Artists abroad : i-Portunus, the EU’s first mobility scheme for culture : final report.
Date: 2020-06-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, artistic creation, artistic profession, cultural cooperation, cultural policy, cultural promotion, culture, culture industry, geographical mobility, job mobility

[
C
a
t
a
o
g
u
e

l

n
u
m
b
e
r
]

ARTISTS ABROAD 

i-Portunus 
the EU’s First Mobility Scheme for Culture 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
N
C
-
0
3
-
2
0
-
3
4
5
-
E
N
-
N

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Directorate-General for Education, youth, Sport and Culture 
Directorate EAC.D – Culture and Creativity 
Unit D.2 — Creative Europe 

  eac-culture@ec.europa.eu 

European Commission 
B-1049 Brussels 

This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views 
only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be 
made of the information contained therein. 

[Title of the publication] 

Reuse is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.  
The reuse policy of European Commission documents is regulated by Decision 2011/833/EU (OJ 
L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). 

[Subtitle] 

For  any  use  or  reproduction  of  photos  or  other  material  that  is  not  under  the  EU  copyright, 
permission must be sought directly from the copyright holders.  
Reproduction  of  the  text  is  authorised  subject  to  acknowledgement  of  the  source.  Reuse  or 
reproduction  of  the  pictures  or  illustrations  included  herein  is  forbidden  without  the  prior 
authorisation of the respective rights-holders. 

[edited by] 

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2020 

PDF 

ISBN 978-92-76-19273-2  DOI 10.2766/396224  

NC-03-20-345-EN-N  

© European Union, 2020  

Source: https://www.i-portunus.eu 

Image(s) 

© Jasiek Mischke, title: TRIAL AND (cover page), 2019 
© Agne Jokse – title: Dear Friend (p. 40), 2019 
© Mariia Bakalo – title: P.O.R.C.H. Synthesis Module (p. 40), 2019 
© Kirenia Martinez – title: Gradual Instant (p. 55), 2019 

2020 

Directorate-General for Education, youth, Sport and Culture 
- Mobility scheme for artists and/or culture professionals - 

EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Contents 

ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 

1. 

TASK I: Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 7 

1.1  Main findings about mobility opportunities ................................................................................................. 7 

2. 

TASK II: Experimentation ........................................................................................................................ 10 

Main findings ................................................................................................................................................................... 11 

2.1  Application Process ............................................................................................................................................ 12 
2.1.1  Application Cycle ........................................................................................................................................ 12 
The Application Form ................................................................................................................................ 19 
2.1.2 

2.2  Evaluation and Selection process ................................................................................................................. 20 
2.2.1  Evaluation ..................................................................................................................................................... 21 
2.2.2  Selection Strategy ..................................................................................................................................... 23 
2.2.3  Final Selection ............................................................................................................................................ 25 
2.2.4  Contact with Selected Applicants and Payment Procedures ....................................................... 29 

2.3  Analysis and Impact .......................................................................................................................................... 30 
2.3.1  Analysis of Data ......................................................................................................................................... 30 
2.3.2  Activity Reports .......................................................................................................................................... 31 

2.4  Communication ................................................................................................................................................... 34 
2.4.1  Network ........................................................................................................................................................ 34 
2.4.2  Online ............................................................................................................................................................ 39 

2.5  Cycle of Calls ....................................................................................................................................................... 44 

3. 

TASK III: The Policy Recommendations ................................................................................................ 45 

3.1  Policy Recommendations Workshop ............................................................................................................ 45 

3.2  Policy Recommendations................................................................................................................................. 45 

4.  RESULTS ACHIEVED PER OBJECTIVE ...................................................................................................... 47 

4.1  Task I: Analysis ................................................................................................................................................... 47 

4.2  Task II: Experimentation .................................................................................................................................. 48 
4.2.1  Task II.A: Experimental Mobility Action ............................................................................................. 48 
4.2.2  Task II.B: Mobility platform .................................................................................................................... 49 
4.2.3  Task II.C: Communication and Dissemination ................................................................................... 49 
4.2.4  Task II.D: Testing and Evaluation .......................................................................................................... 50 

4.3  Task III: The Policy Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 50 

5. 

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................... 53 

6.  ANNEXES ..................................................................................................................................................... 56 

THE TEAM ............................................................................................................................................................ 57 

 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 

A&CP 

Artists and Culture Professionals 

AP 

CCS 

CED 

CEP 

Associated Partners 

Creative and Cultural Sector 

Creative Europe Desk 

Creative Europe programme of the European Union 

DG EAC 

The Commission’s Directorate General for Education and Culture (Contracting Authority) 

EACEA 

Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (of the European Commission) 

GI 

IF 

IO 

IZO 

NAC 

OCT 

PA 

PM 

PMT 

PSC 

ToR 

Goethe-Institut, Consortium Leader 

Institut français, Consortium Partner 

Intermediary Organisation 

Izolyatsia, Consortium Partner 

Nida Art Colony of the Vilnius Academy of Arts, Consortium Partner 

Overseas Countries & Territories 

Project Assistant 

Project Manager 

Project Management Team 

Project Steering Committee (Consortium, DG EAC and EACEA) 

Terms of Reference 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

ABSTRACT 

i-Portunus was a short-term pilot project, selected and funded by the Creative Europe programme (CEP) 
of the European Union, to trial a mobility scheme in 41 countries directly targeting individual artists 
and culture professionals (A&CP) active in the Performing or Visual Arts. i-Portunus was managed by a 
Consortium headed by Goethe-Institut with Institut français, Izolyatsia and Nida Art Colony of Vilnius 
Academy of Arts.  

Between April and September 2019, i-Portunus issued 3 Calls for Applications and received over 2.500 
applications  from  more  than  3.000  individuals  requesting  over  6.000.000  euros  of  support,  hence 
proving the need for artistic mobility. A team of eight independent experts1 evaluated the applications. 
337 individual A&CP2 were supported for demand-led opportunities3 for an amount of 620.933 euros. 
As a result of the mobility 97% of the selected A&CP acquired new skills/knowledge, 94% developed 
new  audiences/outlets,  94%  developed  new  co-productions/creations,  and  49%  received  a  job  offer. 
This is a most impressive impact considering the limited financial support provided by the EU, e.g. only 
1.500  to 3,400 euros per individual.  

1 Cristiano Carpanini, Audronis Imbrasas, Tamar Janashia, Katarzyna Torz for the Performing Arts ; Rueben Fowkes, Tania Pardo, 
Alan Quireyns, Ilya Zabolotnyi for the Visual Arts. 
2  For  an  overview  of  the  selected  applicants:  https://www.i-portunus.eu/about-the-programme/selected-applicants/first-call-
https://www.i-
2019/; 
portunus.eu/about-the-programme/selected-applicants/third-call-2019/ 
3 Demand-led opportunities are ones where the applicant takes the initiative. This is distinct from offer-led opportunities, where 
the funding or host organisation determines the outlines of the project. 

https://www.i-portunus.eu/about-the-programme/selected-applicants/second-call-2019/; 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

INTRODUCTION 

i-Portunus was a short-term pilot project, selected and funded by the CEP of the European Union, to 
trial a mobility scheme in 41 countries for A&CP active in the Performing or Visual Arts. It was the first 
time the CEP put in place a scheme where A&CP were the direct target public, by supporting individual 
A&CP instead  of  organisations.  i-Portunus  was  managed  by  a  Consortium  headed  by  Goethe-Institut 
with Institut français, Izolyatsia and Nida Art Colony of Vilnius Academy of Arts.  

Between April and September 2019, i-Portunus issued 3 Calls for Applications and received over 2.500 
applications  from  more  than  3.000  individual  A&CP  requesting  over  6.000.000  euros  of  mobility 
support, hence proving the need for artistic mobility. A team of eight international independent experts 
(four per discipline) evaluated the applications. 337 individual A&CP were supported for demand-led 
opportunities for an amount of 620.933 euros. As a result of the mobility 97% of selected A&CP acquired 
new  skills/knowledge,  94%  developed  new  audiences/outlets,  94%  developed  new  co-
productions/creations, and 49% received a job offer. This is a most impressive impact considering the 
limited financial support provided by the EU, e.g. only 1.500  to 3,400 euros per individual.  

This  final  report  gives  a  comprehensive  overview  of  the  objectives  of  the  project  and  the  results 
achieved. Chapters 1-3 provide in-depth reporting of the activities and achievements under each task 
of the project, e.g. Task I Analysis, Task II Experimentation, Task III Policy Recommendations. For a short 
overview of the project, please read chapter 4 for the main results and recommendations per task.  
Chapter 5 offers a short conclusion. 

The Analytical Report4 (as part of Task I) and Policy Recommendations5 (as part of Task III) prepare the 
ground for a successful and sustainable mobility scheme. The results can be used to design a permanent 
action under the CEP 2021-2027. The European Commission had proposed a 17% overall increase to the 
Creative Europe budget6 in May 2018, from €1.403 million (2014-2020) to €1.642 million (2021-2027), 
and  argues  that  its  Culture  strand  “would  focus  on  circulation  of  works,  and  mobility  and  capacity 
building for creators and cultural operators”. The European Parliament has stood firm with the cultural 
and creative sectors, upholding their November 2018 proposal to double the current budget available 
for culture from €1.4 bn to €2.8 bn.7 

The i-Portunus pilot project has been the European Commission’s first initiative to organise a mobility 
scheme for A&CP. A second pilot is foreseen to take place in 2020 (Call for Proposals EAC/S06/2019) 
where further questions need to be answered and more procedural/technical aspects need to be tested. 
The results of all pilot projects will inform the European Commission in its work to develop, under the 
2021-2027 Creative Europe Programme, a permanent action dedicated to supporting the mobility of 

4 The Analytical Report was developed by the mobility expert Marie Le Sourd in close collaboration with the team members of 
On the Move and the i-Portunus data collectors Reinier Klok, Dr. Petya Koleva and Gwendolenn Sharp. It is available on-line at 
https://www.i-portunus.eu/wp-fuut/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/OS-final.pdf 
and  https://www.i-portunus.eu/wp-
fuut/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/OS-annexes_final.pdf (Annexes) 
5 The Policy Recommendations are available on the i-Portunus website. 
6 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2018/628229/EPRS_BRI(2018)628229_EN.pdf 
7 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2019-0156_EN.html 

(Study) 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

A&CP.  In  terms  of  results  and  impact  this  pilot  was  the  first  initiative  within  the  Creative  Europe 
programme allowing for a direct dialogue with a community of A&CP in the Performing and Visual Arts. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

1. 

TASK I: Analysis 

The first task of the project was to produce a mapping study analysing the state of play of mobility 
opportunities in the EU and neighbouring countries. The Analytical Report has been carried out by the 
mobility expert Marie Le Sourd in close collaboration with team members of On the Move8, and was 
commissioned  by  the  Consortium.  The  study  was  delivered  in  March  2019  presenting  the  mobility 
opportunities (or lack thereof) for artists and culture professionals in 41 countries and included several 
recommendations on characteristics this mobility scheme should have. Many of these were taken into 
account  when  designing  the  pilot  programme,  especially  concerning  the  needs  for  group  mobility, 
segmented mobility and shorter duration. 

A data collection team aggregated data9 from EU programmes focusing on individual mobility; Euro-
regional / transnational mobility schemes; prior research on mobility opportunities and challenges; an 
online questionnaire for A&CP (launched on 12 February and closed on 25 February 2019). The survey 
‘European cultural mobility for artists and cultural practitioners: what are your needs?’ gathered a total 
of 2,189 responses, with 2,115 completed answers. The Analytical Report was further complemented via 
phone and online interviews with key players, particularly European cultural networks, representatives 
of platforms covering the artistic and cultural sub-sectors, as well as representatives of mobility funding 
schemes at national, European and international levels. The interviews were particularly instrumental 
to  deepen  the  analysis  of  the  needs  of  the  sector  and  to  reveal  paradoxes  and  good  practices.  The 
research and data collection team also had online exchanges and consultations in person, and these 
helped collect missing data.  

The full Analytical Report (Executive Summary, Report, Annexes) was delivered to DG EAC on 31 March 
2019. This first chapter summarises the findings of the Analytical Report and informs us of the very 
limited offer of mobility support, which is particularly striking for the demand-led type of schemes (see 
1.3). A handful of countries cover more than half of the mobility support available and access to such 
support  is  highly  unequal.  The  impact  of  mobility  opportunities  is  juxtaposed  when  considering  EU 
countries and non-EU countries. 

1.1  Main findings about mobility opportunities 

  Offer-led and demand-led opportunities: more than 50% of mobility opportunities for A&CP 
are concentrated in 5 to 8 Creative Europe countries (2,070 funding schemes identified) 

  Out of 2.070 mobility schemes 1.443 are one-off calls with limited scope 

8  The  Analytical  Report  is  available  on-line  at  https://www.i-portunus.eu/wp-fuut/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/OS-final.pdf 
(Study) and https://www.i-portunus.eu/wp-fuut/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/OS-annexes_final.pdf (Annexes) 
9  List  of  documents  used  for  the  Analytical  Report:  https://www.i-portunus.eu/wp-fuut/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/OS-
annexes_final.pdf 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

  One-off calls: irregular by nature, with very short  time frames and not covering all mobility 

formats and sectors  

Limited number of transnational/Euro-regional mobility funding schemes 

  Non-EU Creative Europe countries have very limited access to mobility funding schemes 
 
  No EU funding scheme directly focusing on individuals 
  Huge discrepancies between EU and the non-EU Creative Europe countries 
 

In all support schemes (regular/one-off calls): very few opportunities for research, prospection, 
‘go and see’ grants. 

