REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 2009 ANNUAL REPORT ON PHARE, TURKEY PRE-ACCESSION INSTRUMENTS, CARDS AND THE TRANSITION FACILITY
Date: 2010-12-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU aid, EU programme, Türkiye, accession to the European Union, enlargement of the Union, pre-accession strategy

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION  

Brussels, 20.12.2010 
COM(2010) 793 final 

SEC(2010) 1604 final 

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

2009 ANNUAL REPORT ON PHARE, TURKEY PRE-ACCESSION INSTRUMENTS, 
CARDS AND THE TRANSITION FACILITY 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Since  1  January  2007,  EU  pre-accession  assistance  to  candidate  countries1  and  potential 
candidates2  is  channelled  through  the  Instrument  for  Pre-accession  Assistance  (IPA)3.  IPA 
replaces five former pre–accession instruments, including PHARE4, the Turkish pre-accession 
instrument5 and the financial instrument for the Western Balkans, i.e. CARDS6.  

This report and the associated background document cover the continuing implementation of 
2006  and  earlier  programmes  under  PHARE,  the  Turkish  pre-accession  instrument  and 
CARDS, as well as under the Transition Facility7 during the year 2009, with a cut-off date of 
31 December 20098.  

No new programmes were launched under those instruments since 2006, which was the final 
programming year. 

2. 

PROGRAMMES IMPLEMENTATION: GENERAL OVERVIEW  

2.1. 

PHARE, Turkey pre-accession instrument and CARDS 

During  2009,  management  performance  of  CARDS  programmes  in  the  beneficiaries  was, 
overall,  satisfactory.  By  the  end  of  the  reporting  period,  the  2001-2006  programmes  (2001-
2004  for  Croatia)  were  almost  fully  contracted  across  the  board  (ranging  from  97%  of 
allocated funds for Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina to 99% for Kosovo9). Disbursements 
were  also  generally  approaching  completion,  reaching  more  than  90%  of  2001-2006 
allocations in all CARDS beneficiaries, with the only exception of Albania (72%).  

At, respectively, 85% and 73% of allocated funds, the overall contracting and payment rates 
reached by the end of the contracting period in 2009 for the 2002-2006 programmes under the 
Turkey pre-accession instrument pointed to less than satisfactory performance by the relevant 
management  authorities  in  Turkey.  The  situation  is  set  to  improve  in  the  future  following 
changes  at  management  levels,  new  recruitments  and  resumption  of  monitoring  activity. 
Organisational  and procedural improvements introduced in the relevant managing structures 
as part of enhanced supervision of decentralised implementation under IPA should also have a 
positive  impact  on  the  management  of  assistance  under  the  Turkey  pre-accession 
instrument10. 

During 2009 Bulgaria and Romania continued implementation of PHARE 2006 national and 
Cross-Border Cooperation programmes. Most of the activities under the projects implemented 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 

7 
8 

9 
10 

Croatia, Iceland (as of 2010), the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey 
Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia and Kosovo  
Council Regulation No 1085/2006 of 17 July 2006 
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3906/89 of 19 December 1989 
Council Regulation (EC) No 2500/2001 of 17 December 2001 
Community  Assistance  for  Reconstruction,  Development  and  Stabilisation,  Council  Regulation  (EC) 
No 2666/2000 of 5 December 2000 
Article 31 of the Bulgaria and Romania Accession Treaty 
The  programming  and  implementation  of  subsequent  programmes  are  reported  on  in  the  IPA  2009 
Annual Report (COM (2010) 687 final, of 25 November 2010) 
Under UNSCR 1244/99 
For further details, see the IPA 2009 Annual Report (cf. footnote 8) 

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
under  these  programmes  were  completed  by  the  end  of  the  year,  but  verification  by  the 
national authorities and by the Commission of the results achieved continued in 2010 and will 
do so also in 2011. Implementation of a number of projects under PHARE 2006 programmes 
for Romania will continue until mid 2011, so results were not yet available by the end of the 
reporting  period.  Disbursements  reached,  respectively,  77.10%  and  65.10%  of  allocations 
under PHARE 2005 and 2006 in Bulgaria, while the corresponding figures for Romania were 
79.62% and 69%. Contracting of PHARE 2005 and 2006 in Croatia was completed in 2009, 
at  an  overall  rate  of  about  86%  of  allocations11.  Payments  continued  and  reached  60%  of 
overall allocations.  

