ful ly an d ach ieved its o b j e c t ive s.

i n   s p i t e   o f   d e l a y s   t h e   P h y t o s a n i t a r y   A c-
q u i s  p ro j e c t   f ro m   t h e   2 0 0 2   na t i o n a l   pro -
g r a m m e   w a s   i m p l e m e n t e d   s u c c e s s f u l l y 
a n d   i s   m a k i n g   a   v a l u a b l e   co n t r i b u t i o n   i n 
relatio n to  imp o r t co nt rol s.

40.
a l t h o u g h   p ro j e c t   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   d e l ays 
h a v e   o c c u r r e d   u n d e r   t h e   Tpa,   t h e y   h a v e 
n o t   j e o p a r d i s e d   e i t h e r   t h e   i m p l e m e n t a-
tion of projec ts or their ultimate benefits 
an d exp ec ted  imp ac t.

40

repLy of The 
commission

41.
T h e   co m m i s s i o n   h a s   d r aw n   l e s s o n s   f ro m 
delays in ten der in g by specif yin g  as f rom 
2005 that a complete tender dossier must 
be submitted to the ec  delegation for ap -
p rov a l   by   n o t   l ate r   t h a n   s i x   m o n t h s   a f te r 
t h e   a d o p t i o n   o f   t h e   a n n u a l   n at i o n a l   p ro -
gram me.

f r o m   t h e   i n t r o d u c t i o n   o f   i pa  i n   2 0 0 7 , 
a l l   b e n e f i c i a r y   i n s t i t u t i o n s   h a v e   t o   s u b -
m i t   d r a f t   t e n d e r   d o c u m e n t s   t o   t h e   c f c u 
s h o r t l y   a f t e r   t h e   a d o p t i o n   o f   t h e   c o r -
r e s p o n d i n g   n a t i o n a l   p r o g r a m m e ,   t h u s 
e n s u r i n g   t h a t   t e n d e r   p r e p a r a t i o n s   s t a r t 
before the signature of a financing agree -
m e n t ,   u p o n   w h i c h   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   c a n 
commen ce.

42.
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   a c k n o w l e d g e s   t h a t   t h e 
s u p p l y   c o n t r a c t s   u n d e r   t h e   p r o j e c t s   a u-
d i t e d   b y   t h e   c o u r t   w e r e   d e l a y e d .   h o w -
e v e r,   t h e   e q u i p m e n t   w a s   p r o c u r e d   a n d 
c o n t r i b u t e d   t o   t h e   p r o j e c t   o b j e c t i v e s   a s 
p l a n n e d .   T h e   o n l y   e x c e p t i o n   i s   t h e   c u s-
to m s   p ro j e c t ,   fo r   w h i c h   t h e   p ro c u re m e nt 
process was  un succes sful for  t wo  lo ts.

T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   h a s   i n   t h e   m e a n t i m e 
t a k e n   m e a s u r e s   t o   i m p r o v e   t h e   q u a l i t y 
o f   p r o c u r e m e n t   p r e p a r a t i o n   i n   o r d e r   t o 
a v o i d   t h e   f a i l u r e   o f   t e n d e r   p r o c e d u r e s 
and ensure timely implementation: under 
ipa, mar ket studies are systematically be -
i n g   c a r r i e d   o u t   d u r i n g   t h e   p ro g r a m m i n g 
phase for any projec ts which include sup -
ply compon ents.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

41

repLy of The 
commission

51.
s ee reply  to para graph  29 .

54.
a   co m p re h e n s i ve   m o n i to r i n g   s ys te m   wa s 
e s t a b l i s h e d   w i t h   a   c l e a r   d i v i s i o n   o f   ro l e s 
b e t w e e n   t h e   d i s  a c t o r s .   T h e   c f c u  i s   r e -
sponsible for monitor ing implementation 
from a contrac tual and financial perspec-
tive. The beneficiar y monitors impl eme n -
tation  of  proj ec t  ac tivities  f rom   a   te c hn i-
c a l   p e r s p e c t i ve.  T h e   e u s g  i s   re s p o n s i b l e 
f o r   m o n i t o r i n g   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   a t   t h e 
l e ve l   o f   p ro j e c t   re s u l t s   a n d   at   s e c to r   a n d 
p r o g r a m m e   l e v e l .   T h e   o f f i c e   o f   t h e   na-
tion al  auth or ising   o fficer s  is  responsible 
for  monitor ing   th e  overall  fun c t io nin g  of 
d i s   i m p l e m e nt at i o n ,   i n c l u d i n g   o p e rat i o n 
of the monitor ing system. The ec  d elega-
tion super vises the func tioning of the dis 
t h ro u g h   m o n i to r i n g   a t   c o n t r a c t ,   p ro j e c t , 
sec tor a nd programm e level.

fu r t h e r m o re,   s i n ce   t h e   t i m e   o f   t h e   a u d i t, 
in  J anuar y  2 00 9  Jm c agree d on t he  i nt ro -
d u c t i o n   o f   a   re s u l t s - o r i e n te d   m o n i to r i n g 
s y s t e m   t o   a d d   a n   i n d e p e n d e n t   e x t e r n a l 
mon itor in g pers pec tive  for the  ipa.