  Across all sectors there exists the: 

  Need for a flexible support scheme for individuals and groups 
  Need for support schemes compatible with professional practice 
  Need for support for all creative and cultural sub-sectors 
  Need for adequate and realistic funding 
  Need for longer-term, cross-national interaction 
  Need for enhanced employability 
  Need for self-initiated forms of mobility 
  Need to embrace societal concerns 
  Need to advocate for European diversity and new collaborations. 

1.2 Offer-led mobility opportunities 

The most striking finding of the analysis of the offer-led mobility opportunities in Member States is 
that these exist in only a limited number of countries and that the funding from these few countries 
covers almost half of the total mobility offer: 

Sub-sector 

Amount  of  regular  offer-
led 
mobility 
opportunities 

Visual arts 

370 

Performing arts 

298 

Music 

295 

Literature 

277 

Countries providing opportunities 

48.5%  of  the  offer-led  mobility  opportunities 
come from Spain, France, Germany, Sweden and 
The Netherlands 

48% of the offer-led mobility opportunities come 
from  France,  Spain,  Sweden,  Germany  and 
Czech Republic 

46% of the offer-led mobility opportunities come 
from  France,  Germany,  Spain,  Sweden  and 
Finland 

46% of the offer-led mobility opportunities come 
from  France,  Spain,  Germany,  Sweden  and 
Czech Republic 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

Cultural heritage 

187 

Architecture 

184 

46% of the offer-led mobility opportunities come 
from France, Spain, Sweden, Finland and Austria 

48% of the offer-led mobility opportunities come 
from France, Spain, Sweden, Finland and Austria 

This ranking is based on the number of funding schemes and not on the amount of funds provided by 
each of the funding organisations. 

The  data  or  information  we  could  collect  for  Albania,  Bosnia  Herzegovina,  North  Macedonia, 
Montenegro,  Republic  of  Serbia,  Georgia,  Moldova,  Ukraine,  Tunisia,  Armenia  and  Kosovo,  is  that 
national  and/or  local  funds  for  mobility  (as  based  on  regular  open  calls)  are  often  non-existent  or 
inconsistent. This situation was also mentioned for the Balkan region in the 2016 report on ‘Training, 
education  and  exchange  of  knowledge  in  Southern  Europe’10  with  a  focus  on  performing  arts  which 
stated:  ‘Constructing  mobility  at  regional  and  European  level  in  a  spirit  of  reciprocity  is  another 
challenge reminded many times by our interlocutors. The need for mobility is crucial for a big part of 
the cultural actors’.  
Some limited initiatives are worth mentioning, even if they remain rare, such as the Ukrainian Cultural 
Foundation (set up in 2017) that offers various funding opportunities for international cooperation like 
the  N.O.R.D  programme  supporting  projects  related  to  training,  cultural  exchange,  residencies  or 
emerging artists, or the Sharing Contacts - Sharing Knowledge platform for joint projects by Ukrainian 
and Polish cultural organisations, in cooperation with the Adam Mickiewicz Institute and the Creative 
Europe Desk Ukraine. 

1.3   Demand-led mobility opportunities 

Of the few existing demand-led mobility opportunities, the following table shows the uneven 
distribution in the EU-countries: 

Sub-sector 

Visual arts 

Music 

Amount of regular demand-led 
mobility opportunities 

Public funding from Members States  

90 

90 

of 

the 

52% 
demand-led  mobility 
opportunities financed by United Kingdom, 
Sweden, Norway, France and Belgium 

of 

the 

52% 
demand-led  mobility 
opportunities financed by United Kingdom, 
Sweden, Norway, France and Belgium 

Performing arts 

83 

of 

the 

demand-led  mobility 
48% 
opportunities financed by Sweden, United 
Kingdom, Norway, Belgium and France 

10 Guinet-Ahrens, A., La Belle Ouvrage, report on ‘Training, education and exchange of knowledge in Southern Europe’, 2016 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

Literature 

77 

Architecture 

59 

Cultural heritage 

60 

of 

the 

demand-led  mobility 
48% 
opportunities financed by Sweden, United 
Kingdom, Belgium, Norway and France 

of 

the 

demand-led  mobility 
54% 
opportunities financed by Sweden, United 
Kingdom, Norway, France and Belgium  

of 

the 

58% 
demand-led  mobility 
opportunities financed by Sweden, United 
Kingdom, France, Belgium and Norway 

This ranking is based on the number of demand-led public funding schemes and not on the amount of 
funds provided by each of the funding organisations. The data per sub-sector could not be collected 
within the scope of this operational study. 

In  this  regard,  the  situation  of  non-EU  countries  which  are  part  of  Creative  Europe  programmes  is 
striking.  Regular  mobility  funding  schemes  at  national  level  are  either  extremely  limited  or  non-
existent.  The  data  or  information  collected  from  Albania,  Bosnia  Herzegovina,  North  Macedonia, 
Montenegro, Republic of Serbia, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, Tunisia, Armenia and Kosovo, is that: 

 

Funding for cooperation or mobility mostly comes through European national cultural institutes 
(British  Council,  Goethe-Institut,  Institut  français,  Pro  Helvetia  etc.),  EU  funded  programmes 
(such as EU Eastern Partnership Culture and Creativity or specific programme such as Tfanen 
in  Tunisia),  external  development  bodies  (Swiss  Development  Agency),  intermediary 
organisations  (IFA  -  Institute  for  Foreign  Relations,  Germany),  independent  funding  (like  Al-
Mawred Al-Thaqafy) or North American based international organisations (like CEC ArtsLink). 

  Mobility opportunities are often only related to specific time-bound projects, including those 
emanating from European cultural networks and projects such as, to name a few, ‘Theatre is 
Dialogue for theatre professionals’ in Georgia and Moldova in particular by European Theatre 
Convention, Trans Europe  Halles’s  capacity building / support  programme  in  Eastern Europe 
(Ukraine, Belarus) and the recent Creative Europe training project with NEMO, ‘Be Museumer’, 
with museum professionals from Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan11. 

2. 

TASK II: Experimentation 

This second chapter presents the main findings in implementing the mobility scheme and provides in-
depth reporting of the activities under each Call for Applications. Since the nature of the pilot program 
was one of experimentation, the Consortium offered a project design that would ensure flexibility and 
the  option  to  adapt  and  adjust  all  project  tasks  at  any  given  moment.  This  resulted  in  additional 
experimentation with group mobility, multiple destinations, segmented mobility, a mechanism for A&CP 

11 
https://www.europeantheatre.eu/page/activities/international-professional-development/theatre-is-dialogue; 
http://teh.net/participants-of-teh-startup-support-programme-2019/;  https://www.ne-mo.org/news/article/nemo/ 
first-international-training-opportunity-of-the-be-museumer-project.html. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

living with a disability and continuous communication and dissemination efforts towards A&CP, as well 
as the involvement of key stakeholders12 throughout the whole pilot. In Chapter 4 the main results and 
recommendations per task are summarised. 

Main findings 

  For the 3 i-Portunus Calls for Applications almost 3.200 individuals from 41 countries applied 

and submitted more than 2.500 applications;  

  Of the submitted applications 46% covered the Performing Arts and 54% the Visual Arts; 
  The  purposes  of  the  mobilities  in  the  submitted  applications  were  production-oriented 
residencies  (38%),  international  collaborations  (37%),  professional  development  (14,5%), 
presentation (7,5%) and cultural change (3%). 

  The requested durations of the mobilities in the submitted applications ranged from 15-29 

days (55%), 30-59 days (26%) to 60-85 days (19%). 

  Mobility support ranged from 1.500 euros  per individual A&CP for 15-29 days, to 2.400 euros 
for 30-59 days, to 3.000 euros for 60-85 days, to 3.400 euros for more than 85 days (only 
available in Call 1). 

With over 2.500 applications received from more than 3.000 individual A&CP based in 41 countries 
requesting over 6.000.000 euros of mobility support through three Calls which were each open less 
than one month, we can definitely state that A&CP need support for artistic and cultural mobility.  

With respect to the chosen destinations for the mobility projects of A&CP 87 % of applicants chose to 
go  to  EU  Member  States,  10  %  to  European  countries  beyond  the  EU  MS  and  3%  to  non-European 
countries. 

In terms of countries of residence of A&CP, the submitted applications are roughly in line with what 
one  would expect in relation to the size  of each  country’s population (more applications from  more 
populous countries). The top 5 ranks applicants based in France (15,6%), Germany (11,2%), Italy (10,1%), 
the United Kingdom (8,3%) and the Netherlands (4,5%). The remaining 36 countries range between 4,3% 
(Spain) and 0,1% (Cyprus, Kosovo, Moldova, Montenegro). 

From i-Portunus,  we learned that in the  countries  where mobility schemes are  already widespread13 
(see 1.2 and 1.3), A&CP are more familiar with the application process. Additionally, regional/national 
communication networks are already in place to inform them of new funding opportunities. Reaching 
our  target  audience  with  information  about  i-Portunus  was  relatively  straight-forward  in  those 
countries, whose responses tended to be higher than from countries with fewer mobility opportunities 
(see 1.2 and 1.3). In order to redress this imbalance, we deployed specific extra communication to less 
represented  countries  in  an  ad  hoc  manner,  including  direct  presentation  of  the  mobility  scheme  to 
A&CP during meetings, seminars or webinars (see 2.4). 

The pilot scheme was result-oriented, in that the mobility support was based on an individual project 
to be realised in another country. The parameters of this mobility, the experimentation of the process 

12  In  particular  European  networks  and  platforms,  funded  or  not  through  the  Creative  Europe  programme,  mobility  funders, 
national organisations working with cultural mobility etc. 
13 Countries where mobility opportunities are already widespread are top listed in terms of chosen destination countries: Germany 
(10%), France and Italy (both 9%), Spain (7%), Portugal and the United Kingdom (both 5%). 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

and the resulting outcomes remained flexible. A&CP were not asked to deliver a final product such as 
an exhibition or performance, they could set up new creations, do research, network, meet  etc. This 
was perceived as exceptional by A&CP (see 2.3.2.). 

What  makes  this  pilot  mobility  scheme  unique  is  its  focus  on  individuals  (instead  of 
organisations), allowing for demand-led opportunities to be developed on a European scale. It is 
the first time the Creative Europe programme puts in place a scheme where A&CP are the direct 
target public. 

2.1  Application Process 

2.1.1  Application Cycle 

According to the Terms of Reference (ToR), the scheme had to enable individual A&CP to take advantage 
of flexible and short-term result-oriented opportunities. The support had to be provided to individuals 
of  all  ages,  nationalities,  educational  qualifications  and  levels  of  experience  and  had  to  be 
geographically balanced, covering all countries participating in the Creative Europe programme.  

Each application cycle included the following steps: 

Formulation of call 

 
  Publication of call with timetable 
  Automatic  attribution  of  submitted  applications  to  the  expert  evaluators  in  the  specific 

discipline 

  On the day of the deadline, communication of the number of applications to DG EAC 
 
Statistical analysis of data related to all applications; communication to PMT and DG EAC 
  Preparation of discussion document by a data collector14, based on the scores of the evaluators 
  Meeting of the Consortium and the Project Steering Committee (PSC) 14 days after the deadline 
 
Statistical analysis of data related to selected applications; communication to PMT and DG EAC 
  Publication of results online; emailing of results to A&CP 
  Evaluation of procedure and adaptation for next round 

2.1.1.1  First Call 

Visual arts: Crafts – Design – Digital arts – Fashion 
– Fine arts – Graphic arts – Photography  

Timetable 

Call for Applications:  

17 April 2019 

Performing  arts:  Circus  –  Dance  –  Opera  – 
Performance – Puppetry – Street Art – Theatre 

Submission deadline:  

15 May 2019 
(18:00 Brussels time) 

The  first  call  was  designed  according  to  the 
Technical Offer submitted  for this  project and to 
the  findings  of  the  Analytical  Report.  DG  EAC 
requested the following changes: 

Notification of Results:   7 June 2019 

Earliest departure date:  15 June 2019 

Latest return date:  

31 December 2019 

14 Reinier Klok, i-Portunus data collector, r.l.k. projects 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

  All sub-sectors to be included in the Calls (as opposed to Theatre, Dance and Performance within 

Performing Arts, and Fine arts, Digital arts and Photography within Visual Arts); 
Simplified Application Form; 
Simplified Call for Applications; 
Simplified Evaluation Grid; 

 
 
 
  Higher amounts for the mobilities.  

Thanks  to  extensive  communication  activities  carried  out  by  all  Consortium  partners,  the  first  call 
reached a large target group across all Creative Europe countries. 

The first Call supported the following objectives for mobility support:  

 

International collaborations: Cultural productions such as an exhibition, a performance, or a 
theatre piece with an international partner. 