2.2. 

Transition Facility 

The  ten  countries  that  acceded  to  the  EU  in  May  200412  completed  implementation  of  the 
2006  Transition  Facility  programmes  on  15  December  2009,  achieving  the  expected  results 
and  impact,  notably  in  terms  of  enhancing  the  beneficiaries’  public  administration  and 
contributing to meeting the remaining needs of the acquis. By the end of the reporting period, 
disbursement rates under the 2005 Transition Facility ranged from over 84% in Malta to over 
98% in Cyprus. The corresponding range for the 2006 Transition Facility went from 58% to 
almost 98% (again in Malta and Cyprus, respectively).  

As for Bulgaria and Romania, in 2009 they carried on with contracting and implementation of 
the 2007 Transition Facility programmes. By the contracting deadline of 15 December 2009, 
both countries reached a contracting rate of slightly less than 70%. In Romania, this rate was 
due to slower than expected contracting, while the low performance in Bulgaria is explained 
by the prolonged suspension of accreditation for decentralised implementation of the relevant 
Implementing Agency (applied also to PHARE pre-accession funds).  

2.3. 

Successful project examples 

Pre-accession assistance not only helps to prepare the countries that wish to join the EU, but 
has also stabilised the situation in the Western Balkans in the last decade and supported a far-
reaching economic and political reform agenda. 

The  following  are  concrete  examples  of  achievements  through  pre-accession  assistance  in 
200913: 

–  In Albania, CARDS financed a border crossing point with Montenegro and a reintegration 
centre  for  minors,  thus  contributing  to  facilitate  regional  cooperation  and  the  free 
movement of persons and goods and to strengthen the justice and home affairs sector in the 
country; 

–  In Bosnia and Herzegovina, CARDS financed a border crossing point with Montenegro as 
well  as  a  reception  centre  for  irregular  migrants.  The  former  helps  to  increase  the 
efficiency  of  customs  clearance,  enables  adequate  control  of  freight  and  passengers 
crossing the borders and facilitates their smooth legal flow. The latter provides specialised 
detention  facilities  for  the  purpose  of  removal  of  irregular  third  country  nationals  in 
conformity  with  international  and  EU  standards  and  best  practices,  while  preparing  for 

11 
12 
13 

Funds that were not contracted by the deadline have been de-committed  
Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia 
Projects completed or ongoing in 2009 

EN 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
their  return  to  their  country  of  origin  or  to  another  country.  In  addition,  municipal  and 
cantonal court buildings have been rehabilitated so that space can be used more efficiently, 
therefore  contributing  to  a  more  efficient  and  effective  conduct  of  administrative  and 
judicial functions;  

–  In  Croatia,  PHARE  has  contributed  to  enforcing  intellectual  property  rights,  developing 
the  fisheries  sector  and  aligning  it  more  closely  to  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy  and 
setting  up  “Blue  Border  surveillance”  in  line  with  EU  best  practices.  In  the  first  case, 
PHARE assistance has helped the relevant institutions raise public awareness and improve 
their  cooperation,  coordination  and  enforcement  mechanisms  through  exchange  of 
intelligence,  information  and  best  practices.  In  the  second  case,  it  has  improved  the 
institutional structure, administration and statistical system in the sector and strengthened 
inspection  and  monitoring.  In  the  third  case,  it  has  helped  the  Croatian  Border  Police 
develop  and  implement  a  Blue  Border  surveillance  component  to  its  Integrated  Border 
Management Action Plan. CARDS has contributed to the development and maintenance of 
a  high  quality  food  safety  system  by  setting  up  a  new  food  safety  system  and  related 
institutional framework and upgrading the control activities of the institutions responsible 
for live animals and food products; 

–  In the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, CARDS has contributed to strengthening 
the fight against organised crime and corruption by developing a comprehensive legal and 
institutional  framework  for  a  more  effective  policy  and  helping  make  a  specialised  anti-
corruption Unit fully operational. CARDS has also established a national visa management 
system which enhances security in the EU through specialised software and equipment that 
improve  visa  issuing  processes  and  introduce  standardised  procedures  as  well  as  rapid, 
consistent and accurate verification of visa applicants. Finally, CARDS has supported the 
setting  up  of  a  national  vineyard  monitoring  and  management  system  by  supporting  the 
responsible  body,  developing  a  vineyard  cadastre  and  register  and  helping  align  national 
wine legislation with EU law;  

