52005DC0515

[pic] | COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES |

Brussels, 18.10.2005

COM(2005) 515 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Tempus Annual Report 2004

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Tempus Annual Report 2004

FOREWORD

The Tempus III Programme (2000-2006) focuses on the development of the higher education systems in the 27 partner countries through co-operation with institutions from the Member States of the European Union. Higher education institutions are of particular importance for the social and economic transition process as well as for inter-cultural dialogue; they are also pools of expertise and of human resources and provide for the training of new generations of leaders.

A detailed description of the Tempus programme can be found at the following URL:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/programmes/tempus/index_en.html

The present annual report is presented in accordance with Article 11 of the Council Decision establishing the Tempus programme (OJ L 120 of 8 May 1999).

Implementing Tempus in 2004: the main action lines

The implementation of the Tempus programme in 2004 was guided inter alia by the conclusions and recommendations of the mid-term evaluation published in November 2003. The evaluation confirmed the relevance of the programme to support higher education reform and development as well as the validity of its intervention logic and management approaches. The following recommendations were particularly relevant for the implementation of the programme in 2004:

- The process of formulation of the country-specific priorities should be strengthened by means of a more structured dialogue with the educational authorities of the partner countries.

- Tempus funds should be used for what the programme does best, i.e. promoting mobility, exchanges and innovation of study programmes.

- The relevance and the impact of the programme should be actively promoted at the level of the national authorities.

- Field monitoring should be reintroduced on a selective basis.

Against this background, the main Tempus action lines in 2004 were:

1. Maximising the impact of the programme through a reinforced top-down approach, a strengthened policy dialogue, and more structural measures;

2. Reinforcing mobility by promoting individual mobility grants;

3. Adapting and reinforcing selection and monitoring procedures;

4. Better defining the role of National Tempus Offices.

In accordance with Article 12 of the Council Decision establishing Tempus III (OJ L 120 of 8 May 1999), the findings of the mid-term evaluation report were taken into account in the preparation of the future Tempus programme.

The mid-term evaluation report of the Tempus III programme published in November 2003 can be consulted at the following URL:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/education_culture/evalreports/index_en.htm#TempusIIIinterim1 .

The Report of 8 March 2004 from the European Commission to the Council on the interim evaluation of Tempus III can be found at the same address.

REINFORCED TOP-DOWN APPROACH

Enhanced policy dialogue

In 2004, the European Commission sought to reinforce the policy dialogue with the authorities responsible for higher education from the partner countries. A series of bilateral meetings took place in March/April 2004 in Brussels. The purpose of this dialogue was to acquire a better understanding of the situation of higher education in the partner countries, to identify areas where co-operation through Tempus could have the greatest impact (and to this end better define national priorities) and to enhance EU co-operation in higher education.

In spite of the differences between countries in terms of level of development and organisation of their higher education systems, the dialogue revealed a striking degree of convergence in the countries’ main preoccupations, namely quality assurance, accreditation, access to higher education and tuning education to labour market needs.

European Tempus partner countries are naturally involved in the reform process which Europe is undergoing under the impulse of the Bologna process. The dialogue confirmed that most non-European partner countries have also embarked on reform processes seeking convergence with European higher education systems along the lines of the Bologna process.

The bilateral discussions were followed up by a joint meeting with representatives from Member States and from the Ministries of Education of Tempus partner countries in July 2004. The meeting focused in particular on two issues that emerged as the most relevant to the ongoing reforms of higher education in the partner countries, namely quality assurance systems in higher education, and university / enterprise cooperation.

The generalisation of quality assurance strategies and mechanisms is key to the higher education reform agenda in the partner countries. Many partner countries are taking steps in this area closely following developments within the EU Member States.

Tuning higher education to labour market needs is a major preoccupation in partner countries. Many partner countries emphasised the need to better analyse current and prospective labour market needs in order to adapt higher education structures. Although there was a large consensus on the need to promote university/enterprise cooperation in order to enhance students’ employability on the labour market, the discussion revealed that only a small number of countries have formulated strategies to meet such a need. The European Commission intends to study this topic in 2005, outlining the role that Tempus has played and can continue to play in developing cooperation between university and enterprises.

Joint European Projects

As a result of the reinforced policy dialogue, national priorities for Joint European Projects were agreed between partner country authorities and the European Commission. These priorities aim at establishing closer linkages between Tempus projects and the national reform agenda of the partner countries thereby maximising the programme’s impact.