55.
Th e   e u s g   co - c h a i r s   t h e   J o i n t   m o n i to r i n g 
c o m m i t t e e   a n d   t h e   s e c t o r   m o n i t o r i n g 
sub - committee, which review programme 
a n d   p r o j e c t   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   a t   s e c t o r 
l e v e l .   T h e s e   m e e t i n g s   h a v e   b e e n   o r g a n-
i s e d   r e g u l a r l y   a n d   h a v e   a l l o w e d   c o r r e c -
t i ve   a c t i o n   t o   b e   t a k e n   w h e re   n e e d e d   t o 
e n s u r e   t h e   a c h i e v e m e n t   o f   r e s u l t s   a n d 
objec t ive s.

44.
The introduc tion of interim deadlines has 
p r o v e n   a   u s e f u l   t o o l   t o   a c c e l e r a t e   p r o -
c u re m e n t   a n d   c o n t r a c t i n g   a n d   by   a gre e -
m e n t   b e t we e n   t h e   e c  a n d  Tu r k e y   w i l l   b e 
m a i n t a i n e d   f o r   f u t u r e   y e a r s .   B a s e d   o n 
l e s s o n s   l e a r n t ,   t h i s   s y s t e m   h a s   b e e n   e x -
p a n d e d ,   c o m p r i s i n g   a s   o f   t h e   p r o g r a m-
m i n g   y e a r   2 0 0 5   n o t   o n l y   d e a d l i n e s   f o r 
t h e   s u b m i s s i o n   o f   t e n d e r   d o c u m e n t s   t o 
th e ec  d el eg atio n for ex ante co nt rol and 
t h e   l a u n c h i n g   o f   p r o c e d u r e s ,   b u t   a l s o 
d e a d l i n e s   f o r   t h e   s u b m i s s i o n   o f   e v a l u a -
tion rep or ts  an d contrac ts.

47.
i n   r e s p o n s e   t o   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n’s   c o n d i-
t i o n s   f o r   a c c r e d i t a t i o n   o f   t h e   d i s   u n d e r 
i pa ,   t h e   c f c u   h a s   f u r t h e r   r e i n f o r c e d   i t s 
s ys t e m   fo r   a s s e s s i n g   t h e   c a p a c i t y   o f   l i n e 
m i n i s t r i e s   t o   i m p l e m e n t   p r o j e c t s   b y   d e -
f i n i n g   p r o c e s s e s   c l e a r l y ,   r e i n f o r c i n g 
g u i d a n c e   a n d   t r a i n i n g   t o   m i n i s t r i e s   a n d 
e n s u r i n g   s u p e r v i s i o n   o f   i t s   e f fe c t i ve   a p -
p l i c a t i o n   t h r o u g h   t h e   na t i o n a l   a u t h o r -
i s i n g   o f f i c e   ( n ao ) .   T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   w i l l 
audit co mpl ian ce w ith acc red it ati on  con-
dit ion s  in  d et ail  du r ing  a  fol l ow-up  audit 
i n   e a r l y   2 0 1 0 .   T h e   c o m m i s s i o n’s   c u r r e n t 
a s s e s s m e n t   i s   t h a t   t h e   c f c u  m e e t s   t h e 
conditio ns for th e ipa d is accred itati on.

49.
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   h a s   r e m e d i e d   w e a k -
n e s s e s   e x i s t i n g   f o r   p a s t   T pa   p r o j e c t s   i n 
s e t t i n g   i n d i c a t o r s   a n d   b a s e l i n e s .   s m a r T 
p r o j e c t   o b j e c t i v e s   a n d   e x p e c t e d   r e s u l t s 
a n d   r a c e r   i n d i c a t o r s   f o r   m o n i t o r i n g 
p r o j e c t   p e r f o r m a n c e   a r e   n o w   a   r e q u i r e -
ment.  co mp l iance  wit h  t his  is   ver ified  by 
the c om miss io n and  the eusg.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

42

repLy of The 
commission

57.
a system had been set up to provide regu- 
l a r   m o n i t o r i n g   o f   p r o j e c t   i m p l e m e n t a -
tion   an d  ac h ieve me nt   of   mileston es. Th is 
i n c l u d e d   s i x - m o n t h l y   r e p o r t s   t h a t   w e r e 
submitted by all beneficiaries to the eusg 
i n   p re p a rat i o n   fo r   t h e   b i - a n n u a l   s e c to ra l 
m onitor ing sub - committee ( smsc ) meet-
in gs. The se repor ts were not always  com-
pleted as inten ded.