–  In  Kosovo,  CARDS  has  supported  the  creation  of  a  juvenile  justice  system  based  on 
children’s  rights  through  capacity  building  of  juvenile  justice  professionals,  research 
development  and  targeted  prevention  and  rehabilitation  programmes.  CARDS  has  also 
promoted the establishment of modern, sustainable, competitive, environmentally friendly 
and financially sound small and medium enterprises and employment creation. Finally, this 
pre-accession  instrument  has  support  the  supply  of  coal  to  existing  power  plants  through 
the rehabilitation of heavy coal mining machinery; 

–  In  Montenegro,  CARDS  financed  the  rehabilitation  of  a  number  of  wastewater  pumping 
stations  in  four  municipalities,  improving  the  situation  of  wastewater  management  in 
coastal towns; 

–  In Serbia, CARDS has supported a more transparent, effective and predictable functioning 
of  local  governments  and  has  piloted  a  strategic  planning  methodology  for  sustainable 
development  of  local  government.  It  has  also sustained restructuring  and  development of 
SMEs in priority sectors, such as those with environmental and energy efficiency concerns, 
owned/run  by  women  entrepreneurs  and/or  young  high-tech  enterprises.  Finally,  it  has 
supported  the reform of Vocational Education and Training through training of teachers, 
school  managers  and  others  in  modernised  teaching  methods,  implementation  of  pilot 
curricula, outcome-based assessment of students and preparation of teaching material;  

EN 

4 

   EN 

–  In  Turkey,  the  pre-accession  instrument  has  supported  the  definition  of  a  national 
multiannual action plan on gender equality, produced a model for a gender equality body, 
established  networks  among  relevant  institutions  and  delivered  training  and  awareness-
raising.  The  instrument  has  also  helped  to  combat  domestic  violence  against  women  by 
contributing  to  develop  a  policy  and  a  national  action  plan  on  the  subject,  building  the 
capacity  of  public  agencies  to  provide  services  to  victimized  women  or  to  those  at  risk, 
raising  public  awareness  and  gathering  data  on  the  nature  and  scale  of  the  problem  at 
national level. Further, the instrument has helped to reduce pollution of groundwater and 
the environment by establishing a solid waste management system in the region concerned. 
Finally, the instrument has funded numerous employment projects in various provinces to 
assist public employment services implement more efficient employment measures in line 
with  labour  market  needs  at  a  local  level  and  to  increase  employability  of  young  people 
and women. 

3. 

RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS IN 2009, LESSONS LEARNED AND PERSPECTIVES 

3.1.  Main  developments  and  lessons  from  implementation  of  PHARE  and  the 

Transition Facility in Bulgaria and Romania  

One  of  the  main  developments  in  2009  with  regard  to  implementation  of  PHARE  and 
Transition Facility assistance was related to the suspension of funds to Bulgaria in February 
2008  and  the  subsequent  withdrawal  of  accreditation  from  two  Bulgarian  Implementing 
Agencies  in  July  of  that  same  year14.  2009  saw  improvements  in  the  acknowledgement  and 
quantification  of  control  system  weaknesses  and  in  the  follow-up  of  irregularities  by  the 
relevant Bulgarian authorities as of the month of July. At the end of October 2009, Bulgaria 
submitted to the Commission proposals for financial corrections. This led the Commission to 
lift the suspension of payments on 18 November 2009.  

Learning from the above experience, during the reporting period the Commission engaged in 
a  wider  exercise  aimed  at  addressing  more  comprehensively  those  standards  of  internal 
control  that  were  most  relevant  for  improving  accountability,  reinforcing  the  assurance 
process  and  enhancing 
in  programming  and 
the  effectiveness  of  decision-making 
implementation of pre-accession assistance15. 