  Production-oriented residencies: Mobilities resulting in a public presentation of a newly 

created body of work - an exhibition, a performance, a publication, etc. 

  Professional development: Taking part in auditions, network meetings, showcases, workshops, 

master classes, and other types of training outside of formal education. 

  Presentation: Presenting an exhibition, a performance, a theatre piece in the destination 

country. 

  Cultural change: Working with local communities in the destination country to address cultural 

challenges. 

Our Technical Offer proposed to support 15-, 30-, 60- and 85-day mobilities with 650, 1.200, 2.200 and 
3.250 euros, respectively. To allow for greater flexibility, DG EAC asked the Consortium to revisit these 
amounts. Consequently, four different mobility durations were offered in the first call: 

15 to 29 days:  
30 to 59 days:  
60 to 84 days:  
85-days (maximum length): 

1.500 euros 
2.400 euros 
3.000 euros 
3.400 euros 

Accordingly, the total number of mobilities to be reached by the end of the project was reduced from 500 
to 337, offering a more substantial financial support for A&CP to reach the above-mentioned objectives. 

Numbers 

On 17 April 2019,  i-Portunus  launched the  first Call for Applications for short-term mobilities  in the 
fields  of  the  Performing  Arts  and  the  Visual  Arts.  Over  1.200  valid  applications  were  received 
requesting a total mobility support of 2.559.900 euros whereas the available budget was 245.725 
euros. 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

The  Visual  Arts  sector  represented  52%  of  the 
applications, against 48% for the Performing Arts 
sector. Although all sub-disciplines were included, 
the  majority  of  A&CP  applied  for  Performance, 
Dance  and  Theatre  (together  88%)  within  the 
Performing  Arts,  and  Fine  Arts,  Photography  and 
Digital Arts (together 82%) within Visual Arts. The 
countries  of  residence  of  applicants  were  mainly 
Western  European/EU  countries  (69%):  France, 
Italy,  Germany,  the  UK,  the  Netherlands,  Spain, 
Belgium,  Portugal,  and  Finland.  Ukraine  was  the 
only  non-EU  country  represented  in  the  top  10. 
According to the Analytical Report, with the exception of Portugal and Ukraine, the top 10 countries 
listed above are also those with the greatest number of mobility schemes.  

In the first Call, the majority of A&CP applied for production-oriented residencies (35%) closely followed 
by international collaborations (33%) and much less for professional development (16%), presentation 
(9%) and cultural change (7%). 

Lessons Learnt 

  Recurring questions from applicants nourished the FAQ section of the website and allowed the 

team to refine the information provided for the following Calls: 

  During Call 1, the great majority of questions concerned ‘technical problems and issues’; 
these had dropped to a very modest number by Call 3 (from 106 to 5), indicating that 
over time, the functionality of the application platform was improved and successfully 
integrated user feedback.  
Inquiries on ‘application requirements’ (such as ‘Am I eligible if I am X?’) and ‘travel 
requirements’ (‘How many countries?’ etc.) remained relevant for a smaller proportion of 
potential applicants (respectively dropping from 68 to 20 and from 32 to 12 between the 
first and third Calls). 

 

  Questions covering the ‘practical’ dimensions of potential mobility plans were effectively 
answered but also evolved. They concerned for instance financial aspects (dropping from 
21 in Call 1 to 10 in Call 3), the language of documents used for the application 
(templates/portfolio dropping from 28 to 5) and if applications for the movie and music 
sectors were eligible. The nature and number of these questions suggest that the 
programme successfully established a link with the target audience, addressing real needs 
and actual professional scenarios. During the second Call, more disciplines became aware 
of the mobility funding opportunity, notably musicians, who addressed both the 
centralised mailbox as well as individual country representatives to inform themselves 
on the future of the funding scheme.  

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

 

In Call 1, bugs on the platform allowed applicants to  submit applications that were not fully 
completed. As a consequence, data was missing for the Analysis (occupation, objective of the 
mobility, duration); 
The 85-day category proved redundant and was merged into the 60-85 days category; 

 
  A&CP almost never selected ‘Cultural change’ as an objective for their mobility (3%); 
  Appointing  applications  to  evaluators  based  on  regions  didn’t  add  to  the  quality  of  the 
evaluations  (all  the  evaluators  were  experts  in  their  sector  and  had  a  vast  international 
network)  and  caused  quantitative  imbalances  (since  the  majority  of  applications  came  from 
Northern and Southern European countries); (More under 2.2 Evaluation and Selection process) 
  By and large, the greatest number of applications came from countries that were already well 
served  by  mobility  schemes.  Non-EU  Creative  Europe  countries  were  underrepresented, 
confirming the importance of including capacity-building in a mobility scheme under the future 
Creative Europe programme; 
Live presentations of the scheme were effective in increasing the number of applications: this 
was demonstrated by the extensive communication activities Izolyatsia undertook in Ukraine15; 
Finally, the need for segmented mobilities and multiple destinations became clearly apparent. 
Besides the feedback from A&CP and the sector, the Analytical Study also pointed out that this 
would constitute a real innovation with respect to other funding schemes. In consultation with 
DG EAC, the Consortium tested these options in the second and third Call for Applications. 

 

 

Adaptations for the Second Call  

  Three duration categories instead of four; 
 
  Bugs on the platform were fixed. 

‘Cultural change’ was removed from the list of objectives for the mobility; 

2.1.1.2  Second Call 

Timetable 

3 June 2019 

Call for Applications:  

Submission deadline:  

In  its  Technical  Offer,  the  Consortium  already 
highlighted  the  need  for  group  mobilities  and 
shorter  mobilities  for  A&CP  working 
in  an 
international  context.  Inspired  by  the  results  of 
the Analytical Report and a survey completed by 
over  2.000  A&CP,  the  Consortium  received  DG 
EAC’s  approval  to  test  group  mobilities  and  to 
experiment  with  shorter  mobilities  (5-15  days). 
From  the  second  Call  onwards,  the  Consortium 
implemented  segmented  mobilities  (keeping  a 
minimum of 15 days, segmented in chunks of at least 5 days) and group mobilities (for a maximum of 
5 individuals who were  individually  sub-contracted). Another beneficial innovation took the form  of 
additional mobility support for disabled A&CP.  

24  June  2019  (14:00 
Brussels time) 

Notification of Results:   16 July 2019  

Earliest departure date:  25 July 2019 

Latest return date:  

31 December 2019 

From the second Call onwards, PowerPoint presentations for information purposes were shared with 
Creative Europe Desks (CEDs) and were accessible via the i-Portunus website. Furthermore, the second 
Call was translated in five additional languages (Albanian, Armenian, Georgian, Romanian and Serbian) 

15 See Annex 10: Communication & Dissemination Activities. 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

so as to encourage A&CP from underrepresented countries to apply. The translations didn’t generate a 
significant change in the number of applications and confirmed the assumption that language is not the 
main barrier for A&CP to apply, but rather lack of experience. 

Prior to the launch of the second Call, DG EAC requested a better view of the balance between emerging 
and established A&CP and of their annual income: an additional check box for annual income was thus 
integrated on the application form.  

Based on feedback from the evaluators after the first  Call, additional checkboxes were integrated in 
the evaluation grid to give them the ability to flag the following types of applications: Emerging A&CP 
–  Experimental  Mobility  -  Inter-regional  (different  region  and  not  neighbouring  country)  - 
Interdisciplinary  within  art  -  Interdisciplinary  beyond  art  –  Environment  –  Gender  –  Inclusion  – 
Commercial. 

Numbers 

The second Call for Applications received a similar response compared to the first, with 710 individual 
and  group  applications  covering  1.141  individuals  requesting  over  2.000.000€  of  mobility  support 
whereas the available budget was 234.510 euros.  

Similar  to  the  first  Call  the  Visual  Arts  sector 
represented  54%  of  all  submitted  applications, 
against  46%  for  the  Performing  Arts  sector. 
Although  all  sub-disciplines  were  included,  the 
majority of A&CP applied for Performance, Dance 
and Theatre (together 92%) within the Performing 
Arts, and Fine Arts, Photography and Digital Arts 
(together 85%) within Visual Arts.  

Once  more,  the  countries  of  residence  of 
applicants  were  mainly  Western  European  EU 
countries and the top 10 were almost identical to 
that  of  the  first  Call:  only  Portugal  and  Finland 
were replaced by Austria and Poland, and Ukraine was still the only non-EU country on the list. This 
time, all Creative Europe countries except Bosnia Herzegovina were covered in terms of destinations, 
even if, compared to the first Call, a greater number of countries were mentioned less than 5 times. The 
least  requested  destinations  included  Albania,  Armenia,  Kosovo*16,  Moldova,  Montenegro  (non-EU 
countries) but also Cyprus, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta and Slovakia (EU countries). 

16 * This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the 
Kosovo declaration of independence. 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

In  the  second  Call,  the  majority  of  A&CP  applied  for  production-oriented  residencies  (39%)  closely 
followed by international collaborations (38%) and much less for professional development (13%) and 
presentation (10%).  

Group applications represented 27% of the applications against 73% of individual applications. However 
in terms of individuals involved in groups, they were higher in number than the individual applicants: 
the group applications concerned 621 individuals (54%) against 520 individual applicants (46%). Within 
the group applications 49 % were groups of two persons, 24% groups of 3 persons, 13% groups of 4 
persons and 14% groups of 5 persons. 

This  chart  juxtaposes  the  representation  of  individual  applications  vs.  group  applications,  and  the 
number of individuals in individual applications vs. group applications. 

In  the  second  Call,  segmented  mobilities  were  requested  by  25%  of  A&CP  while  75%  applied  for  a 
continuous mobility.  

Lessons learnt 

  Groups needed a better understanding of the eligibility criteria; 
 
 

‘Presentation’ as an objective for the mobility was not highly demanded; 
Translating calls didn’t automatically result in more applications: translations are only one part 
(live  presentations,  multipliers,  webinars, 
of  a  chain  of  capacity-building  activities 
visualisation…)  and  there  is  also  a  need  for  continuity  (the  process  needs  time  to  become 
familiar); 

  Communication for the third Call had to be low-key since almost 2.500 individuals applied for 

the first two Calls and the remaining budget was lower than for those Calls. 

Adaptations for the Third Call  

  An extra section for groups was added in the Call for Applications and on the FAQ page of the 

web site; 
‘Presentation’ was removed from the list of objectives for the mobility; 
The application form was completed with two additional categories: 

 
 

•  Applicants had to mark whether they were an emerging or an established A&CP 
•  Applicants had to indicate the number of inhabitants in their place of residence 
  Overseas Countries & Territories (OCTs) were listed on the website, Application Form and in the 

Call for Applications;  

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

  22 additional localities from OCTs were listed on the website, the Application Form and in the 

Call for Applications. 

2.1.1.3 Third Call  

In  the  third  Call,  only  two  duration  categories 
remained, since an 85-day duration would exceed 
the limits of the latest return date. This had been 
foreseen  at  the  outset,  and  the  available  budget 
for the third Call was about 50% less compared to 
the first two Calls. Prior to the launch of the third 
Call,  DG  EAC  requested  an  adaptation  in  the 
Application  Form  whereby  A&CP  had  to  indicate 
whether  they  were  emerging  or  established  and 
whether  they  were  based  in  an  urban  or  rural 
area.  

Numbers 

Timetable 

Call for Applications:  
Submission deadline:  

14 August 2019 
5  September  2019 
(14:00 Brussels time) 
Notification of Results:   26 September 2019  
Earliest departure date:  11 October 2019 
Latest return date:  

31 December 2019 

The third and final Call for Applications was open during the summer months and for three weeks only, 
yet  still  resulted  in  586  valid  individual  and  group  applications  corresponding  to  832  individuals 
requesting a total 1.497.300€  of mobility support whereas the available budget was 140.698 euros.  

Similarly to the first two Calls, the Visual Arts sector 
represented 56% of the applications, against 44% for 
the  Performing  Arts  sector.  We  saw  the  same 
tendency  with  regards  to  the  sub-disciplines:  Fine 
Arts,  Photography  and  Digital  Arts  were  the  most 
represented  sub-sectors  for  the  Visual  Arts  sector 
(together  they  accounted  for  86%),  whereas  for  the 
Performing  Arts  sector,  Performance,  Theatre  and 
Dance  were  the  most  represented  (together  they 
accounted for 90%). 

For  the  third  Call,  the  majority  of  A&CP  applied  for 
international  collaborations  (44%)  and  production-oriented  residencies  (41%)  and  much  less  for 
professional development (15%). 

Group applications represented 23% of the applications against 77% of individual applications, which is 
very  similar  to  the  demand  in  the  second  Call.  In  terms  of  individuals  involved  in  groups,  they  are 
slightly lower in number than the individual applicants, which was the reverse on the second Call. The 
number of individuals in group applications in the third Call concerned 382 individuals (46%) against 
450 individual applying through an individual application (54%).  

This  chart  juxtaposes  the  representation  of  individual  applications  vs.  group  applications,  and  the 
number of individuals in individual applications vs. group applications. 

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

In the third Call, segmented mobilities (travel at different times to one or more than one country) were 
requested by 15,5% of A&CP while 84,5% applied for a continuous mobility to one or more than one 
country.  