s i n ce   t h e   t i m e   o f   t h e   a u d i t ,   t h e   co m m i s -
s i o n   a g r e e d   o n   a   s e r i e s   o f   m e a s u r e s   t o 
st reng th en th e monitor ing syste m.  Th e se 
i n c l u d e   t h e   m e r g e r   o f   t h e   t w o   e x i s t i n g 
m o n i t o r i n g   r e p o r t s   i n t o   a   s i n g l e   r e p o r t -
i n g   f o r m a t   t o   b e   s u b m i t t e d   t o   b o t h   t h e 
e u s g  a n d   c f c u  o n   a   q u a r t e r l y   b a s i s , 
a n d   a   r e i n fo r c e d   q u a l i t y   c h e c k   o n   t h e s e 
r e p o r t s   t h r o u g h   t h e   n e w l y   e s t a b l i s h e d 
e u s g   m o n i t o r i n g   u n i t .   T h e   n e w   s y s t e m 
was applied by the eusg for the first time 
f o r   s e c t o r a l   m o n i t o r i n g   su b - c o m m i t t e e 
meet ing s in th e second  h alf  o f  20 09 .

i n   a d d i t i o n ,   t h e   Jm c  o f   J a n u a r y   2 0 0 9 
a g r e e d   o n   t h e   i n t r o d u c t i o n   o f   a   r e s u l t s - 
oriented monitoring ( rom) system, which 
w i l l   p r o v i d e   a n   a d d i t i o n a l   e x t e r n a l   p e r -
s p e c t i v e   o n   p r o j e c t   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   e x-
p e c t e d   a s   o f   2 0 1 0 .   T h e   r o m   r e p o r t s   w i l l 
b e   p r o d u c e d   f a s t e r   a n d   m o r e   f re q u e n t l y 
t h a n   t h e   p r e v i o u s   i n t e r i m   e v a l u a t i o n 
repor t s.

a s   w e l l   a s   t h e   m o n i t o r i n g   t h r o u g h   t h e 
d i s ,   j o i n t   m o n i t o r i n g   s t r u c t u r e s   ( J m c 
a n d   s m s c )   a n d   t h e   e x t e r n a l   r o m  s y s t e m 
i n   p l a c e,   t h e   e c   d e l e g a t i o n   c o n t i n u e s   t o 
c a r r y   o u t   i t s   o w n   m o n i t o r i n g   o f   p r o j e c t 
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   t h r o u g h   p r o j e c t   v i s i t s , 
an alysis of repor ts,  and inte r n al mon itor-
i n g   re p o r t s   ( s o   c a l l e d  ‘m o n i to r i n g   m a p s’ ) 
est ablished at  regular inter vals.

T h e   b e n e f i c i a r y   o r g a n i s e s   p r o j e c t   m a n-
a g e m e n t   m e e t i n g s   o n   a   m o n t h l y   o r   b i -
m o n t h l y   b a s i s   i n   w h i c h   t h e   c f c u,   t h e   e c 
d e l e g a t i o n   a n d   t h e   c o n t r a c t o r   p a r t i c i-
p a t e .   T h e   e u s g  h a s   s o   f a r   n o t   a t t e n d e d 
t h e s e   m e e t i n g s .   fo l l o w i n g   t h e   a d o p t i o n 
o f   t h e   n e w   l a w   o n   t h e   e u s g,   t h e   e s t a b -
l i s h m e n t   o f   a   s e p a r a t e   m o n i t o r i n g   u n i t 
a n d   t h e   r e i n f o r c e m e n t   o f   t h e   r e l a t e d 
s t a f f,   t h e   e u s g  i s   i nte n d i n g   to   at te n d   i n-
d i v i d u a l   p r o j e c t   m a n a g e m e n t   m e e t i n g s 
of par ticular relevance from a sec tor/pro -
gramm e p erspe c t ive as o f 2010.

m i n u te s   o f   Jm c  a n d   s m s c  m e e t i n g s   h ave 
been e st ab lished o n a reg ul ar  b as is.  m in-
u t e s   o f   i n d i v i d u a l   p r o j e c t   m a n a g e m e n t 
meetin gs  were  not draf ted u nder  t h e Tpa 
o n   a   re g u l a r   b a s i s.   un d e r   t h e   i pa,   a   w r i t -
ten  reco rd of  s uc h m eetings  is  e n sure d.

56.
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   a g r e e s   t h a t   m o n i t o r -
i n g   r e p o r t s   f r o m   t h e   b e n e f i c i a r i e s   w e r e 
o f   v a r i a b l e   q u a l i t y   u n d e r   t h e   T pa .   r i s k s 
r e s u l t i n g   f r o m   s h o r t c o m i n g s   o f   i n d i v i d-
u a l   m o n i t o r i n g   r e p o r t s   w e r e   m i t i g a t e d 
t h r o u g h   t h e   m o n i t o r i n g   c a r r i e d   o u t   b y 
t h e   e c  d e l e g a t i o n ,   t h e   e x i s t e n c e   o f   c o n-
t r a c t o r s’  p ro g re s s   re p o r t s   a n d   t h e   e x t e r-
n a l   p e r s p e c t i v e   p r o v i d e d   b y   t h e   i n t e r i m 
evaluat io n rep o r ts.

