Building Peace through Emotional Resilience Workshop 3: Additional issues and wrap-up

1. Building Peace through Emotional ResilienceWorkshop 3: Additional issues and wrap-up 4 June 2019

2. Agenda • Introduction • Q&A • Cross-Community and Cross-Border Value-added • Value for Money • Quality of the Project Team and Implementation Arrangements • Sustainable development • Equality • The proposal document • Review and wrap-up

3. Q&A

4. The Call - Indicative activities • The following are listed: • Training programmes – emotional resilience and good relations • Regional based themed programmes – events, activities, workshops – sports, dance, arts, etc. • Best practice guidelines – community-based organisations • Shared Spaces/Emotional Recovery Colleges in each geographic targeted area • Peer Mentoring programmes • Social media app • Will need to be programmed on a cross-community and cross-border basis

5. Q&A • Emotional Resilience/Recovery Colleges • The terms are interchangeable • College  Education/training/skills development • Not about therapy or treatment • Expectation that will be one College in each geographic area, i.e., one per Urban Village (5) and one per Border County (5) • Located in shared spaces using existing infrastructure

6. Illustration: Existing Recovery Colleges • A definition: • They deliver comprehensive, peer-led education and training programmes within mental health services. They should be run like any other college, providing education as a route to Recovery, not as a form of therapy, with courses that are co-devised and co-delivered by people with lived experience of mental illness and by mental health professionals. • Source: • https://imroc.org/resources/1-recovery-colleges/

7. Illustration: Existing Recovery Colleges • Examples • Belfast HSC Trust - http://www.belfasttrust.hscni.net/BelfastRecoveryCollege.htm • Nottingham NHS Trust - https://www.nottinghamshirehealthcare.nhs.uk/nottingham-recovery-college • Need to be careful to distinguish proposed Colleges from current statutory offering • Displacement risk • The requirement to build community capacity/resilience is a distinguishing feature in this Call

8. Q&A • Timing of the evaluation • Will be commissioned by SEUPB in the course of the project, to report after completion • Training • Have to programme contact • Any proposals for online delivery must be cognisant of that requirement • Default assumption is that sharing will be face-to-face • Social media app • Role and scope is for the proposal to determine • Any other questions?

9. SEUPB Criteria for Assessment • Contribution of the project to the defined results and outputs of the programme • Quality of project design • Quality of cross community and cross border co-operation with demonstrable added value • Quality of project team and implementation arrangements • Value for money • Contribution to sustainable development • Contribution to equality

10. Building Positive Relations, first call, Stage 2 applications – Average scores on assessment criteria Little variation in average scores across criteria. More variability within each criterion (compare distance between min and max), especially the first three.

11. Cross-Community and Cross-Border Value-added

12. Issues for the assessment • Has the proposal demonstrated how they will effectively ensure participation from all communities in their activities? • Does the proposal clearly articulate the need for the proposed project in terms of cross-community barriers (faced by target beneficiaries) to be addressed? • Does the proposal include cross-border co-operation with demonstrable added value in the delivery of the project proposal?  • Additionality - Has the proposal shown how the proposed results and outputs are enhanced by working in co-operation on a cross-community and/or cross-border basis?

13. Cross-Community & Cross-Border • Business Case Section 3 requirements under this topic • Project implementation must involve demonstrable cross-community and/or cross-border partnerships and activities • Note: This is a call for a regional project, so must generate impacts across the eligible region, including the Border Counties

14. Cross-Community & Cross-Border • Has the proposal demonstrated how they will effectively ensure participation from all communities in their activities? • What helps: • Programming activities to ensure contact (sustained, meaningful, purposeful) • Setting targets for representation, e.g., projected Protestant:Catholic split • Also, marginalised or other target groups • Cross-community partnership

15. Cross-Community & Cross-Border • Does the proposal clearly articulate the need for the proposed project in terms of cross-community barriers (faced by target beneficiaries) to be addressed? • What helps: • Working with groups affected by the Troubles and Community Relations issues • Clear recruitment methods, i.e., outreach, etc. • A positive approach in case of under-representation

16. Cross-Community & Cross-Border • Does the proposal include cross-border co-operation with demonstrable added value in the delivery of the project proposal? • What helps: • Programming cross-border activities – cannot be just about activities taking place separately in NI and Border Counties • Ensuring a cross-border dimension to the partnership

17. Cross-Community & Cross-Border • Additionality - Has the proposal shown how the proposed results and outputs are enhanced by working in co-operation on a cross-community and/or cross-border basis? • What helps: • Minimum requirement is to establish additionality of the project • Also, what difference is made from cross-community and cross-border activities and partnerships, e.g., relationships, links, outcomes, potential policy impacts, that would not otherwise have occurred

18. Quality of the Project Team and Implementation Arrangements

19. Issues for the assessment • Are the project’s proposed operational management structures well organised and demonstrate adequate control and transparency by the partnership? • Are there robust and credible governance arrangements? • Has the proposal provided sufficient explanation and evidence that the partnership has the right mix of experience, qualifications, expertise and competence in the thematic field concerned? • Does the Lead Partner have the administrative, financial and operational capacity to lead on a grant of this size and complexity? • Is the procurement policy in line with Programme Rules?