Lessons Learnt 

 

The timing of the third Call – in the middle of summer – was deliberate, since given the limited 
remaining budget, the Consortium aimed for a lower response rate. This timing did indeed result 
in a lower response rate, however some applicants communicated their disappointment at not 
being able to sufficiently prepare their application since partners and host organisations were 
often on summer leave. 

2.1.1.4  Recommendations for the Application Cycle 

  Generally speaking, applicants should be given a minimum of eight weeks between the opening 

 

 

and the closing of calls to be able to sufficiently prepare their application; 
In  general,  the  Consortium  wouldn’t  recommend  launching  calls  over  summer  months  since 
applicants have difficulties contacting host organisations and partners to prepare their projects; 

In a future mobility project, more attention should be given to capacity-building as part of the 
application cycle, especially for less experienced A&CP. 

2.1.2  The Application Form 

The  current application form received  positive feedback from all the  users. However  we found that 
some additional features should be added in the future. 

Lessons Learnt 

 

 

Technical issues in the first Call enabled applicants to leave fields empty, resulting in a lack of 
data; 
In the current Application Form, the definition of ‘emerging’ and ‘established’ focuses on artists 
only, yet culture professionals should be equally addressed; 
 
The policy for A&CP living with a disability should be better explained in the Application Form; 
  When members of group mobilities withdrew from the scheme after being selected, this could 

not be edited in the form, since there is only one main applicant for group applications. 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

2.1.2.1 Recommendations for the Application Form 

  Every single item on the form should be compulsory; 
 

The applicant should tick a box whether the cost for the mobility is already covered by another 
organisation. Matching funding should be allowed, but given the restricted budget it makes no 
sense to prioritise these applications even when they receive a high score; 
The definitions of emerging and established A&CP should be modified: 
  Emerging: 

 

 

In the early stages of creative development and of a professional career. 

  Established: 

  With an extensive professional track record; 
  With presentation of the oeuvre/expertise in public (inter)national contexts; 
  With  professional  publications  (and  distribution)  of  the  (artistic)  oeuvre/publications 

written by the culture professional/artist. 

 

There  should  be  a  new  technical  approach  for  group  applications  which  allows  each  group 
member to  have  their  own application  file,  including  personal information, educational data 
and eventually a (personalised) signed contract. It would work as follows: 

  Every Group member has their own my.i-portunus.eu account and submits their own files; 
 
The option “Type of Application” has two options: (1) Individual Application; (2) Group 
Application. If (2) is chosen, a new option is shown, the applicant can indicate whether 
s/he is a Main Applicant or a member of a group; 

  Main Applicants complete the main part of the Application Form (describing the mobility) 
and choose up to five group members (including the main applicant). They will receive a 
unique code for each group member; 
  Group Members enter the code they are given by their Main Applicant: this links them 
to their group application. They do not need to fill in the project description, but still 
need to enter their personal information, CVs etc. 

  A  more  transparent  policy  for  A&CP  living  with  a  disability  should  be  defined  for  a  future 

programme in cooperation with a specialised organisation. 

See Annex 2: Application Form (visuals; working version available through https://my.i-portunus.eu) 

2.2  Evaluation and Selection process 

The ToR made it clear that the mobility scheme had to be light and reactive, enabling A&CP to respond 
to flexible and short-term opportunities. Results were notified to applicants within three weeks of the 
closing of the first and third Call, and three and a half weeks of the closing of the second Call. Although 
the feedback from A&CP and the sector expressed appreciation for this fast turnaround, the Consortium 
argues that a longer period would be more beneficial for the evaluators and project team processing 
the applications. 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

2.2.1  Evaluation 

A  team  of  eight  evaluators  with  four  experts  in  Performing  Arts17  and  four  experts  in  Visual  Arts18 
coming  from  different  regions  and  with  a  vast  international  network  were  involved  throughout  the 
whole process. An easy-to-use and clear evaluation grid, together with guidelines aimed at ensuring a 
common  understanding  of  how  to  apply  the  evaluation  criteria,  was  communicated  through  an 
Evaluation Manual and reflected in a user-friendly online evaluation system. At the beginning of the 
project,  the  PM  personally  briefed  each  evaluator,  providing  a  detailed  introduction  into  the 
methodology. She remained available for in-depth discussions and questions during the whole process. 

In  order  to  ensure  the  highest  quality  and  accuracy  of  evaluations,  the  Consortium  proposed  in  its 
Technical Offer to work with evaluators who have expertise in (1) the artistic/cultural sector concerned 
by each application; and (2) the region of origin and/or destination of each application.  

Each  application  was  evaluated  by  two  evaluators.  For  this  mobility  scheme,  evaluators  were  not 
requested – as they are typically asked to do – to evaluate the quality of the artistic project, but rather 
of the mobility.  

The i-Portunus platform automatically allocated the applications to the relevant evaluators, and gave 
evaluators on-line access to the applications they had to assess. 

Lessons learnt 

  We  engaged  two  experts  for  each  sector  and  for  each  region  (Northern  Europe,  Southern 

Europe, Eastern Europe and non-EU countries), but soon realised that: 

 
 

their networks covered more than the geographical region they were evaluating; 
applications for a mobility scheme with a possibility to include multiple destinations can’t 
easily  be  allocated  to  “regions”  and  include  a  far  more  complex  web  of  elements  to 
evaluate.  

Based on this reality, the Consortium modified its system to allocate applications to evaluators 
per sector and not per region. The new system for the assignment of evaluators to applications 
worked as follows: 

  Each sector had a group of four evaluators. 
  Each application was assigned to two evaluators in the corresponding sector group. 
 

The  two  evaluators  were  assigned  via  a  rotating  system  to  make  sure  that  (a)  every 
evaluator  received  the  same  number  of  applications  and  (b)  the  pairing  of  the  two 
evaluators was diffused.  
In  detail:  the  mechanism  behind  it  looped  through  the  following  sets  of  evaluator 
combinations: 

 

1: Evaluator 1 + Evaluator 2 
2: Evaluator 1 + Evaluator 3 

17 Cristiano Carpanini, Audronis Imbrasas, Tamar Janashia, Katarzyna Torz.  
18 Rueben Fowkes, Tania Pardo, Alan Quireyns, Ilya Zabolotnyi. 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

3: Evaluator 1 + Evaluator 4 
4: Evaluator 2 + Evaluator 3 
5: Evaluator 2 + Evaluator 4 
6: Evaluator 3 + Evaluator 4 

 

The  success  of  the  mobility  scheme  could  not  be  estimated  in  advance.  With  over  1.200 
individual A&CP applying for the first Call; 1.141 individuals (covered by 710 applications) for 
the second Call and 832 individuals (covered by 586 applications) for the third Call, the team 
of evaluators faced an enormous workload and had only two weeks to process the huge amount 
of submitted applications; 

  Because the turnaround times had to be so short (to ensure a light and reactive scheme), it was 
not  realistic  for  the  PMT  to  take  time  to  check  the  eligibility  status  of  applications  prior  to 
sending them to the evaluators. That’s why the PM invested a lot of time in personal contacts 
with the evaluators before and after each  Call, so as to create a common vision of how the 
applications had to be assessed. Prior to and after each Call, the PM had an email and phone 
exchange with the evaluators to discuss past and upcoming procedures, after which updates 
were made to the evaluation grid and online system. The PM organised and drew conclusions 
from the challenges the evaluators faced with the evaluation system; 

  Our on-line system automatically transferred the applications to the evaluators as soon as they 
were  submitted:  in  theory,  this  should  have  allowed  the  evaluators  to  begin  assessing  the 
applications before the Calls closed, giving them more time to do their work. In practice this 
did not prove possible, since almost 95% of applicants finalised their applications in the hours 
leading up to the deadline. 

2.2.1.1 Recommendations 

 

Ideally, there should be five to six weeks between the closing of a Call and the time when the 
evaluators should submit their scores to the Project Manager; 

  A  rolling  Call  should  be  tested  to  check  whether  this  would  even  out  the  workload  for 

evaluators; 

  While  for  this  mobility  scheme,  evaluators  should  focus  on  evaluating  the  quality  of  the 
proposed mobilities (as opposed to the quality of the artistic projects), we still recommend that 
the evaluators involved in the project be experts in the different artistic and cultural sectors; 
  Each  evaluator  should  submit  a  short  evaluation  with  the  strengths  and  weaknesses  of  the 

application. 
For the evaluation grid: 

 

Although the majority of evaluators and DG EAC were not in favour of an additional breakdown 
in  points/sub-categories,  the  Consortium  still  thinks  a  more  extensive  breakdown  would 
facilitate the final selection process. While we recognise that such granularity would result in 
a longer and more complex evaluation, it would also provide more detailed information, which 
would  be  useful  for  the  final  selection.  Indeed,  in  the  current  pilot,  the  top  scores  were  all 
between 43 and 50, and it was not easy to distinguish the quality of applications between these 
two scores. 

•  The following sub-aspects should be taken into consideration for the evaluation grid 

under the current evaluation criteria: 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

  Relevance  -  To  what  extent  are  the  mobility  and  the  planned  activities 

important for achieving the selected objective? 

Sub-aspects: 
Is the project really in line with the stated objective?  
Choose from: 
International collaboration  Is happening around a specific and well-defined project 
Residency  The resulting production is tangible and well-defined 
Professional development  Concrete training with well-defined learning outcome 
Presentation  Of a specific and tangible production 

Could the same outcomes be achieved without physical mobility?  
Yes, in the end physical mobility wouldn’t make that much difference  
Yes, but the result is better/more interesting with physical mobility  
Yes, but with difficulty/would take much longer  
No, physical mobility is intrinsic to the realisation of the project  

  Quality of preparation - Is the project organised and planned so as to make it 
likely  that  the  objective  will  be  achieved?  (For  example:  clear  plans,  logical 
order,  sound  reason  for  selected  host,  host  is  involved,  concrete  activities 
planned, etc.) 

Sub-aspects: 
Is the host defined?  
How committed is the host to the project?  
Is there a well-defined schedule of meetings/presentations/activities?  
Are the host and schedule likely to lead to the selected objective?  

  Expected  outcomes  -  To  what  extent  will  the  mobility  lead  to  tangible  or 

intangible outcomes, in the short or long term?  

Sub-aspects: 
How realistic is the foreseen outcome?  
Will the project lead to new long-term opportunities?  

See Annex 3 Evaluation Grid and Annex 4 Evaluators’ Manual. 

2.2.2  Selection Strategy  

As soon as the evaluation team submitted their scores, a data collector19 brought all the applications 
and their scores together in one excel document, which served as the discussion document for the final 
selection.  The  final  selection  was  discussed  within  the  Consortium  taking  into  account  geographical 
balance, balance of sectors and emerging vs established A&CP.  

In the first and second Call, the highest ranked applications came from A&CP based in France, Italy, the 
UK and Germany: in order  to redress this geographical imbalance,  we  gave ‘penalty points’ to these 
countries of residence. In the third Call, we used another strategy: the budget was equally divided over 

19 Reinier Klok, i-Portunus data collector, r.l.k. projects. 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

Visual and Performing Arts and the final selection document included the 41 participating countries and 
their  proportionate  representation  in  terms  of  population  size.  In  the  next  step,  the  scores  of  the 
evaluators were imported (taking into account the discipline, geographical coverage and budget).  

Lessons learnt 

  Although applications coming from the Visual Arts were in the majority in all three calls, in the 
first two Calls, the final selection of A&CP was predominantly from the Performing Arts as these 
applications had higher scores. For the third Call, the Consortium modified its final selection 
strategy to first give priority to sectoral distribution and then to the scores of the evaluators. 
When  the  evaluators  were  asked  for  feedback  about  the  reason  behind  the  differences  in 
scores,  the  main  response  from  the  Visual  Arts  evaluators  was  that  the  preparation  of  the 
mobility was often too vague in terms of invitation letters from hosts or partners; this was less 
the case for A&CP in the Performing Arts sector. 

2.2.2.1 Recommendations 

 
 

 

The final selection should take into account the “double criterion” : quota and excellence. 
For the final selection, we recommend that the “ideal” number of applications to be funded per 
sector and per country first be determined, based on a proportional breakdown of the budget 
by sector and population size: this should be the baseline according to which applications from 
each country and sector are selected. 
This baseline should then be modified as a function of the actual strength of the applications: 
if applications from some countries or sectors are just too weak, they will not be funded, in 
favour of stronger applications from other countries or sectors. 
To work with a specialist data analyst who will: 

 
 

Import all the scores from the evaluators’ online platform into one single document; 
Identify “anomalous” evaluations (where two evaluators gave a very different score) and 
send these to the Project Manager who either (1) sends it to a third evaluator or 
(2) connects both evaluators to have a discussion about the application; 

  Prepare a final selection discussion document for the final Selection Committee in which 

(s)he will: 

  Divide the budget over sectors; 
 

Include the 41 participating countries and their proportionate representation in terms 
of population size; 
Import the final scores of the evaluators; 

 
  Check per country if the scores reach the minimum required score to get selected 

(based on the available budget and average success score). 

If not: other applications with a higher score get priority and as a 
consequence, some countries will have fewer selected applications. 