T h e   f a c t   t h a t   s i x - m o n t h l y   m o n i t o r i n g 
re p o r t s   d i d   n o t   i n   a l l   c a s e s   re ve a l   we a k-
n e s s e s   a n d   d e l a y s   h a s   n o t   m e a n t   t h a t 
th ese were not  ident if ied  and  re m edi e d.

s i n ce   t h e   t i m e   o f   t h e   a u d i t ,   t h e   co m m i s -
s i o n   h a s   a g re e d   a   re v i s i o n   o f   t h e   fo r m a t 
a n d   f re q u e n c y   o f   a n d   t h e   q u a l i t y   co nt ro l 
procedures for beneficiar y monitoring re -
p o r t s   w i t h   t h e   d i s   a u t h o r i t i e s   to   a d d re s s 
the  identified weak n esses.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

43

repLy of The 
commission

62.
s i n c e   2 0 0 3 ,   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n   h a s   h a d 
i n   p l a c e   a n   i n t e r i m   e v a l u a t i o n   s c h e m e 
whic h  c ar r ie d out regular se c tor  an d th e -
matic evaluations of assistance to Tur key. 
as  th is  is   done  dur ing   proj ec t   impl em e n-
t a t i o n   r a t h e r   t h a n   a f t e r w a r d s ,   i t   c a n n o t 
b e   c o n s i d e r e d   a s   e x   p o s t.   n e v e r t h e l e s s , 
t h e   m a i n   a i m s   we re   t o   a s s e s s   t h e   c o n t r i-
bution  of pre -accession  as sistan ce  to t he 
ove r a l l   a cce s s i o n   p ro ce s s   a n d   to   p rov i d e 
l e s s o n s   l e a r n e d   a n d   r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s 
f o r   i m p r o v i n g   t h e   r e l e v a n c e ,   e f f i c i e n c y, 
e f f e c t i v e n e s s ,   i m p a c t   a n d   s u s t a i n a b i l i t y 
of ass istan ce.

s i n ce   t h e   t i m e   o f   t h e   a u d i t ,   t h e   co m m i s -
sion  h as replaced th is with a ne w inter i m 
eva luat ion   tool,  wh ich   aims  to  asse s s   t he 
c o n t r i b u t i o n   o f   p re - a c c e s s i o n   a s s i s t a n c e 
i n   Tu r k e y   t o   t h e   o v e r a l l   a c c e s s i o n   p r o -
c e s s ,   a n d   m o r e   s p e c i f i c a l l y   t o   t h e   s t r a-
t e g i c   o b j e c t i v e s   o f   t h e   m i p d,   a s   w e l l   a s 
p rov i d i n g   re c o m m e n d a t i o n s   a n d   l e s s o n s 
lear n ed.

The commission will under take an ex post 
e v a l u a t i o n   o f   t h e   w h o l e   Tpa  i n s t r u m e n t 
( 2 0 0 2 – 0 6 )   o n c e   a l l   p r o j e c t s   h a v e   b e e n 
completed.

sy s t e m a t i c  ‘p ro j e c t - l e ve l ’  e x   p o s t  e v a l u a-
t i o n   i s   n e i t h e r   c o s t - e f f i c i e n t   ( t o o   e x p e n-
s i v e )   n o r   m e a n i n g f u l ,   p a r t i c u l a r l y   w h e n 
e v a l u a t i n g   i m p a c t   a n d   s u s t a i n a b i l i t y 
w h i c h   o f t e n   c a n n o t   b e   i s o l a t e d   fo r   e a c h 
i n d i v i d u a l   p r o j e c t   b u t   n e e d   t o   a s s e s s e d 
in  a wider contex t  that takes into cons id-
e r a t i o n   a l l   r e l a t e d   a s s i s t a n c e   a s   w e l l   a s 
p o l i c y   m e a s u re s   a n d   re fo r m s.   sys te m at i c 
e x   p o s t   e v a l u a t i o n s   a r e   t h e r e f o r e   b a s e d 
o n   a   l e v e l   h i g h e r   t h a n   t h e   p r o j e c t   l e v e l , 
i.e. sec tors, themes, financial instrument, 
programm es, etc.

59.
s ee re p ly  to  p ara graph 57.