20. Project Team • Are the project’s proposed operational management structures well organised and demonstrate adequate control and transparency by the partnership? • What helps: • Clearly detailed organisational chart, encompassing all partners, consistency in staffing numbers • Detailed job descriptions • How will jobs be filled – re-deployment or recruitment • Previous staff experience in roles required for the project • Reporting structure consistent with project scale • Maintaining strategic focus – regional impact with local connections – striking the right balance

21. Project Team • Are there robust and credible governance arrangements? • What helps: • Regular partnership meetings – progress reporting, monitoring and risk management • Oversight, finance and administration responsibilities • Sub-committees where appropriate • Partnership agreements – roles and responsibilities • Participation of key stakeholders • SEUPB Consultative Advisory Panel – specify how that will feed in

22. Project Team • Has the proposal provided sufficient explanation and evidence that the partnership has the right mix of experience, qualifications, expertise and competence in the thematic field concerned? • What helps? • Clear rationale for each partner’s role – skills, expertise, motivation, local and/or thematic/sectoral knowledge • All partners have a role to play in delivery • Partnership approach to project design and development • Previous experience of delivering peace and reconciliation outputs • Lead Partner – experience with leading collaborative projects

23. Project Team • Does the Lead Partner have the administrative, financial and operational capacity to lead on a grant of this size and complexity? • What helps: • A fundamental question for the Lead Partner to answer • LP’s experience in delivering previous projects • Familiarity with responsibilities and tasks that go with EU funding • LP’s track record and experience in relation to what the project is seeking to achieve, subject/thematic area, target groups, etc. • The appropriate organisation to lead on this project? • Does LP have means to cash flow the implementation of the project?

24. Lead Partner: Indicative responsibilities • Overall co-ordination, management and implementation of the Project • The arrangements for relations with the Project Partners, including sound financial management of the funds allocated to the Project • Monitor the overall implementation of the Project in accordance with the Letter of Offer • Notify SEUPB of any factors that may adversely affect the implementation of the Project • Verify all expenditure claimed by the Project Partners is eligible for funding • Receive Grant Aid from SEUPB and ensure the timely onward transfer of Grant Aid payments to the Project Partners who directly incurred the spend • Manage the Grant Aid in accordance with the terms of the Partnership Agreement and the Letter of Offer • Manage any claw-back amounts that may arise • Submit financial declarations, claim forms, periodic progress reports, interim reports, follow up budget documentation and financial reports to SEUPB • Provide all necessary information to the Project Partners that may be required to co-ordinate, monitor and implement the Project.

25. Project Team • Is the procurement policy in line with Programme Rules? • What helps • See Section 7 of Programme Rules – policy must be consistent with that • Make sure procurement risks are included in the Risk Register

26. Value for Money

27. Components of value for money Outputs Outcomes Resources Inputs Effectiveness Economy Efficiency Value for money

28. The Three E’s • Economy • Making best use of resources • Procurement – getting the best price for required quality • Efficiency • Ratios of outputs to inputs • Effectiveness • How successful at meeting objectives. • Effectiveness is reduced where there is deadweight (due to activities that would happen anyway) and/or displacement. Highlights importance of good statement of need.

29. The VFM criterion in the assessment • Main focus is economy • Efficiency • Make sure proposed outputs proportionate to cost • For example, is cost per participant in training activities comparable to historical experience and/or some external benchmark? • Effectiveness - that will come through in the project design assessment • Setting achievable targets • Demonstrating ability to meet targets • Demonstrating additionality • Addressing displacement, demonstrating complementarity

30. Headings for the assessment • Proportionality and cost-effectiveness • Financial assessment – Operating and capital costs • Financial management • Match funding • State aid

31. Issues for the assessment • Proportionality and cost-effectiveness • Is the budget allocated to each of the project elements/activities/work packages correct and justified? • What exchange rate and inflationary uplift has been used and is it deemed reasonable? • Are the underlying cost assumptions reasonable and/or based on quotations, public sector rates or historical comparators? • Has the project adequately taken into account any revenue generated over the reference period? • Has match funding been appropriately secured and evidenced? • Does the project have any state aid implications and is an exemption under GBER available, or does a lower intervention rate need to be imposed?