These  countries  will  thus  be  identified  as  in  need  of  capacity-building 
and additional communication work. 

  Check per discipline if the scores reach the minimum required score to get selected 

(based on the available budget and average success score). 

If not: other applications with a higher score in other disciplines get priority. 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

2.2.3  Final Selection 

In the final step, the Consortium’s selection was taken to DG EAC and EACEA for discussion and as soon 
as  it  was  approved,  the  results  were  published  on  the  i-Portunus  website  at  the  same  time  as  an 
automated email message informed all the applicants about the outcome of their application. 

Initially 123 A&CP were selected with a financial support of 252.300€. Three applicants subsequently 
decided to return the mobility support and one applicant reduced the duration category. The remaining 
budget was transferred to the third Call. The first i-Portunus Call resulted in a financial mobility support 
for 120 A&CP for a total amount of 245.725€. 

The financial support for the first Call for Applications covered 32% of Visual Arts projects and 68% of 
Performing Arts projects of legal residents (36% men, 63% women and 1% other) from Southern Europe 
(39%), Northern Europe (33%), Eastern and South-Eastern Europe (11%) and non-EU countries (17%). The 
majority of selected applicants was between 35 and 44 years old (39%) closely followed by applicants 
between 25 and 34 years old (37%), although one selected person was between 18 and 24 years old 
and  2  were  between  65  and  74  years  old.  In  this  first  Call,  all  sub-categories  in  Visual  Arts  and 
Performing Arts were represented, except for Fashion and Opera. 

The  objectives  which  were  most  in  demand  were  Production-oriented  residencies  (39%)  and 
International collaboration (34%), followed by Professional development (12%), Cultural change (8%) and 
Presentation (7%). 

The  selected  A&CP  were  based  in  28  different  countries  including  non-EU  countries.  Countries  of 
residence which were not covered for this first Call were Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, 
Cyprus, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Iceland, Kosovo, Luxemburg, Malta, Moldova and Montenegro. The 
most popular destination countries for the mobility projects were Italy (16%), Germany (9%), Serbia (8%), 
Belgium (7%), France (6%) and Ukraine (5%). Destination countries which were not requested by A&CP 
for this first Call were Cyprus, Ireland, Malta, Moldova and North-Macedonia.   

The statistical report of the final selection of the first i-Portunus Call shows that 56% of the selected 
applicants applied for the category 15–29 days, 24% for 30–59 days, 11% for 60–84 days and 9% for 85 
days. 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

The second i-Portunus Call initially resulted in financial mobility support for 132 A&CP for a total amount 
of 249.900€. The financial support for this second Call initially covered 27% of Visual Arts projects and 
73% of Performing Arts projects from emerging (53%) and established (47%) A&CP, of which 62% were 
women, 37% men and 1% other. There were 65 individuals who had applied through a group application 
(50%)  and  67 persons  who  had  submitted  an  individual  application  (50%)  for  a  total  of  89  selected 
projects. 68% of the selected applicants applied for the first time and for 32% of the selected applicants, 
this was a second and successful try. 

In the weeks after the selection, eight individuals (mostly members of a group) returned the support 
they had been granted, one individual received disability support and four individuals switched to a 
shorter duration category. In the end, the second i-Portunus Call resulted in financial mobility support 
for 124 A&CP for a total amount of 234.510€ including disability support. 

The financial support for the second Call for Applications covered 26% of Visual Arts projects and 74% 
of Performing Arts projects of legal residents (38% men, 61% women and 1% other) from Southern Europe 
(19% - a drop of 20% compared to the first Call), Northern Europe (32% - similar to the first Call), Eastern 
and South-Eastern Europe (32% - a rise of 20% compared to the first Call) and non-EU countries (17% - 
similar to the first Call). The majority of selected applicants was between 25 and 34 years old (42%), 
closely  followed  by  applicants  between  35  and  44  years  old  (41%),  although  5  selected  A&CP  were 
between  18  and  24  years  old  and  1  was  between  75  and  84  years  old.  In  this  second  Call,  all  sub-
categories in Visual Arts and Performing Arts were represented, except for Fashion and Crafts. 

The  objectives  which  were  most  in  demand  were  Production-oriented  residencies  and  International 
collaboration (both 31%), followed by Professional development (27% - a rise of 15% compared to the 
first Call) and Presentation (11%). 

The statistical report of the final selection of the second i-Portunus Call shows that 55% of the selected 
applicants applied for the category 15–29 days, 24% for 30–59 days and 21% for 60–85 days, which is 
very similar to the first Call. 

The selected A&CP were based in 33 different countries including non-EU countries, which is 5 more 
countries compared to the first Call. Countries of residence which were not covered in the second Call 
were  Latvia,  Lithuania  and  Tunisia.  Countries  of  residence  which  were  not  covered  in  the  first  and 
second Call were Albania, Cyprus, Kosovo, Luxemburg and Moldova, but compared to the first Call this 
time Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Iceland, Malta and Montenegro were 
included. The most popular destination countries for the mobility projects were more balanced than for 
the  first  Call  with  France  and  Germany  (both  7%)  on  top  of  the  list,  closely  followed  by  the  Czech 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

Republic (6%), Slovenia and Spain (both 5%) and a shared third place for Austria, Portugal and the United 
Kingdom (all 4,5%). The single destination country which was not covered by A&CP for both Calls was 
Moldova and for the second Call newcomers were Albania, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iceland, 
Montenegro  and  Slovakia.  Compared  to  the  first  Call  this  time  Cyprus,  Ireland,  Malta  and  North-
Macedonia were included as a country of destination for the mobility project. 

The option to apply as a group was introduced in the second Call and 26% of selected A&CP submitted 
a  group  application  compared  to  74%  individual  applications.  The  second  Call  also  allowed  for  a 
segmented  mobility,  and  21%  of  selected  A&CP  chose  this  option  compared  to  79%  opting  for  a 
continuous mobility. 

The option to declare the estimated annual income was integrated on the application form from the 
second Call. The majority of selected A&CP had an estimated annual income between 5.000 and 10.000€ 
(34%), closely followed by an annual income below 5.000€ (29%) and 52% were self-employed.  

The selection of the third Call resulted in a financial support for 93 A&CP for a total amount of 140.698€ 
including disability support. 

The financial support for the third Call covered 42% of Visual Arts projects and 58% of Performing Arts 
projects. In the application form of the third Call, A&CP could indicate whether they were emerging or 
established in their field or profession. In the third Call 72% were emerging and 28% were established 
A&CP. Also, in this Call 76% were artists and 24% culture professionals and 58% were women and 42% 
men.  

Of the selected applicants in the third Call 76% submitted an individual application and 24% submitted 
a group application. However, in terms of individuals this translated to 54 A&CP were an individual 
applicant (58%) and 39 individuals were  part of a group (42%).  Furthermore, 15,5% of selected A&CP 
applied for a segmented mobility and a majority of 84,5% for a continuous mobility. Of the selected 
applicants 88% applied for the first time and for 12% of the selected applicants, this was a repeated and 
successful try. Similar to the first and second Calls the majority of selected applicants in the third Call 
were between 35 and 44 years old (43%), closely followed by applicants between 25 and 34 years old 
(40%), although 1 selected applicant was between 18 and 24 years old and 3 applicants were between 
55  and  64  years  old.  In  the  third  Call,  all  sub-categories  in  Visual  Arts  and  Performing  Arts  were 
represented, except for Puppetry, Street Art, Graphic Arts and Fashion. 

The  objectives  which  were  most  in  demand  were  Production-oriented  residencies  (44%)  and 
International collaboration (41%), followed by Professional development (16% - a drop of 10% compared 
to the second Call and quite similar to the turnout of the first Call). 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

The  selected  A&CP  were  based  in  27  different  countries  including  non-EU  countries,  which  is  less 
compared to the first two Calls. Countries of residence which were not covered in the third Call were 
Bosnia  and  Herzegovina,  Czech  Republic,  Iceland,  Malta,  North-Macedonia,  Slovakia  and  Sweden. 
Countries of residence which were not covered in the second and third Call were Latvia and Tunisia. 
Countries of residence which were not covered all three Calls were Albania, Cyprus, Kosovo, Luxemburg 
and Moldova. The most popular destination countries for the mobility projects in the Third Call were 
quite similar to the previous Calls, although the United Kingdom (11%) was on the top of the list, closely 
followed by a shared second place for France and Germany (both 10%), Spain (8,5%), the Czech Republic 
and Sweden (both 5%). The single destination country which was not covered by A&CP for all Calls was 
Moldova and for the second and third Call it was Armenia, Iceland and Montenegro.  

The option to declare the estimated annual income has been integrated on the application form since 
the  second  Call.  The  majority  of  selected  A&CP  for  the  third  Call  had  an  estimated  annual  income 
between 10.000 and 15.000€ (31%), closely followed by an annual income below 5.000€ (30%) and 5.000 
and 10.000€ (25%). 63% were self-employed. In the third Call applicants could indicate on the application 
form what the number of inhabitants was in the place they were based: 52% of selected A&CP applied 
from  a  place  with  more  than  1.000.000  inhabitants  and  25%  from  a  place  with  more  than  100.000 
inhabitants. 

Below  are  the  combined  results  of  all  three  Calls  for  Applications.  Interestingly,  almost  half  of  the 
participants in this mobility scheme received a job offer or new contract as a result of their international 
mobility experience. This is a most impressive impact considering the limited financial support provided by 
the EU, e.g. only 1.500 to 3.400 euros per individual. 

28 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

Summary visual of the 3 i-Portunus Calls. 

2.2.4  Contact with Selected Applicants and Payment Procedures 

Each applicant received an automated email which was generated by the i-Portunus platform. The email 
for the successful applicants contained a link to the contract and information on the next steps. The 
Project Assistant processed all the contracts. Upon signing the contracts the first 75% of the mobility 
support was transferred to the A&CP’s account. 

The  PM  and  PA  were  available  to  answer  all  sorts  of  questions  throughout  each  phase  of  the  calls. 
Recurring questions were collected on the FAQ section of the website (see also 2.1.1.1), and also served 
to improve the communication in each Call for Applications. 

At the end  of the mobility, the  Project Assistant contacted the applicants to  complete  their Activity 
Reports. As soon as this was submitted the procedure for the final 25% payment was put in effect. These 
Activity Reports provided quantitative and qualitative data to understand the impact  of the scheme 
and  how  it  could  be  improved  in  the  future.  (See  2.3.2  Activity  Reports  for  more  details  on  the 
quantitative and qualitative data.) 

Lessons Learnt 

 

To allow the programme to be fast and flexible, the current pilot set extremely tight deadlines 
for  the  evaluation,  selection  and  payment  process.  In  the  current  pilot,  applicants  were 
requested to return their signed contracts within two weeks of the notification of results and 
the earliest date of departure was shortly thereafter. Some applicants therefore paid for their 
transport out of their own pocket, while awaiting their financial support to come through. These 
precarious  situations  should  be  avoided  by  establishing  a  more  realistic  timeframe  in  the 
future. 

2.2.4.1 Recommendations 

 

 

 

To  set  the  earliest  date  of  departure  at  one  month  from  the  date  at  which  the  contract  is 
validated; 
To continue the payment procedure in two instalments: 75% at outset and 25% after submitting 
an Activity Report about the mobility; 
To  include  the  following  table  in  the  online  application  platform  so  as  to  better  inform  the 
applicants on the different phases: 

29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

2.3 

Analysis and Impact  

2.3.1  Analysis of Data 

After each Call 

At  the  close  of  each  call,  the  data  collector20  extracted  data  from  the  user  platform  and  provided 
statistics on submitted applications, covering: 

 
Sectors and sub-sectors 
  Countries of residence  
  Nationalities 
  Countries of destination  
  Objectives (5 options in Call 1, 4 options in Call 2, 3 options in Call 3)  
  Duration (4 categories in Call, 3 categories in Call 2, 2 categories in Call 3)  
 
  Artist vs culture professional  
  Emerging vs Established A&CP (Calls 2 and 3) 
 
  Groups of 2, 3, 4 or 5 members (Calls 2 and 3) 
  Gender 
  Number of inhabitants of place of residence (Call 3 only) 

Individuals vs Groups (Calls 2 and 3) 

Transport means 

20 Reinier Klok, i-Portunus data collector, r.l.k. projects 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

  Economic background (Calls 2 and 3) 
  First time applicant vs former applicant (Calls 2 and 3) 
  Continuous vs segmented (Calls 2 and 3) 
  One destination vs multiple destinations (Calls 2 and 3) 
  Amount of destinations (Calls 2 and 3) 
  Disability (Calls 2 and 3) 
  Age category 

See Annex 5: Statistics of submitted applications per Call. 

After each Selection 

Once the Consortium and DG EAC agreed on the final selection (based on the scores of the evaluators 
and  the  final  selection  meeting  with  the  PSC)  the  data  collector  provided  statistics  on  the  selected 
applications on the parameters mentioned above. 

See Annex 6: Statistics of the final selection per Call. 