60.
The monitoring repor t format established 
i n   s u m m e r   2 0 0 9   —   s i n c e   t h e   t i m e   o f   t h e 
a u d i t   —   i n c l u d e s   i n d i c a t o r s   ( t h e   c u r re n t 
s t a t u s   o f   t h e   p r o j e c t   a g a i n s t   i n d i c a t o r s 
for projec t results), main ac tivities during 
t h e   r e p o r t i n g   p e r i o d ,   c u r r e n t   p r o b l e m s 
an d  r is ks,  ant ic ip ated  p ro b l ems  an d  r is ks 
a n d   p l a n n e d   a c t i v i t i e s.  Th i s   i n fo r m at i o n /
d a t a   i s   p r o v i d e d   f o r   e a c h   c o m p o n e n t   o f 
the  proje c t.

61.
un d e r   t h e  Tpa,   f i n a l   p ro j e c t   re p o r t s   f ro m 
c o n t r a c t o r s ,   t h e   l a s t   m o n i t o r i n g   r e p o r t s 
f r o m   b e n e f i c i a r i e s ,   a n d   i n t e r i m   e v a l u a-
t i o n   r e p o r t s ,   e a c h   p r o v i d e d   s o m e   i n f o r -
m a t i o n   r e g a r d i n g   r e s u l t s   a n d   l i k e l y   i m-
pac t s o f p roj ec ts.

since t he audit, wit h t he imp l eme nt at ion 
o f   i pa  p ro j e c t s,   t h e   co m m i s s i o n   s y s t e m-
a t i c a l l y   a s s e s s e s   t h e   a c h i e ve m e n t   o f   o b -
j e c t i v e s   a n d   p r o j e c t   s u s t a i n a b i l i t y   i n   i t s 
f i n a l   r e v i e w   o f   p r o j e c t   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n 
( m o n i t o r i n g   m a p ) .   a s   o f   2 0 0 9 ,   b e n e f i c i-
a r i e s   a re   re q u i re d   t o   p ro v i d e   a   q u a r t e r l y 
monitoring repor t. fur thermore, more fre -
q u e nt   ex te r n a l   re p o r t i n g   w i l l   b e   e n s u re d 
t h r o u g h   a   r e s u l t s - o r i e n t e d   m o n i t o r i n g 
s y s t e m ,   t o   b e c o m e   o p e r a t i o n a l   i n   2 0 1 0 . 
T h e s e   a d d i t i o n a l   re p o r t s   w i l l   p r o v i d e   a n 
improved basis to judge the achievement 
o f   re s u l t s   a n d   p ro j e c t   i m p a c t   a t   t h e   e n d 
of t he p ro jec t.

(s ee rep l y to  pa ra graph  57 .)

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

cONcLUSIONS   
ANd REcOMMENdATIONS

64.
The commission has taken or is under tak-
i n g   m e a s u r e s   t o   i m p r o v e   p r o j e c t / m o n i-
tor ing  data,  est abl is h a m ore ro b ust  st ra-
tegic framewor k and improve the process 
of pr ior it is at io n /s elec tion of p ro j ec t s.

65.
p r e - a c c e s s i o n   a s s i s t a n c e   t o   Tu r k e y   h a s 
since  2 003  b ee n  gu ided  by  the  access ion 
par tne rship.

With the introduc tion of the ipa, the veri-
f i c a t i o n   o f   c o m p l i a n c e   w i t h   a c c e s s i o n 
par tnership priorities has been enhanced. 
a  s y s t e m a t i c   v e r i f i c a t i o n   o f   a c c e s s i o n 
par tnership (and mipd) compliance is car-
r ied  ou t fro m t he p ro jec t  id eas  s tag e.

fr o m   J u l y   2 0 0 9 ,   s e c t o r   w o r k i n g   g r o u p s 
a r e   c o n t r i b u t i n g   t o   a   s y s t e m a t i c   a s s e s s-
m e n t   o f   s e c t o r   n e e d s   a n d   p r i o r i t i s a t i o n 
of projec t  id eas over t wo  years.

Th i s   e n s u re s   f u l l   co m p l i a n c e   w i t h   ac ce s-
sion par tnership pr ior ities and mipd stra-
tegic o b jec t ive s.

44

repLy of The 
commission

66.
The commission has established an inter-
ve n t i o n   l o gi c   fo r   i pa  f i n a n c i a l   a s s i s t a n ce 
t o   Tu r k e y   i n c l u d i n g,   f r o m   t o p   d o w n ,   t h e 
a s s o c i a t i o n   a g r e e m e n t ,   c u s t o m s   u n i o n 
agreement, negotiation mandate, annual 
p r o g re s s   re p o r t s   a n d   e n l a r g e m e n t   s t r a t -
eg y,  access ion   par t ne rsh ip,  m ip d,  ann ual 
programm es.

T h e   a c c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   d o e s   n o t   e s -
t a b l i s h   a   h i e r a r c hy   o f   p r e - a c c e s s i o n   p r i-
o r i t i e s.   o n l y   t h e   m i p d   s e t s   p r i o r i t i e s   fo r 
ipa  fun ding  based  on  the   accession   par t-
n ersh ip.

