3 Paragraph i–vii 1–6 7–9 10–66 10–34 12–17 18–27 28–31 32–34 35–56 36–39 40–44 45–52 53–56 57–66 58–59 60–63 64–66 contents Acronyms And AbbreviAtions summAry introduction Audit scoPe And APProAch observAtions Were the first AnnuAl Action ProgrAmmes Well designed? a strategIc framework Is In place InsuffIcIent clarIty and prIorItIsatIon reduces the benefIts of multIannual programmIng by dg releX two year programmIng and desIgn process Involves rIsks to the relevance of the assIstance programmIng and desIgn of assIstance are not suffIcIently guIded by a structured dIalogue wIth benefIcIary states hAs the imPlementAtion of the first AnnuAl Action ProgrAmmes led to timely And successful Achievements? armenIa: reform process was strengthened In assIstance prIorIty ‘vocatIonal educatIonal traInIng’ but progress Is stIll very fragIle azerbaIjan: unsatIsfactory progress In assIstance prIorIty ‘energy’ georgIa: modest progress In assIstance prIorIty ‘publIc fInance management’ and no progress In assIstance prIorIty ‘economIc rehabIlItatIon and confIdence buIldIng’ all countrIes: twInnIng under enpI was stIll In the start-up phase hAs the commission AdequAtely exPloited the delivery tools AvAilAble under the euroPeAn neighbourhood And PArtnershiP instrument? the commIssIon varIed the way In whIch It provIded fInancIal assIstance shIft to sector budget support was InsuffIcIently prepared, affectIng performance use of delIvery tools has not been selectIve enough special report no 13/2010 – Is the new european neighbourhood and partnership Instrument successfully launched and achieving results in the southern caucasus (armenia, azerbaijan and georgia)? 67-75 conclusions And recommendAtions Annex i Annex ii Annex iii Annex iv Annex v – rAnge of tools for delivering AssistAnce under enPi – ArmeniA: sPecific conditions of sector suPPort ProgrAmme for vocAtionAl And educAtionAl trAining, second vAriAble instAlment (5 million euro) – AzerbAijAn: sPecific conditions of sector suPPort ProgrAmme for energy reform, second vAriAble instAlment (5 million euro) – sPecific conditions of sector suPPort ProgrAmme for Public finAnce mAnAgement in georgiA, second vAriAble instAlment (5 million euro) – georgiA: risks to vAlue for money in AdditionAl eu Post-crisis AllocAtion rePly of the commission 4 special report no 13/2010 – Is the new european neighbourhood and partnership Instrument successfully launched and achieving results in the southern caucasus (armenia, azerbaijan and georgia)? 
67–75 SlutSAtSer och rekommendAtioner bilAgA i bilAgA ii bilAgA iii bilAgA iV bilAgA V – olikA biStåndSVerktyg inom rAmen för det euroPeiSkA grAnnSkAPS-och PArtnerSkAPSinStrumentet – Armenien: SärSkildA Villkor för StödProgrAm till Sektorn yrkeSutbildning, den AndrA rörligA delbetAlningen (5 miljoner euro) – AzerbAjdzjAn: SärSkildA Villkor för StödProgrAmmet till Sektorn energireformer, den AndrA rörligA delbetAlningen (5 miljoner euro) – SärSkildA Villkor för StödProgrAmmet till Sektorn reform AV förVAltningen AV offentligA finAnSer i georgien, den AndrA rörligA delbetAlningen (5 miljoner euro) – georgien: riSker koPPlAde till VAlutA för PengArnA när det gäller det extrA AnSlAg Som eu tilldelAt georgien efter kriSen kommiSSionenS SVAr 4 särskild rapport nr 13/2010 – Har det nya europeiska grannskaps-och partnerskapsinstrumentet införts på ett bra sätt och leder det till att resultat uppnås i södra kaukasien (armenien, azerbajdzjan och georgien)?