2.3.2  Activity Reports 

The Consortium assessed the impact of the individual mobility support and of the overall pilot scheme 
by screening the “Activity Reports” submitted by supported A&CP. The reports provided information 
on: 

  Communication about the mobility 
  Objectives (whether they were reached or not) 
  Outcomes (job opportunities, new collaborations, new skills/knowledge…) 
  The funding process 
  What A&CP would change 

The use of activity reports is highly recommended by the Consortium, since it shows the outcome and 
impact of the scheme on the personal level of each A&CP. The Consortium linked the activity report as 
a condition for receiving the remaining 25% payment, and this has proven to be very successful. 

Of 337 A&CP only two applicants didn’t return the activity report: one applicant couldn’t complete his 
mobility because of an unexpected medical intervention and immediately contacted the head of the 
CED in Armenia who upon her turn informed the PMT. The other applicant first wanted to change the 
dates of his mobility due to problems with the visa permit. This applicant equally reached out to the 
head of the CED in Armenia who asked the PMT for permission to change the dates. The PMT accepted 
the  change.  As  soon  as  the  mobility  ended  the  PA  contacted  the  applicant  to  complete  the  activity 
report.  After  several  unanswered  emails  and  phone  calls  the  PM  contacted  the  head  of  the  CED  in 
Armenia. She called the applicant and found out he didn’t undertake the mobility and had closed down 
his email address. The applicant did send an email to the PM following the phone call with the CED to 
apologize, but since then the emails stayed unanswered.  

In the first phase of the pilot A&CP received the template for the activity report (see Annex 7) via email 
from the PA. A&CP had to complete it and send it back to the PA within two weeks after the mobility. 
In exceptional cases the PA had to remind them several times, but the majority handed in on time. 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

In the meantime the web designer and the technical team worked on a digital version linked to the 
my.i-portunus platform. This version was available from December 2019 onwards. An automatic system 
was put into place in which A&CP automatically received an email with the template on the day the 
mobility  ended.  They  had  to  upload  it  within  two  weeks  after  the  mobility.  This  system  has  the 
additional advantage  of allowing data to be extracted more easily since they are centralised on the 
platform and not collected via emails. 

Communication about the mobility 

A&CP took ownership of the communication about their project and the programme, which proved to 
be one of the main success factors, and allowed for an i-Portunus community to grow stronger, more 
known and widespread.  

Almost 91% of A&CP communicated and/or disseminated their experience about their mobility project, 
financially supported by i-Portunus, and did so on the following platforms: 

Objectives  

49% of A&CP stated to have reached their objective completely, and 36% indicated they went beyond 
their objective. Together they accounted for 85% having  very successful international experiences 
via i-Portunus mobility support.  
Of  the  14%  who  reached  their  objective  only  partly,  the  most  common  statement  was,  that  people 
wished they would have given themselves more time for the project. This included the wish for a longer 
i-Portunus  mobility  duration  compared  to  the  duration  they  applied  for  but  also  more  time  for 
preparatory  work.  Here,  A&CP  expressed  their  desire  for  more  (preparatory)  contacts  to  local 
institutions and individuals before and during the mobility. 

32 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

Outcomes 

Almost 97% of A&CP acquired new skills / knowledge through the mobility, 94% developed new 
audiences / outlets, 94% stated new co-productions / co-creations came out of the mobility, and for 
almost 50% the mobility resulted in a job offer or new contracts.  

Funding process 

88% of A&CP indicated the funding process went smoothly. The remaining group indicated they would 
have preferred more clear communication concerning the timing of the first payment.  

Since the consortium aimed for a light and reactive scheme, the earliest departure date for A&CP had 
been  set  two  weeks  after  the  notification  of  results.  This  meant  some  A&CP  received  the  payment 
closely to, or shortly after, their departure.  

The experience of this pilot phase taught us that this deadline is too sharp, since the handling of 120, 
124 and 93 contracts and payments for A&CP residing in 41 countries in less than two weeks  is not 
sufficient time to process. 

Feedback on the i-Portunus scheme 

76% of A&CP wouldn’t change anything to the current scheme.  

In  the  remaining  24%  a  sub-group  of  A&CP  is  related  to  the  first  Call  for  Applications  where  group 
applications were not yet eligible but in demand. In the second and third Call, some group members 
indicated to have preferred to receive mobility support for groups on a company account and / or the 
main applicant’s account.  

Two participants perceived the financial support as insufficient for destination countries in Northern / 
Western Europe. One participant suggested to orient the amount of mobility support on the actual days 
of mobility duration rather than paying a lump sum.   

Others indicated they would keep the Calls open for a longer duration so as to allow them to find the 
right partner(s) in the country of destination. 

One participant suggested additional funding for people with children, in order to enable for child care 
during the mobility period. 

One participant would have wanted to receive more advise on taxation for funding. 

2.3.2.1 Recommendations 

  Continue using the activity reports 

•  To condition the final payment 
•  To establish a direct dialogue on the impact of the mobility for A&CP 

  Offer A&CP a clear timetable for the payment transfers; 
  Use a fix travel amount + a daily rate for the duration of the mobility. 

33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

See Annex 7: Template Activity reports, Annex 8: Analysis of Activity reports, Annex 9: Selection of i-
Portunus Stories stemming from the activity reports. 

2.4 

Communication 

2.4.1  Network 

2.4.1.1  Consortium 

The  Consortium  partners  have  branch  offices  in  40  countries21  concerned  by  this  project,  i.e.  those 
eligible  under  the  Creative  Europe  program,  including  non-EU  countries.  This  geographical  coverage 
was an important and vital asset to the successful implementation of this short experimental project.  

Important communication tools included: 

  A dynamic and integrated web platform dedicated to the communication, dissemination and 

management of the mobility scheme (see 2.4.2.1 Website and Mobility Platform); 
  Web sites of Consortium partners, intermediary organisations and host organisations; 
  Project  social  media  channel;  social  media  channels  of  Consortium  partners,  associated 

partners and host organisations (see 2.4.2.2 Social Media); 

  Press releases – especially to the specialised media, to intermediary organisations; 
  PowerPoint  presentation,  which  was  adapted/translated  for  different  target  audiences  as 

needed; 

  Direct access to an info email address22, where all queries were quickly answered, in multiple 

 

languages. 
Live  presentations  to  relevant  A&CP,  host  organisations  and  intermediary  organisations 
through direct participation in meetings and seminars with these target audiences. 

See  Annex  10:  Communication  &  Dissemination  Activities,  and  Annex  11:  Statistics  Communication 
Outreach 

2.4.1.2  Creative Europe Desks 

Towards the end of the pilot, a data collector23 interviewed representatives24 of CEDs and multiplier 
organisations about their  communication activities. The interviews highlighted  the importance of an 

21 Except Moldova. 
22 info@i-portunus.eu 
23 Petya Koleva, i-Portunus data collector, Intercultura Consult. 
24 Eva Blaute, Project Manager i-Portunus | Pilot Mobility Scheme for individual Artists and Culture Professionals Goethe-Institut; 
Ernest Thiesmeier Project Assistant  - Voices of Culture & i-Portunus | Pilot Mobility Scheme for individual Artists and Culture 
Professional Goethe-Institut; Dessislava Pancheva, Manager Creative Europe Desk Bulgaria, Dimitrije Tadic, Head of CED Serbia, 
Milan  Đorđević,  Project  manager,  Creative  Europe  Desk,  Republic  of  Serbia;  Gwendolenn  Sharp  data  collector  for  i-Portunus, 
Khouloud Soula, Operations Coordinator, Creative Europe Desk Tunisia; Mafalda Sebastião, coordinator of the art and cultural 
mobility info point, Câmara Municipal de Lisboa, Portugal, Marie Le Sourd, Secretary general, On the Move; Oksana Sarzhevskaya-
Kravchenko, Director of IZOLYATSIA platform for cultural initiatives Ukraine; Pavla Petrová Director Arts and Theatre Institute 
Czech Republic, Reinier Klok, data collector for i-Portunus. 

34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
                                                   
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

active CED as the core source of information and support for all Creative Europe programmes, including 
i-Portunus.  The  visibility  of  the  CED  is  particularly  important  in  partner  countries  that  joined  the 
Creative  Europe  programme more recently, as  is the  case of Armenia and Tunisia. Online support  is 
seen  as  especially  relevant  in  connecting  the  respective  local  scene  to  international  partners.  The 
comparative Table 1 below summarises the activities undertaken by CEDs in promoting i-Portunus to 
their A&CP. It shows that Creative Europe member countries had a common approach to promoting the 
Calls,  combining  traditional  means  of  dissemination  (e.g.  website  posts  and  newsletters)  and  social 
media  outreach.  There  was  a  clear  domination  of  Facebook  over  other  profiles.  Yet,  other  channels 
were  also  effective  to  reach  professional  networks  and  younger  people,  such  as  Twitter,  Instagram, 
LinkedIn, YouTube and the Issuu Digital Publishing Platform. 

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

Table 1: Effective tools and approaches used to disseminate information and motivate applicants 

ЕFFECTIVE APPROACHES/TOOLS/INSTRUMENTS 

Creative 

active 

websites  

newsletter 

social 

Capacity -building 

Europe 

country 

CED 

& portals 

media 

(events, mediated reach, virtual means) 

Armenia  New 

(2018) 

Bilingual 
website 

CED 

Facebook 

A presentation by 
CED and i-
Portunus PM at 
ICA Yerevan 

- 

Bulgaria  Yes 

CED 

BFA 

Bilingual 
website; 
international 
coop. 
portals 

Yes 

Czech 

Republic 

Bilingual 
culture  info 
portal;  

ATI  weekly 
newsfeed 

Facebook 
LinkedIn 
twitter 

A presentation by 
CED at  a Dance 
event 

CED info 
sessions 

Instagram 

Facebook 
LinkedIn 
Instagram 
YouTube 
Issuu 

A networking 
event on arts 
mobility by 

ATI and ASIA-
EUROPE 

cinema trailers 

Portugal  Yes 

mobility 
portal  

Online 
portal; 

 a  mobility 
info page  

Serbia 

Yes 

Bilingual 
website; 

CED 

culture 
for, 
funds 

A 
portal 
EU 
portals 

Bilingual 
info  portal 
for 
networking 
civic 
organisation 

Tunisia 

New 

(Oct. 
2017) 

CED 

Facebook 

A conference on 
internationalisation 
by the CCI 

several training 
sessions  

Facebook 
Twitter 
Instagram 
(incl. ads) 

A presentation by 
CED and i-
Portunus PM  

Contact with 
sector-specific 
art networks  

CED 

Facebook 

- 

An info session 
integrated in a 
festival; 

presentations 
within CED info 
sessions 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

36 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

Ukraine 

Yes 

bilingual info 
sheets online 

Foundation 

Facebook 

CED 

Seminars; an info 
session integrated 
in a festival 

A CED national 
networking 
event; 

webinars 

Community 
culture bus info 
sessions;  

Art Wednesday 
project 

The comparative Table 1 above shows that Creative Europe member countries had a common 
approach to promoting the Calls, combining traditional means of dissemination (e.g. website posts and 
newsletters) and new social media outreach. There was a clear domination of Facebook over other 
profiles. Yet, other channels were also effective to reach professional networks and younger people, 
such as Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn, YouTube and Issue. 

The PM shared press releases and statistics for each Call with the coordinator of the Creative Europe 
Desks. Some CEDs actively promoted the pilot through presentations and through the media (it was on 
television  in Portugal and  Serbia, and  on a radio  programme in Slovenia).  Furthermore, the CEDs in 
Helsinki, Belgrade, Yerevan and Ljubljana invited the Project Manager to physically present the scheme, 
which immediately resulted in a rise of applications from those countries.  

See Annex 10: Communication & Dissemination Activities for more detailed information. 

Table 2: Applications, awards and success rates per country/call 

Country/Call 

Valid Applications 

Awarded 
Individuals 

Success rate25 

Armenia 
Call 1 
Call 2 
Call 3 
Bulgaria 
Call 1 
Call 2 
Call 3 
Czech Republic 
Call 1 
Call 2 
Call 3 

5 
13 
11 

7 
13 
12 

15 
20 
8 

2 
2 
2 

0 
1 
7  

1 
8 
0 

good 

increase 

very good 

25 The quality of applications received for all three calls was very high and only outstanding candidates were awarded mobility 
support due to the restricted budget available for A&CP residing in the 41 Creative Europe countries.  

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

Portugal 
Call 1 
Call 2 
Call 3 
Serbia 
Call 1 
Call 2 
Call 3 
Tunisia 
Call 1 
Call 2 
Call 3 
Ukraine 
Call 1 
Call 2 
Call 3 

51 
22 
12 

13 
13 
16 

12 
7 
2 

38 
33 
24 

8 
3  
3 

3 
4 
5 

4 
0 
0 

9 
6 
3 

high 

high 

decrease 

high 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

2.4.2  Online 

2.4.2.1  Website and Mobility Platform 

The  website  and  associated  application  management  platform  have  been  developed,  tested  and 
validated extensively. They are a key highlight to the success of this first pilot phase. The PM and web 
designer26  were  in  touch  on  a  daily  to  weekly  basis  to  channel  the  information  coming  from  the 
Consortium and the PSC into an efficient and user-friendly design.  