W h i l e   t h e   i n t e r v e n t i o n   l o g i c   i s   c o n -
s i d e r e d   s o u n d ,   w e a k n e s s e s   h a v e   b e e n 
i d e n t i f i e d   i n   t h e   s e t t i n g   o f   s t r a t e g i c   o b -
j e c t i v e s ,   w h i c h   a r e   c u r r e n t l y   b e i n g   r e m -
e d i e d .   s e t t i n g   s t r a t e g i c   o b j e c t i v e s   f o r 
f i n a n c i a l   a s s i s t a n c e   i s   d o n e   f o r   Tu r k e y 
against a background of uncer taint y over 
t h e   s p e e d   o f   p o l i t i c a l   re fo r m s   a n d   a cce s-
sion  neg otiation s.

67.
The commission has taken or is under tak-
i n g   m e a s u r e s   t o   i m p r o v e   p r o j e c t / m o n i -
t o r i n g   d a t a   f u r t h e r   a n d   t o   i m p r o v e   t h e 
meas urabilit y of strategic  obj ec t ives.

i n t e r i m   e v a l u a t i o n s   h a v e   b e e n   c a r r i e d 
o u t   s u c c e s s f u l l y   s i n c e   2 0 0 3   o n   t h e   b a s i s 
of exis ting  proj ec t and mon itor i n g  dat a.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

68.
Work has been launched since the time of 
the  au dit   in  s ummer  2009  to  improve   t he 
m e a s u ra b i l i t y   o f   s t rate gi c   o b j e c t i ve s   a n d 
improve  re sult s indic ato rs.

Recom m en datio n on  st rategic   
objec tive s
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   h a s   e s t a b l i s h e d   a n   i n -
t e r v e n t i o n   l o g i c   f o r   f i n a n c i a l   a s s i s t a n c e 
b a s e d   o n   a n   a c c e s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p   a n d 
m i p d ,   w h i c h   i t   c o n s i d e r s   a n   a d e q u a t e 
f r a m e w o r k .   T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   r e c o g n i s e s 
t h a t   s t r a t e g i c   o b j e c t i v e s   a n d   i n d i c a t o r s 
c a n   b e   f u r t h e r   i m p ro ve d ;   wo r k   o n   t h i s   i s 
under way.

Th e   co m m i s s i o n   i s   c o m m i t t e d   t o   f u r t h e r 
i m p r o v i n g   t h e   i n t e r v e n t i o n   l o g i c   a n d 
strategic framewor k for p re -acce s si on in-
stitu tio n-b uildin g  as sistan ce  to  Tur ke y.   a 
fo l l o w - u p   t o   t h e   e v a l u a t i o n   o f   t h e   i n t e r -
v e n t i o n   l o g i c   f o r   p r e - a c c e s s i o n   f u n d i n g 
in Tu r key is  sched uled.

s e c t o r   wo r k i n g   g ro u p s,   t r a i n i n g   fo r   ( p o -
t e n t i a l )   b e n e f i c i a r i e s   a n d   a   r o b u s t   j o i n t 
T u r k e y – c o m m i s s i o n   p r o j e c t   a p p r a i s a l 
a n d   s e l e c t i o n   p r o c e s s   e n s u r e   t h e   e f f e c -
tiveness of ipa  component i assistance to 
Tur key.

45

repLy of The 
commission

Recommend atio n  on ac t ivit y   
st atements
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   i s   l o o k i n g   f o r   w a y s   t o 
i m p r o v e   t h e   i n f o r m a t i o n   i t   p r o v i d e s 
w i t h i n   t h i s   c o n t e x t .   a  w o r k i n g   g r o u p 
h a s   b e e n   s e t   u p   w i t h i n   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n 
t o   f i n d   w a y s   o f   i m p r o v i n g   a l l   t h e   a c t i v -
it y statements, including those related to 
en largement polic y.

Recommendatio n o n p ro jec t  p ro p os als
s t r a t e g i c   o b j e c t i v e s   f o r   e u  f u n d i n g   a r e 
l i n k e d   t o   t h e   e u ’s   p o l i t i c a l   a c c e s s i o n 
p r o c e s s   w i t h   Tu r k e y.   T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   i s 
a n d   w i l l   c o n t i n u e   s t r o n g l y   e n c o u r a g i n g 
Tu r k e y   a t   b o t h   p o l i t i c a l   a n d   t e c h n i c a l 
l e v e l s   t o   m a k e   p r o g r e s s   i n   m e e t i n g   p r e -
a cce s s i o n   o b j e c t i ve s   a n d   acce s s i o n   pa r t-
nership pr ior ities. This includes the prep -
a r a t i o n   o f   p r o j e c t s   t h a t   c a n   h e l p   m e e t 
th ese  obj ec tives and  pr ior it ies.