Other actions taken in 2009 by the Commission and relevant also for the management of pre-
accession  programmes  that  were  closing  down  included  the  adoption  of  a  Control  Strategy 
document  and  Instructions  to  Delegations  aimed  at  guiding  their  setting  up  of  the  internal 
control  standards,  particularly  in  the  newly  devolved16  EU  Delegations  in  the  Western 

14 

15 

16 

In  February  2008  the  Commission  suspended  payments  of  PHARE  and  the  Transition  Facility  funds 
managed by two accredited agencies and in July 2008 it withdrew the accreditation of those agencies, 
i.e.  their  right  to  manage  those  programmes,  following  controls  on  the  spot  which  revealed  that  the 
national management and control systems set up to manage pre-accession funds were not reliable. See 
2008  Annual  Report  on  PHARE,  Turkey  Pre-Accession  Instrument,  CARDS  and  Transition  Facility, 
COM(2009)700 of 21.12.2009 
Namely,  the  internal  control  standards  related  to  objectives  and  performance  indicators,  risk 
management process, processes and procedures and management supervision  
Until the end of 2008, the major part of the CARDS programme was managed by the European Agency 
for Reconstruction (EAR). Since September 2008, the remaining tasks of implementing this programme 
in  the former  Yugoslav  Republic of  Macedonia, Kosovo,  Montenegro and  Serbia were  taken over by 
the EU Delegations under the responsibility of Commission headquarters (DG Enlargement)  

EN 

5 

   EN 

                                                 
Balkans, and clarifying aspects of supervision at headquarters. A payment claims validation 
policy for centralised management17, including the preparation of annual assurance strategies 
by  Authorising  Officers  by  Sub-Delegation18  (AOSD),  was  also  adopted  in  this  context. 
Additional  ex  post  controls  of  AOSD  acts  in  centralised  management  were  foreseen  from 
2010.  

The experience from implementation of PHARE and the Transition Facility under EDIS19 in 
Bulgaria  and  Romania  has  brought  home  the  lesson  that  decentralised  management  of  EU 
assistance  without  ex-ante  controls  should  be  introduced  before  accession,  so  that  its 
efficiency  and  effectiveness  can  be  demonstrated  and  confirmed  in  practice  under  the  close 
scrutiny of the Commission. 

Mindful  of  this,  the  Commission  has  set  tight  conditions  for  the  decentralisation  of  the 
management  of  IPA  funds  to  the  Croatian  authorities.  These  conditions  will  ensure  that  the 
national authorities are capable of assuming the tasks of managing pre-accession (IPA) funds 
before  accession  and  Structural  Funds  after  accession.  Similarly,  the  Commission  will  take 
further  action  to  address  outstanding  recommendations  from  audits  and  evaluations  to 
strengthen  the  management  and  control  systems  for  decentralised  implementation  of  IPA  in 
Turkey. 

Implementation of pre-accession assistance in Bulgaria and Romania has also indicated that 
issues remaining during the last year of implementation can still be complicated and resource 
demanding.  Therefore  in  2009  the  Commission  intensified  its  efforts  to  secure  a  closer 
monitoring and ex-post follow up of the programmes that were closing-down.  

Finally, the experience in Bulgaria and Romania has also had an impacted on the coordination 
of the EU pre-accession assistance in those countries. Following from Parliament’s request for 
regular  reporting  on  the  status  of  implementation  of  EU  funds  in  Bulgaria  and  Romania,  in 
2009 the Commission has created an additional internal coordination mechanism to monitor 
the management of EU funds in those two countries.  

3.2. 

Lessons  from  implementation  of  the  pre-accession  instrument  in  Turkey  and 
perspectives 

Turkey is the biggest recipient of EU pre-accession assistance. Management of this assistance 
is partially decentralised, i.e. conferred to the national authorities, but under ex ante control by 
the  EU  Delegation.  Although  recognizing  that  projects  funded  from  the  EU  budget  had 
achieved  their  intended  outputs  and  that  results  were  likely  to  be  sustainable,  in  its  Special 
Report  16/2009  on  the  management  of  pre-accession  assistance  to  Turkey  under  the 