The web designer created the visual identity for the  mobility scheme. He built a temporary landing 
page to announce the pilot. The page featured brief information about i-Portunus in three languages 
and allowed visitors to subscribe to email updates. He designed the main website which focused on 
the general information about the programme. The i-Portunus website was in English, but included basic 
information about the pilot in the languages of all Creative Europe countries. 

The website www.i-portunus.eu provided: 

  Access to the on-line application platform; 
  Content of the three i-Portunus Calls 
  Data and statistics of the three i-Portunus Calls and the selected A&CP; 
 
 

i-Portunus Stories; 
Information on mobility and mobility opportunities. 

The web designer developed the application management platform with a technical team27 who had 
previous  experience  with  online  applications  systems.  Together  they  continuously  improved  and 
updated the system per Call, answering needs to update the application form for the second and third 
Call,  the  evaluation  grid  from  the  second  Call  onwards  and  to  include  digital  Activity  Reports  from 
December 2019 onwards.   

The platform www.my.i-portunus.eu provided access to an on-line application system, and allowed: 

 
 
 
 
 

the applicants to have visibility of their application within the process; 
the evaluators to evaluate the applications; 
the management team to manage the applications and agreements; 
the download of contracts; 
the download and upload of activity reports (from December 2019 onwards). 

26 Wies Hermans, Senior Graphic/Web Designer and Consultant, www.fuut.be 
27 eMundus, Online Application Developers, www.emundus.fr 

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

Whereas  the  website  initially  served  as  the 
core access point for information on the Calls, 
it  gradually  grew  into  a  forum  for  success 
stories.  As  soon  as  applicants  ended  their 
mobility  projects,  they  submitted  an  Activity 
Report  with  visuals  and  information  on  the 
mobility.  

  This source material was used to produce 
the i-Portunus Stories available on the 
website. Thanks to the i-Portunus Stories, 
future applicants were informed and inspired 
by the nature of successful projects, and 
unsuccessful applicants could learn how to 
improve their projects for future Calls. 

The homepage provided an overview of the project and was enriched with Stories and Statistics: 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

41 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

The website was structured around different categories: 

42 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

The section “About the Programme” listed the following sub-categories: 

For  detailed  information  on  the  technical  aspects  of  the  web  platform,  see  Annex  12:  Technical 
Handover: Website and Online Mobility Platform. 

2.4.2.2  Social Media 

The Project Assistant set up accounts on Facebook, Twitter and 
Instagram,  which  were  followed  and  shared  by  A&CP, 
Consortium partners, CEDs and On the Move, thus creating a vast 
network  of  online  visibility.  Furthermore,  1,654  Facebook 
followers,  574  Instagram  followers  and  328  Twitter  followers 
have multiplied the communication of messages. 

To ensure regular communication throughout the project, posts 
were evenly spaced out over time. See also 2.4: Communication. 

See Annex 13: Communication Handbook 

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

2.5  Cycle of Calls 

Recommendations 

To summarise the duration of all the different parts mentioned above, which together form the cycle 
of a Call:  

  We recommend to announce the Calls via all communication channels 4 weeks before each Call; 
  Calls  should  be  open  for  at  least  8  weeks,  which  gives  associated  partners  enough  time  to 

inform A&CP who need help developing their application; 

  Evaluators need 5 to 6 weeks to assess the applications; 
 

The timing between the evaluators submitting their scores, the data collector processing the 
information, the final selection and the notification of results should be at least 2 weeks; 

  After notification, A&CP should have at least 2 weeks to return their signed contracts; 
 
  Earliest date of departure: at least 4 weeks after returning the signed contract 

The PMT needs 2 weeks to process all contracts; 

For each Cycle (communication, publication, evaluation, notification, handling of contracts, payments, 
departure), we recommend a period of 25-28 weeks.  

In  the  recommended  timeframe  A&CP  will  be  notified  about  the  result  within  8  weeks  after 
submitting their application, and will be able to leave 6 weeks after the notification. This duration 
still fits into the objective of having a light and reactive scheme on such a large scale.  

44 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

3.  TASK III: The Policy Recommendations 

3.1 

Policy Recommendations Workshop 

In  October  2019,  ca.  60  professionals  representing  a  broad  range  of  organisations,  both  in  terms  of 
sectors and geographical spread, concerned with the mobility of A&CP, came together for a workshop. 
The participants28 were selected from the key players that had been consulted for the Analytical Report, 
as well as from the vast and varied networks of the Consortium partners.  

Based on the experience of the pilot, the Consortium identified five crucial topics to be discussed within 
the context of a European mobility scheme. Through open discussions and working groups around those 
topics, the workshop aimed to identify and formulate Policy Recommendations for a future mobility 
scheme for A&CP at European level.  

The working groups explored: 

1.  Capacity building: forms, tools and activities empowering A&CP international mobility; 
2.  Networks: their role and impact on A&CP international mobility; 
3.  Host organisations: typology, needs and conditions for a European mobility scheme; 
4.  Environmental mobility guidelines: reducing environmentally costly travel while ensuring the 
participation  of  A&CP  from  countries  with  less  environmentally  sustainable  transport 
infrastructure; 

5.  Culture professionals: typology, key characteristics and nature of their needs. 

One  team  member  from  each  of  the  Consortium  partners  and  one  evaluator  from  the  i-Portunus 
evaluator team moderated the working groups. Note keepers wrote up reports that were shared with 
the participants after the workshop. Everyone was invited to give feedback on the summary report. 
The outcomes of the different working groups are part of the Policy Recommendations. 

See Annex 14: Workshop agenda, and Annex 15: Participant biographies. 

3.2 

Policy Recommendations 

The  Policy  Recommendations  set  out  in  Annex  1  formulate  practical  and  actionable  Policy 
Recommendations  based  on  our  experience  of  implementing  the  i-Portunus  mobility  scheme  on  the 
operational  level.  Together  with  the  recommendations  from  the  Analytical  Report,  this  document 
formulates  Policy  Recommendations  to  the  European  Commission,  the  European  Parliament  and  the 
Member States to prepare the ground for an individual mobility scheme for A&CP from 2021 onwards 
in the next generation of EU programmes. 

See 4.3 for a short summary of the policy recommendations. 

28 Annex 15: Participant biographies. 

45 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

4.  RESULTS ACHIEVED PER OBJECTIVE 

4.1 

Task I: Analysis  

The Analytical Report by On the Move: 

 

Includes a definition of “mobility” for each sector and an updated definition of cultural 
mobility: 

  Mobility is a central component of the professional trajectory of A&CP. Involving a 

temporary cross-border movement, often for educational, capacity-building, networking, 
or working purposes, it may have tangible or intangible outputs in the short term, and/or 
be part of a long-term professional development process.  

  Mobility is a conscious process, and those involved in it, whether by directly engaging in 

it or by supporting it, should take into consideration its cultural, social, political, 
environmental, ethical and economic implications. 

 

Identifies gaps in the provision of mobility where a European scheme could provide added 
value in terms of boosting creativity, exploring markets and developing careers: 

  Offer-led and demand-led opportunities in Creative Europe countries: 2.070 funding 

schemes identified, more than 50% of which are concentrated in 5 to 8 Creative Europe 
countries 
1.443 one-off calls with limited scope 

 
  A&CP in non-EU Creative Europe countries have very limited access to mobility funding 

schemes 
Limited number of transnational/Euro-regional mobility funding schemes 

 
  No EU funding scheme directly focus on individuals 

  Defines the most effective operational framework for a mobility scheme that can efficiently 

deliver this added value. 

  Assesses the necessity to focus on a specific group of beneficiaries or sector 

While  certain  sub-sectors  require  more  or  less  dedication  when  it  comes  to  cross-border 
mobility, A&CP  of all sub-sectors covered by the Creative Europe programme expressed the 
relevance  of  international  development  in  their  professional  practice  within  their  own  sub-
sector. Furthermore, a project or an existing initiative can go beyond the artistic sub-sectors 
or allow cross-disciplinary exchanges. This calls for all sub-sectors to be eligible, also cross-
disciplinary approaches and cross-overs  with  other sectors.  The mobility scheme should be 
open to experimentation within and between disciplines, and go beyond certain fixed topics 
or focuses. 

47 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

4.2 

Task II: Experimentation 

4.2.1  Task II.A: Experimental Mobility Action  

After the completion of the last application round, a total number of 337 mobilities (instead of 500 as 
initially foreseen in the ToR) had been selected for financial mobility support. This implied a reduced 
number of contracts and activity reports to deal with. However the experimental nature of the pilot 
and a much higher number of applications than expected resulted in an increase of the workload for 
the PMT, especially in terms of communication with enquiring A&CP, and for the evaluators in terms of 
eligibility checks and evaluations. 

The mobility actions implemented during the pilot phase had the following distinctive features:  

  The selected i-Portunus mobility projects were part of creative and cultural projects and 

touched upon various disciplines and sectors, as can be seen in the i-Portunus Stories on the 
website;  

  They covered individual, flexible and short-term opportunities with a balanced geographical 
coverage although additional capacity building work should be done in a future scheme, 
especially in non-EU countries participating in the Creative Europe programme;  

  They involved a wide range of host organisations, resulting in an updated typology of host 

organisations;29 

  They were open to A&CP who are legal residents of an EU Member State or of a country 

participating in the Creative Europe programme;  

  They were implemented in the following sectors: Visual Arts and Performing Arts.  
  They included Activity Reports delivered by the participants. 

All  of the A&CP in the  mobility scheme took  part as individual sub-contractors. Below are the main 
statistics: 

  3.194 individuals from 41 countries applied and submitted a total of 2.517 applications;  
  Of the submitted applications 46% covered the Performing Arts and 54% the Visual Arts; 
 

 Of the selected applications 67,5% covered the Performing Arts and 32,5% the Visual Arts; 
a.  The final selection took into account the “double criterion” : quota and excellence. 
b.  The final selection was based on a proportional breakdown of the budget by sector 
and population size. This baseline was modified as a function of the actual strength of 
the  applications:  if  applications  from  some  countries  or  sectors  were  just  too  weak, 
they were not be funded, in favour of stronger applications from other countries or 
sectors. 

  The  purpose  of  the  mobilities  in  the  submitted  applications  were  production-oriented 
residencies  (38%),  international  collaborations  (37%),  professional  development  (14,5%), 
presentation (7,5%) and cultural change (3%). 

  The requested durations of the mobilities in the submitted applications ranged from 15-29 

days (55%), 30-59 days (26%) to 60-85 days (19%). 

  Mobility support ranged from 1.500 euros  per individual A&CP for 15-29 days, to 2.400 euros 
for 30-59 days, to 3.000 euros for 60-85 days, to 3.400 euros for more than 85 days (only 
available in Call 1). 

29 Annex 17: Typology of Host Organisations 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

  A total amount of 620.933 euros has been allocated to the international mobilities of 337 

A&CP. 

See Annex 16: Amended budget. 

4.2.2  Task II.B: Mobility platform 

The mobility platform (www.i-portunus.eu): 

  Provided access to mobility opportunities and information sources; 
  Allowed online application, evaluation and management of mobility actions; 
  Featured success stories of A&CP contributing to a better understanding of innovative 

mobility projects in the European sphere; 

  Provided data and statistics on mobility in the CCS. 

Between April and November 2019, the website was accessed by 75,220 unique visitors. 

4.2.3  Task II.C: Communication and Dissemination 

The following objectives were reached: 

  To attract eligible, geographically and sectorally balanced applications 

 

the pilot has demonstrated that additional work in capacity-building is crucial for a future 
mobility scheme, especially in non-EU countries. 

  To gauge public perceptions of the mobility scheme  

through feedback from the sector 

through communication with A&CP via the helpdesk 

 
  via the Facebook, Twitter and Instagram posts and reposts  
 
  via the Creative Europe desks 
 
  via the submitted activity reports by A&CP 

at the Policy Recommendations workshop with ca. 60 stakeholders in Brussels 

  To recruit the participation of A&CP in further communication and dissemination efforts 

 

thanks to the activity of the 1,654 Facebook followers (account active since April 2019), 
574 Instagram followers (account active since July 2019) and 328 Twitter followers 
(active since April 2019) 

  To obtain the support of CCS stakeholders and decision-makers for the future mobility 

scheme and Policy Recommendations 

  European networks and platforms (like On the Move, EUNIC, IETM), national organisations 

working with cultural mobility (like Flanders Arts Institute, the Finnish Cultural Institute 
etc.) and Ministries. 

Annex 8: Analysis of Activity Reports. 

Annex 10: Communication & Dissemination Activities. 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

4.2.4  Task II.D: Testing and Evaluation 

The following objectives have been reached: 

  To provide content for the website/the mobility platform  

 

See 2.4.2.1 Website and mobility platform 

  To inform stakeholders through our Communication and Dissemination activities 

 
 

See Annex 10: Communication & Dissemination Activities 
See Annex 13: Communication Handbook 

  To provide evidence for the Policy Recommendations 

 

This Final Report and its annexes presents a summary of the evidence that has been 
collected through this pilot project. 

4.3 

Task III: The Policy Recommendations 

During the pilot phase of the i-Portunus mobility scheme for A&CP, the Consortium has tested various 
aspects of the mobility scheme, both in line with the conclusions of this project’s Analytical Report as 
well as variations and new ideas, developed in response to needs that became  apparent during the 
pilot.  