u n d e r   i pa   p r o g r a m m i n g   f o r   i n s t i t u t i o n 
b u i l d i n g ,   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n   d e p a r t m e n t s 
h ave   e s t a b l i s h e d   p ro c e d u re s   fo r   e n c o u r -
a g i n g   a n d   f a c i l i t a t i n g   t h e   d e v e l o p m e n t 
o f   p ro j e c t   p ro p o s a l s   t h at   b e s t   m e e t   s t ra-
tegic pre -accession objec tives in a realis-
tic  t imeframe.  This  in cludes  the   st rategic 
f ra m e wo r k   (acce s s i o n   pa r t n e r s h i p,   m i p d, 
sec tor work ing groups and/or strategies), 
p r o j e c t   i d e n t i f i c a t i o n   ( i pa   p r o g r a m m i n g 
process document, sector work ing groups, 
re q u i re m e n t   fo r   n e e d s   a s s e s s m e n t / fe a s i-
b i l i t y   s t u d i e s )   a n d   p ro j e c t   s e l e c t i o n   ( a s-
s e s s m e n t   o f   c o m p l i a n c e   w i t h   s t r a t e g i c 
f r a m e wo r k ,   a s s e s s m e n t   o f   p ro j e c t   m a t u-
r it y, qualit y an d sustain abilit y) .

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

46

repLy of The 
commission

Recommend atio ns  on  projec t   
p er fo rmance
under ipa, it is a requirement for projec ts 
t o   h a v e   s m a r T   o b j e c t i v e s   a n d   r a c e r 
i n d i c a t o r s   a n d   t h i s   i s   b e i n g   s y s t e m a t i c -
a l l y   v e r i f i e d   b y   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n   a n d   t h e 
e usg.

co n c re te   m e a s u re s   to   i m p rove   t h e   m o n i-
toring system have been taken in 2008/09, 
including a new/improved monitor ing re -
por t for mat, rein forced qualit y  ch eck s on 
t h e s e   r e p o r t s   b y   t h e   e u s g ’s   m o n i t o r i n g 
u n i t ,   a   n e w   s c h e d u l e   fo r   s m s c  m e e t i n g s 
a n d   i n t r o d u c t i o n   o f   a   r e s u l t s - o r i e n t e d 
m o n i t o r i n g   s y s t e m .   i n   a d d i t i o n ,   t h e   e c 
delegation continues to carr y out its own 
mon itor in g of projec t implement ati on .

pr o j e c t   r e p o r t s ,   i n c l u d i n g   a   f i n a l   r e p o r t 
at  t he en d of th e cont rac t, are  bei n g pro -
duced by contrac tors for their par t of the 
p ro j e c t .   m o n i t o r i n g   re p o r t s   i n c l u d i n g   f i-
n a l   m o n i to r i n g   re p o r t s   a f te r   t h e   co m p l e -
t i o n   o f   t h e   p r o j e c t   w i l l   b e   p r e p a r e d   b y 
t h e   p r o j e c t   b e n e f i c i a r y   u n d e r   t h e   n e w 
monitoring repor t format. The ec delega-
t i o n   a l s o   u n d e r t a k e s   p ro j e c t   m o n i t o r i n g 
at  different inter vals.

sy s t e m a t i c  ‘p ro j e c t - l e ve l ’  e x   p o s t  e v a l u a-
t i o n   i s   n o t   co m m i s s i o n   p o l i c y   b e c a u s e   i t 
is n ot cost- effic ient.

69.
T h e   d i s   b o d i e s   w e r e   a s s e s s e d   a s   b e i n g 
a d e q u a t e l y   r e s o u r c e d   a t   t h e   a c c r e d i t a-
t i o n   s t a g e .   h o w e v e r,   s t a f f i n g   i n c r e a s e s 
l a g g e d   b e h i n d   t h e   f u n d i n g   i n c r e a s e s   i n 
the instrument ’s star t-up years. The com-
m i s s i o n   r e a c t e d   b y   s e t t i n g   q u a n t i t a t i v e 
t a r g e t s   fo r   a d e q u a t e   s t a f f i n g   l e v e l s   a s   a 
c o n d i t i o n   fo r   a l l o c a t i n g   f u r t h e r   f u n d s   t o 
Tu r k e y.   r e ce nt   e u s g   l e gi s l at i o n   w i l l   l e a d 
t o   a n   i n c r e a s e   i n   s t a f f   l e v e l s   f r o m   8 0   t o 
300 in  to tal.

Recomm e ndatio n on p roje c t de sig n
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   c o n s i d e r s   t h a t   t h e   s e t -
t i n g   o f   s t r i c t   c o n d i t i o n s   fo r   t h e   a c c r e d i-
tation of the Tur k ish implementation sys-
tem and the rigorous monitoring of these 
co n d i t i o n s   ( w i t h   t h e   t h re a t   o f   s a n c t i o n s ) 
w i l l   e n s u r e   e f f i c i e n t   i m p l e m e n t a t i o n   o f 
pre -acce ssio n assist ance.