17 

18 

19 

Applicable mutatis  mutandis to  decentralised  implementation,  although  subject  to  further  clarification 
in this case 
I.e. with powers of budget implementation conferred upon them (delegated) by the Commission, as per 
Art.  51  of  the  Financial  Regulation  applicable  to  the  EU  general  budget,  Council  Regulation  (EC, 
Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 
Extended  Decentralised  Implementation  System.  Management  of  pre-accession  assistance  is  an 
important  learning  phase  for  the  national  authorities  of  a  candidate  country  to  prepare  for  future 
management of the – considerably higher – amounts the country will receive after accession. Therefore 
management  of  pre-accession  funds  is  conferred  to  the  national  authorities  gradually,  first  under 
supervision by the EU Delegation (DIS - decentralised implementation with ex ante controls) and later 
on without such ex ante controls (EDIS)  

EN 

6 

   EN 

                                                 
instrument applicable in the period 2002-200620, the Court of Auditors considered that, in the 
past, the link of the assistance to the priorities of the enlargement agenda and its effectiveness 
in supporting those priorities could not be sufficiently demonstrated.  

Mindful of the above findings, the Commission is taking steps under the new instrument for 
pre-accession  assistance  (IPA)  to  increase  its  effectiveness.  In  addition  to  strengthening  the 
management  and  control  system  under  decentralised  implementation,  already  mentioned 
above, the following steps are being taken: 

–  Programming of financial assistance will be better linked to political priorities and will be 
complemented  with  a  more  sectoral  approach  where  appropriate,  with  sector  strategies 
aiming at both improved ownership and impact. 

–  The  Commission  will  ensure  that  future  projects  have  clearer  objectives  that  result  in  an 

improved intervention logic with relevant and measurable indicators and benchmarks. 

–  Where necessary, clearly defined conditionalities will be used to ensure that beneficiaries 
implement  the  commitments  necessary  for  financial  assistance  to  achieve  results  and 
impacts. 

–  Increased focus on results and impact of projects under implementation will be given in the 

monitoring systems. 

–  Audits, evaluations and close monitoring will ensure that improvements are effective and 

further adjustments are brought under way to the system if necessary. 

For  more  details  on  perspectives  related  to  management  of  pre-accession  assistance,  please 
refer to the IPA 2009 Annual Report21 and related background document22.  

4. 

PERFORMANCE OF PHARE/CARDS/TURKEY PRE-ACCESSION INSTRUMENTS  

In  2009  sector,  thematic  and  ad-hoc  evaluations  were  completed  as  part  of  the  Interim 
Evaluation  (IE)  scheme  in  Turkey  and  Croatia,  covering  mainly  the  pre-accession  financial 
instrument  (Turkey)  and  PHARE  and  CARDS  (Croatia).  Retrospective  evaluations  of 
CARDS  programmes  were  conducted  also  in  the  former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia, 
Kosovo, Montenegro and Serbia23.  

According to the evaluations, overall the assistance which has been delivered has addressed 
the  priorities  and  strategies  agreed  with  the  beneficiaries.  Evaluation  findings  suggested  the 
performance  of  assistance  varied  from  moderately  satisfactory  to  moderately  unsatisfactory. 
Positive results have been achieved, including an increased capacity of people and institutions 
working  with  EU-funded  programmes  across  all  sectors,  with  beneficial  impacts  on 
government  policy,  institutions,  private  entities  and  individuals.  The  instruments  have 
provided  the  means  to  modernise  infrastructure,  equipment,  practices  and  procedures. 

20 

21 
22 
23 

Special  Report  No  16/2009  The  European  Commission’s  management  of  pre-accession  assistance  to 
Turkey, published on 13 January 2010  
Cf. footnote 8 
SEC(2010)1430 final of 25 November 2010  
For Albania as well as Bosnia and Herzegovina, CARDS evaluations were completed and reported on 
in 2008 

EN 

7 

   EN 

                                                 
Interventions in the evaluated sectors have therefore produced political, social, environmental 
and economic impacts. 

The performance of assistance was often mitigated by weaknesses identified in the beneficiary 
countries  related  to  programming  (insufficient  institutional  implementation  capacity  and 
national  strategies  at  the  time  of  preparation  of  project  proposals),  implementation  (limited 
beneficiary  capacity  in  some  areas  and  delays  in  implementation)  and  monitoring  (limited 
functionality of the sectoral monitoring sub-committees) of assistance. There was also a lack 
of tools to assess cost efficiency and the absorption capacity of beneficiaries remained rather 
weak.  