The Policy Recommendations presented in Annex 1 of this Final Report are based on our experience of 
implementing the i-Portunus mobility scheme. We strongly recommend that the reader refers to the full 
Analytical Report,  which contains highly relevant and important information  presented with a  great 
wealth of detail, and which also addresses financial and political aspects of the mobility scheme for 
A&CP, as well as policy recommendations.  

The Consortium partners will present the Policy Recommendations in a separate document which will 
be publicly available30 (as opposed to the Final Report which is for restricted dissemination). 

Short Summary of the Policy Recommendations: 

1.  Overall Goal 

To develop and implement a European mobility support scheme directly targeting individual 
artists and culture professionals with self-initiated and concrete project-oriented mobilities 
fostering international collaboration, dialogue and reflection. 

2.  Objectives and Impact 

The objective of i-Portunus is: 

  To fund a broad range of mobilities in terms of geographical and sectoral scope; 

30 The Policy Recommendations will be published on the i-Portunus website and will be sent to stakeholders. 

50 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

  To allow for  long-term impacts in terms of tangible and non-tangible artistic, creative and 

economic development.  

3.  European Added Value 

 

The distinctive added value of i-Portunus lies in: 
  offering a mobility scheme no single Member State (MS) can offer on its own; 
 

the  potential  to  have  an  EU  scheme  for  individual  mobility  at  large  pooling  all  available 
information, including innovative initiatives and multiple studies on legal and tax issues; 
the large community of A&CP providing information on trends and needs of the sectors and 
the specific target groups;   
tackling inequalities of access to and information about mobility support; 

 
  paving the way to promote fair cultural relations with third countries (neighbourhood, ACP 
countries,  Asia  and  beyond),  and  possibly  engage  with  them  in  two-way  mobility  flows, 
fostering discussion around equal access, ecological and ethical issues of mobility in the long 
run, in the same way as should be done with Creative Europe member countries.  

While the European scheme can provide an initial impulse as well as pan-European opportunities, 
it should also be used as leverage, to encourage governments of Creative Europe countries: 
 
to think about how they could improve their contribution to the mobility of A&CP; 
 
to contribute to a more equal share of mobility opportunities; 
 
to encourage and/or support in the design and implementation of mobility schemes. 

A European mobility scheme also allows to redefine mobility as fair, ecological and ethical on a 
large scale. We recommend that incentives for greater environmental responsibility be introduced 
in the scheme: 
 
 

to use transportation with less negative impacts on the environment where possible; 
to  provide  additional  financial  support  to  A&CP  who  travel  up  to  700km  by  train  to  help 
compensate for the greater length of travel time and its higher cost;  
to stimulate A&CP to make a conscious decision as to their transportation method through the 
communication messages of the scheme; 
to consider the challenge of balancing between the promotion of more sustainable mobility 
and providing equal access to the programme. There is a need for a fair and inclusive system 
of mobility support that takes into account the contexts in which A&CP are working. 

 

 

We recommend that the European Union establishes an environmental compensation fund for all 
of its mobility schemes, which would invest in projects that offset CO2 emissions. 

4.  Operational Structure 

Advantages of a centralised management structure include: 
  The inclusion of all Creative Europe countries in the mobility scheme; 
  Lower overhead costs, resulting in greater financial resources for the mobility of A&CP; 
  Direct financial support to A&CP; 

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

  Centralised monitoring of trends in the mobility of A&CP thanks to the centralised data and 
statistics  creating  the  ability  to  adapt  the  programme  in  function  of  evolving  needs  or 
requirements; 

  Greater guarantee of quality and impartiality in the selection process; 
  Solid ground for advocacy and solidarity enhancement on the European and national levels; 
  A dedicated network of associated partners; 
  A centralised database of host organisations for A&CP in all Creative Europe countries; 
  Strong position for synergies with other actions in the European Union. 

5.  Communication  

i-Portunus is a strong brand with a clear visual identity. We recommend to keep the same visual 
style and language through: 
  Consistent and uniform messaging; 
  Circulating the i-Portunus Stories from the website on social media; 
  Encouraging A&CP to share their i-Portunus Stories using the #iportunus hashtag; 
  Actively involve Creative Europe Desks, associated partners and host organisations to reach 

A&CP in their own language; 

  Ownership of A&CP. 

6.  Capacity Building and Networking 

Local associated partners and host organisations should play a vital role with respect to capacity-
building and networking skills of A&CP. They should support A&CP in their own language by: 
  Training A&CP to compile a portfolio and to write an application; 
  Guiding A&CP in creating an international network for their projects; 
  Offering webinars with Q&A sessions; 
  Live presentations of the scheme on networking events; 
  Visualisation / graphic depiction of the application process. 

Capacity-building should focus on presenting the mobility scheme, explaining how to apply, how 
to establish an international network and how to make a portfolio. 

7.  Eligibility 

The scheme should be open to A&CP from all cultural and creative sub-sectors, all ages (18+), and 
legal residents of countries participating in the Creative Europe programme, including: 
  Both emerging and established A&CP; 
  Mobilities ranging between 3 and 90 days; 
  A&CP living with a disability based on a clear policy; 
  A&CP beyond the EU. 

8.  Application Cycle 

The mobility scheme must be light and reactive, in line with the needs of A&CP. In real terms, this 
means: 
 

Issuing single calls addressing A&CP working in all cultural and creative sectors; 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

  Calls should be open for 8-10 weeks; 
  A 6-week turnaround between the close of the call and notification of results; 
  4 weeks to arrange contracts and payments; 
  Financial simplicity: lumps sums and daily rates. 

9.  Evaluation and Selection 

A  centralised  organisational  structure  offers  the  following  advantages  with  respect  to  the 
evaluation of applications: 
  External  evaluators  will  be  selected  by,  briefed  by  and  reporting  directly  to  central 

management; 

  Homogeneous application of the evaluation grid and procedures; 
 

Imbalances  between  countries  are  identified  more  easily  and  necessary  work  on  capacity-
building can be done in collaboration with local associated partners and host organisations; 

The final selection should take into account the “double criterion” : quota and excellence. 
  A proportional breakdown of the budget by sector and population size; 
  Ranking based on the evaluators’ scores. 

10. Activity Reports and Impact Assessment 

The use of activity reports is recommended: 
  To measure the impact of the mobility; 
  To provide an insight on the results of each funded mobility; 
  To verify that the funds were put to proper use;To condition the final payment of 25 %. 

11.  Additional Requirements 

The  demand  for  a  European  mobility  scheme  on  the  part  of  A&CP  has  been  proven  during  the 
successful pilot phase. To improve the scheme on the European level we recommend: 
  To increase the resources available to fund the mobility of A&CP; 
  To  establish  a  new  unit,  dedicated  to  the  collection  and  analysis  of  data  linked  to  all  the 
Creative Europe projects and thus also to the mobility of A&CP, its results and impacts; 

  Transparency on taxation of funds for mobile A&CP; 
  To simplify procedures for visas and work permits for A&CP; 
  To encourage the national levels to contribute to the mobility scheme for A&CP. 

5. 

CONCLUSION 

With over 2.500 i-Portunus applications received from more than 3.000 individual A&CP  based in 41 
countries requesting  over  6.000.000 euros of mobility support through  three Calls which  were each 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

open  less  than  one  month,  we  can  definitely  state  that  A&CP  need  support  for  artistic  and  cultural 
mobility.  With  an  11%  successful  applicant  rate  in  the  i-Portunus  pilot,  the  demand  for  a  European 
mobility scheme on the part of A&CP is clear. A far bigger community of talented A&CP ranked the top 
lists of evaluators, but the final selection was limited to the given budget.  

337 individual A&CP were supported for demand-led opportunities31 for an amount of 620.933 euros. 
As a result of the mobility 97% of the selected A&CP acquired new skills/knowledge, 94% developed 
new  audiences/outlets,  94%  developed  new  co-productions/creations,  and  49%  received  a  job  offer. 
This is a most impressive impact considering the limited financial support provided by the EU, e.g. only 
1.500  to 3,400 euros per individual.  

Almost 91% of A&CP communicated and/or disseminated their experience about their mobility project, 
financially  supported  by  i-Portunus.  A&CP  took  ownership  of  the  communication  about  their  project 
and the programme, which proved to be one of the main success factors, and allowed for an i-Portunus 
community and for the Creative Europe programme to grow stronger, more known and widespread.  

76% of A&CP wouldn’t change anything to the current scheme, which is a strong indicator about the 
satisfaction level of this pilot programme, and which allows for further improvement during a second 
pilot phase. These A&CP could be the ambassadors or stakeholders for  the next programme, and the 
scope could be expanded and opened to other sectors beyond the currently tested fields of Performing 
and Visual Arts. 

The results and impact of the i-Portunus pilot mobility scheme offer convincing arguments to proceed 
with the ambitious objective to enhance and increase the budget for the mobility of individual A&CP 
as a stand-alone programme under a permanent action of the CEP of the European Union. To guarantee 
its success the programme should allow for accessibility in all artistic sectors and should aim for two-
way mobility flows which go even beyond the Creative Europe member countries.  

31 Demand-led opportunities are ones where the applicant takes the initiative. This is distinct from offer-led opportunities, where 
the funding or host organisation determines the outlines of the project. 

54 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

6. ANNEXES 

ANNEX 1 

Policy Recommendations 

ANNEX 2 

Application form 

ANNEX 3 

Evaluation Grid  

ANNEX 4 

Evaluators’ Manual 

ANNEX 5 

Statistics of submitted applications per Call 

ANNEX 6 

Statistics of the final selection per Call 

ANNEX 7 

Template Activity Report 

ANNEX 8 

Analysis of Activity reports 

ANNEX 9 

Selection of i-Portunus Stories Stemming from Activity Reports 

ANNEX 10 

Communication & Dissemination Activities 

ANNEX 11 

Statistics Communication Outreach 

ANNEX 12 

Technical Handover: Website and Online Mobility Platform 

ANNEX 13 

Communication Handbook 

ANNEX 14 

Workshop Agenda 

ANNEX 15 

Participant Biographies 

ANNEX 16 

Amended Budget 

ANNEX 17 

Typology of Host Organisations 

56 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

THE TEAM 

The i-Portunus team includes: 

  1 Project Manager (Eva Blaute, GI); 
  1 Project Assistant (Ernest Thiesmeier, GI); 
  4 Consortium Partners and their teams (Susanne Höhn / Dr. Elke Kaschl-Mohni, Antonia Blau, 
Friederike Beulshausen / Jacqueline Cabaço of the GI; Valérie Mouroux / Anaïs Fontanel, Fanny 
Rolland, Mélanie Rolland, Mathilde Lajarrige of the IF; Oksana Sarzhevskaya-Kravchenko of IZO; 
Rasa Astanaviciute of NIDA) 

  8 Evaluators (Cristiano Carpanini, Rueben Fowkes, Audronis Imbrasas, Tamar Janashia, Tania 

Pardo, Alan Quireyns, Katarzyna Torz, Ilya Zabolotnyi);  

  3 Data Collectors (Reinier Klok, Dr. Petya Koleva, Gwendolenn Sharp);  
  1 Mobility Expert (Marie Le Sourd).  

The pilot project encompasses 14 months of shared project implementation with 5 physical meetings 
with the Consortium Members and weekly online Skype meetings and discussions.  

The Consortium Members regularly exchanged and took joint decisions on the following main topics:  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

the content and design of the application form;  
the application cycles;  
the evaluation grid;  
the activity report;  
the selection process;  
the communication strategy and dissemination;  
the tools for capacity building;  
the  content  of  the  i-Portunus  Policy  Recommendations  workshop  and  the  selection  of 
participants; 
the inception, interim and final reports; 
the Policy Recommendations. 

The Project Steering Committee (PSC) includes: 

  DG EAC (Pedro Velázquez-Hernandez, Helene Skikos, Anna-Rita Luterotti) 
  EACEA (Corinne Rigaud, Danijela Jovic); 
  Consortium Members (Antonia Blau, Friederike Beulshausen / Jacqueline Cabaço, Eva Blaute of 
the GI; Fanny Rolland, Mélanie Rolland of the IF; Oksana Sarzhevskaya-Kravchenko of IZO; Rasa 
Astanaviciute of NIDA) 

The PSC held 9 physical meetings and was responsible for: 

57 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i-Portunus Final Report                                                                                               27 March 2020    

 

 
 
 

the  validation  of  the  Call  for  Applications,  the  Application  Form,  the  Selection  Criteria,  the 
Evaluation Grid, the template of the Activity Report; 
the approval of the Inception, Interim and Final Report and the Policy Recommendations; 
the preparation for the 3 Calls for Applications; 
the Final Selection of the 3 Calls for Applications. 

58 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Finding information about the EU 

Online 

Information about the European Union in all the official languages of the EU is 
available on the European website at: https://europa.eu/european-union/index_en  

EU publications 

You can download or order free and priced EU publications at: 
https://publications.europa.eu/en/publications. Multiple copies of free publications may be 
obtained by contacting Europe Direct or your local information centre (see 
https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en). 

 
 
 
 
 
 
N
C
-
0
3
-
2
0
-
3
4
5
-
E
N
-
N