Background:
The second training for the potential beneficiaries of IPA cross-border programmes under the CBIB II was organised in Montenegro on 7th and 8th May in Podgorica.
The trainings for the potential applicants in Montenegro were originally planned in the agreed Work Plan between the first and the second round of Calls for proposals for the programmes on the internal WB borders. However, the Secretariat for European Integration felt the need for the organisation of additional trainings for potential applicants even before the first round of the Calls for Proposals. The possible dates and number of trainings were discussed during several meetings.
Participants and objectives:
In total, 23 representatives from municipalities, NGOs, employment services, public companies, tourist organisations participated in this initial training. In addition, representatives from the Secretariat for European Integration, JTS for programme Croatia – Montenegro, and Antenna for programme Bosnia and Herzegovina – Montenegro and Albania – Montenegro were also present.
Even though the level of previous experience and knowledge of the participants was not the same, all of them took active part in the training.
The main objectives of the course were the following:
The objectives of the training indicate that the course was helping the potential grant beneficiaries to understand what is required in the grant preparation process, what does the cross–border partnerships mean, what are the main elements of a logical framework approach and how to fill in the application form.
The training consisted of the following sessions under the Preparation of the Grant Proposal:
Each day consisted of morning and afternoon sessions that were introduced in combination of theory with exercises/“learning by doing”, and due to the relatively short duration of the training, most of the topics were presented in plenary sessions and followed by “buzzing” – group discussions. Group exercises were organised on the following topics: stakeholder, problem analysis and development of the intervention logic.
Conclusion:
A two day training for such an active group of participants, as well as the importance of the topic presented, seemed not to be enough. Nevertheless, the participants showed high commitment to the training.
The participants evaluated the course extremely positively. The qualities of the lectures were considered very clear and interactive and the participants considered the course highly successful and useful.