Based  on  evaluation  findings,  recommendations  for  future  programming  included  that 
beneficiary  institutions  dealing  with  pre-accession  assistance  should  ensure  more  adequate 
capacity  for  programming  and  project  design.  This  should  include,  in  particular,  more  solid 
assessment of the needs and absorption capacity of the institution making use of the project 
outputs,  a  more  systematic  embedding  of  assistance  with  national  strategies  and  higher 
consideration for efficiency aspects. Regarding implementation, the administrative efficiency 
within  both  the  national  structures  and  the  EU  Delegations  should  be  increased  further  to 
enable timely procurement procedures and prevent implementation delays. Once projects are 
being  implemented,  they  should  be  subject  to  more  systematic  monitoring.  The  monitoring 
system  should  be  further  strengthened  both  in  terms  of  functionality  of  sectoral  monitoring 
sub-committees and quality of monitoring reports. 

The long-term impact and sustainability of pre-accession assistance remained an open issue 
in  most  beneficiaries,  mainly  due  to  high  turnover  of  staff  and  budget  uncertainty  to  cover 
follow  up  activities  and  operational/maintenance  costs  of  projects.  National  authorities 
therefore  need  to  promptly  address  the  problem  of  high  staff  turnover  to  ensure  long-term 
impact  and  sustainability.  Future  programming  should  also  address  more  systematically  the 
question  of  financial  resources  needed  to  ensure  that  outputs  delivered  by  programmes  are 
translated into sustainable results. 

The  beneficiaries  are  addressing  the  findings  and  recommendations  from  the  2009 
evaluations. For its part, the Commission has intensified its regular monitoring of progress in 
the  actions  undertaken  by  the  beneficiaries  to  address  evaluation  findings.  In  addition,  the 
Commission is drawing from the findings of these evaluations to improve management of pre-
accession assistance under the new IPA instrument, with regard not only to implementation, 
but also to programming and the wider intervention logic of the new instrument, as outlined 
above. 

5. 

CO-OPERATION WITH THE EIB AND INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS 

Developments  in  2009  under  the  PHARE  funded  financial  facilities  created  in  cooperation 
with IFIs24 saw an additional EUR 35 million of incentives earmarked for projects under the 
SME Finance Facility (SMEFF) and EUR 5 million of additional incentives committed under 
the  Municipal  Finance  Facility  (MFF).  Overall,  31  PHARE  programmes  were  under 
implementation  in  2009  under  the  four  existing  facilities  (i.e.  the  two  facilities  mentioned 
above,  plus  the  Municipal  Infrastructure  Facility  (MIF)  and  the  Energy  Efficiency  Finance 

24 

The  European  Investment  Bank  (EIB),  the  European  Bank  for  Reconstruction  and  Development 
(EBRD)  and  the  Council  of  Europe  Development  Bank  (CEB)  in  association  with  Kreditanstalt  für 
Wiederaufbau (KfW) 

EN 

8 

   EN 

                                                 
Facility  (EEFF)25).  New  projects  were  approved  under  all  the  facilities  except  the  MIF,  for 
which  the  contracting  period  with  local  financial  intermediaries  had  expired.  The  difficult 
market  conditions  still  prevailing  in  2009  have  caused  difficulties  in  the  implementation  of 
programmes  under  some  of  the  facilities  (e.g.  MFF  2005  and  2006)  as  well  as  requests  for 
amending their scope (e.g. include renewable energy projects under the EEFF). In 2009 those 
facilities were being reshaped in order to align them with the Europe 202026 objectives. This 
process was still ongoing at the end of the reporting period.  

25 

26 

For more information on the four programmes, see the 2008 Annual Report on PHARE, Turkey Pre-
Accession Instrument, CARDS and Transition Facility (COM(2009)700 final of 21.12.2009) 
Europe  2020  is  the  new  strategy  for  a  smart,  sustainable  and  inclusive  growth,  launched  by  the 
Commission  on  3  March  2010  (COM(2010)2020  final,  of  3.3.2010)  to  exit  the  economic  crisis  and 
prepare the EU economy for the next decade and adopted by the Council in June 2010 (EUCO 13/10 of 
17 June 2010)  

EN 

9 

   EN