32. Value for Money • Is the budget allocated to each of the project elements/activities/work packages correct and justified? • Assessor will critically examine: • Staff costs • Office and administration costs • External expertise and services • Travel and accommodation • Equipment costs • Simplified cost options

33. Value for Money • Are the underlying cost assumptions reasonable and/or based on quotations, public sector rates or historical comparators? • For example: • Are staff costs appropriately evidenced with appropriate job descriptions, proposed time commitment and salary grades? • Are the staff grades and / or salaries reasonable? • Are Office and Admin costs equivalent to 15% of direct salary costs (flat rate) and, if not, why not? • Are there any summation errors in the budget?

34. Value for Money • External expertise and services • Justify inclusion • Provide clear rationale for proposed expenditure, e.g., previous experience, quotations • Make sure staff are not included in this heading and vice versa • External consultants – make sure should not treat as staff • Third party suppliers – ensure will follow Peace IV Procurement Rules

35. Value for Money • Travel and accommodation costs • Clear rationale in relation to implementation and delivery • Justify costing, e.g., does LP have an approved mileage rate?

36. Value for Money • Training costs • SEUPB will not fund vocational training under the PEACE IV Programme. • However, non-vocational, accredited courses can be funded. • Office and admin costs • Office and admin costs will be funded at a flat rate of 15% of staffing costs. • It does not matter what figures a proposer may separately estimate for those costs, the flat rate is what will be funded by SEUPB.

37. Value for Money • State aid • Four tests – all must be satisfied • “A transfer of state resources in any form whatsoever”; • “Which favours certain undertakings or the production of certain goods”; and • “Which confers a selective advantage on the beneficiary”; and • “Which distorts or threatens to distort competition and trade between Member States” • In general, not a problem for Peace IV projects

38. Sustainable development

39. Sustainable development • ‘Sustainable Development is development that meets the needs of the present, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’

40. Sustainable development • Section 10 Horizontal Principles • In this section you should select the impact your project will have from the drop-down menus (Positive, Negative or Neutral) and illustrate how it will promote and implement sustainable development in terms of the integration of environmental, economic and social issues (specifically, equal opportunity and non-discrimination and equality between men and women). • Source: SEUPB eMS External User Guide

41. Issues for the assessment • Does the application illustrate how it will promote sustainable development in terms of environmental, economic and social issues?

42. Sustainable development • In regard to sustainable development, you should consider: • How you will promote and implement sustainable development in terms of the integration of environmental, economic, and social issues. • How the principle of sustainable development has been incorporated into the design of your project and is embedded into the monitoring of the project. • The impact of your project on the Horizontal Principles of the Programme and justification of your choice. • Source: SEUPB eMS External User Guide

43. Sustainable development • EU Policy • All projects in all themes must comply with the Sustainable Development Strategy, adopted by the European Council in June 2006, as well as the respective national Sustainable Development Strategy within each jurisdiction. • NI and Ireland policy • Documents and links listed at end of presentation

44. Sustainable development: Objectives Economic prosperity Social equity and cohesion Environmental protection Promote a prosperous, innovative, knowledge-rich, competitive and eco-efficient economy High living standards Full and high quality employment Promote a democratic, socially inclusive, cohesive, healthy, safe and just society Fundamental rights, cultural diversity, equal opportunities Safeguard the earth’s capacity Prevent & reduce environmental pollution Promote sustainable consumption

45. Overview on the Urban Villages • Viewed as a good relations and regeneration initiative, opportunities for: • Promoting social cohesion / fostering positive community identity • Building community capacity • Enhancing economic/social outcomes and improving the environment

46. Overview on the Urban Villages • Useful to look at some relevant deprivation indicators • Note • The core Urban Villages do not correspond with defined statistical areas • What follows is based on a ‘best-fit’ approximation which reflects the demographics and challenges facing the core areas but also their connection to the wider vicinity and the concept of an extended ‘area of influence’ • The policy imperative is the impact made on people living in the core areas

47. NI MDM 2017 Mental Health Indicator • A combined measure of five indicators: • Proportion of the population in receipt of prescriptions for mood and anxiety disorders • Standardised suicide rate • Standardised rate of mental health inpatient stays • Standardised mental health related benefit ratio • Standardised proportion of people with a long term emotional, psychological or mental health condition

48. West Belfast - Colin

49. West Belfast - Colin

50. South Belfast – Sandy Row, Donegall Pass and the Markets