T h e   r e q u i r e m e n t   fo r   n e e d s   a s s e s s m e n t s, 
f e a s i b i l i t y   s t u d i e s   a n d   o t h e r   p r e p a r a-
tor y  st u die s will  co nt inu e to  b e  im pos ed. 
Tr a i n i n g   w i l l   c o n t i n u e   t o   b e   p ro v i d e d   t o 
p o te n t i a l   b e n e f i c i a r i e s   o n   p ro j e c t   d e ve l-
opment and  imp lementation.

B e t t e r   s c h e d u l i n g   o f   c o n t r a c t i n g   i s 
a c h i e v e d   b y   p r e p a r a t o r y   p r o j e c t   d e s i g n 
requirements, training but also enhanced 
s c r u t i n y   i n   t h i s   r e g a r d   b y   t h e   c f c u   a n d 
ver ific atio n by the c o mmis sio n.

71.
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   a g r e e s   t h a t   i n d i c a t o r s 
a n d   b a s e l i n e s   o f   p a s t   p r o j e c t s   a r e   o p e n 
to improvement.

s m a r T   p r o j e c t   o b j e c t i v e s   a n d   e x p e c t e d 
r e s u l t s   a n d   r a c e r  i n d i c a t o r s   f o r   m o n i-
tor ing  p ro jec t   p er fo r mance   are  n ow  a  re -
quirement.  co mp l iance w it h t his is be in g 
s t r i c t l y   v e r i f i e d   b y   t h e   c o m m i s s i o n   a n d 
th e eusg.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

47

repLy of The 
commission

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n   o n   p r o g r a m m e  
evaluat ion
T h e   c o m m i s s i o n   c o n c l u d e d   a n   e v a l u a -
t i o n   c o n t r a c t   i n   a u g u s t   2 0 0 9   w h i c h   w i l l 
a s s e s s   t h e   c o n t r i b u t i o n   o f   p re - a c c e s s i o n 
a s s i s t a n ce   i n  Tu r k e y   to   t h e   ove ra l l   a cce s-
sion  pro ce ss  an d  mo re  sp e cifica lly   to  th e 
strategic objec tives of the mipd. This will 
c o v e r   a s s i s t a n c e   t o   Tu r k e y   f r o m   2 0 0 5   t o 
2008.

a s   f o r   p r e v i o u s   f i n a n c i a l   i n s t r u m e n t s   i n 
o t h e r   co u nt r i e s,   t h e   co m m i s s i o n   w i l l   u n-
d e r t a k e   a n   e x   p o s t  e v a l u a t i o n   o f   t h e  T pa 
( 2 0 0 2 – 0 6 )   o n c e   p ro j e c t s   h ave   b e e n   c o m-
pleted.

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

special r eport no 16/2009 — The e uropean commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

european court of auditors

Special Report No 16/2009

The European commission's management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

Luxembourg: publications office of the european union

2009 — 47 pp. — 21 × 29.7 cm

isBn 978-92-9207-569-9

doi:10.2865/61544

how to obtain EU publications

Publications for sale:

•	

•	

•	

via	EU	Bookshop	(http://bookshop.europa.eu);

from	your	bookseller	by	quoting	the	title,	publisher	and/or	ISBN	number;

	by	contacting	one	of	our	sales	agents	directly.	You	can	obtain	their	contact	details	on	the	Internet	
(http://bookshop.europa.eu) or by sending a fax to +352 2929-42758.

Free publications:

•	

•	

via	EU	Bookshop	(http://bookshop.europa.eu);

	at	the	European	Commission’s	representations	or	delegations.	You	can	obtain	their	contact	details	
on the internet (http://ec.europa.eu) or by sending a fax to +352 2929-42758.

Q
J
-
a
B
-
0
9
-
0
1
6
-
e
n

-
c

in This reporT The courT anaLyses The commission’s managemenT of pre-

accession financiaL assisTance To Turkey. parTicuLarLy The firsT pre-accession 

assisTance period (2002–06) suffered from many Weaknesses common To pre-

accession programmes. The commission had noT seT sufficienTLy specific 

oBJecTiVes for iTs funding To aLLoW assessmenT of The proJecT ouTcomes 

and did noT haVe sufficienT informaTion To demonsTraTe The effecTiVeness 

of iTs pre-accession assisTance. hoWeVer, The proJecTs VisiTed did deLiVer 

Their inTended ouTpuTs and The resuLTs of The proJecTs are LikeLy To Be 

susTainaBLe.

WhiLe The commission has aLready made some significanT improVemenTs, The 

courT makes seVeraL recommendaTions for furTher correcTiVe measures. The 

mosT criTicaL areas for improVemenT are The seTTing of sTraTegic oBJecTiVes 

for The financiaL assisTance, The deVeLopmenT of more reaLisTic TimescaLes 

for The oBJecTiVes and The moniToring of acTuaL proJecT performance and 

resuLTs Based on cLear oBJecTiVes and appropriaTe indicaTors.

european courT of audiTors