Joint European Projects (JEP) support innovative multilateral initiatives involving at least one university from a partner country, one university in an EU Member State and one academic or non-academic consortium member in a different EU Member State. Joint European Projects aim at transferring knowledge from EU universities to institutions in the partner countries in the areas of curriculum development, institution building and university management. They absorb around 82% of the total Tempus annual funding. In 2004, the European Commission funded 111 JEPs with a total EC contribution of approximately € 44 million.

Structural and Complementary Measures

At the end of 2003, a new type of Tempus projects was launched - the Structural and Complementary Measures (SCMs). This type of project was introduced to support partner countries efforts in formulating and implementing higher education reform strategies. It reinforces the top-down approach of the programme by seeking the close involvement of higher education authorities in partner countries. SCMs typically address horizontal issues such as the introduction of credit transfer systems, quality assurance mechanisms, recognition of qualifications, or university/enterprise cooperation. Projects under this programme component need to be endorsed by national educational authorities and frequently involve national or regional bodies directly as partners.

Given the generalised interest amongst Tempus partner countries in the Bologna process, a joint call for proposals Tempus/Socrates aimed at supporting Bologna-related projects was launched in 2004. Institutions from Tempus partner countries were invited to submit proposals under SCMs. The aim of the ten selected projects, inter alia, is to set up teams of Bologna promoters and to involve Tempus partner countries in Bologna-related conferences and seminars.

When looking back at the three calls for proposals for SCMs organised since this new instrument was launched in October 2003, one can see the number of SCMs funded so far is evenly distributed between the different regions covered by Tempus.

A brief analysis of their objectives indicates that most projects (58% of all projects) are linked to the action lines of the Bologna process, with two main focuses: 1) dissemination of information by setting up teams of Bologna promoters; and 2) design of quality assurance systems in higher education, a theme which is particularly popular in the Tacis region (a fourth of all SCMs selected in the Tacis region are linked to quality enhancement). In the Western Balkans, SCMs linked to the Bologna process represent 72% of all projects, which is quite natural, since all countries in the region have signed the Bologna declaration.

SCMs are also used as instruments to support the modernisation of university operations and services (35% of all SCMs), with an emphasis on the modernisation and reorganisation of training programmes, the use of information and communication technologies, strengthening of international relations (and modernisation of teacher training).

SCMs are still underused to address systemic issues, and the overall reform of the higher education sector: this type of project represents only 7% of all SCMs, and are mainly concentrating on the Meda region.

Regional Tempus conference in Central Asia

In November 2004, the European Commission services, in partnership with the Ministry of Higher and Secondary Specialised Education of the Republic of Uzbekistan, organised in Tashkent a Tempus conference on higher education reform in Central Asia. The objectives of the conference were to exchange information on and discuss the reform processes in partner countries, to update the participants on the latest developments of the Bologna process, and to explore how the Tempus programme could continue to contribute to modernising and enhancing the quality of higher education systems in the region. All five delegations from Central Asia present at the conference expressed their countries’ intention to apply the principles underlying the Bologna process and informed of the changes being introduced in higher education structures and legislation to bring them in line with these principles.

The reinforcement of individual mobility

The evaluation of the third phase of the programme confirmed the value of mobility for both university staff and students and underlined the importance of the people-to-people cooperation supported through Tempus. Prior to 2004, this action had been used only to a limited extent. The demand for this type of project had grown stronger with the extension of the Tempus programme to the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean partners, confirming the feedback from other regions on the desirability of increasing the number of grants. Individual Mobility Grants were perceived as a useful and flexible tool to establish partnerships and develop project proposals as well as to facilitate exchange of know how, experience and good practices, including through training delivered in partner countries by higher education experts from the European Union. Following the introduction of a new and simple online application form and the promotion of this type of grants in partner countries in 2002, the number of individual mobility grants soared in 2004: over 700 grants were awarded (up from 663 in 2003) for all the regions covered by Tempus.

GRANT-RELATED ISSUES

Application, selection and award process

Detailed selection and financial information is provided in the three Annexes to this report.

Grant agreements and payments

Following the entry into force of the Financial Regulation, the management of all commitments and payments were transferred from the European Training Foundation to the European Commission in 2003. The transfer coincided with both the preparatory work leading to the introduction of the new European Commission accounting system as of 1 January 2005 and the increase in the number of Individual Mobility Grants. The new requirements regarding in particular the approval of bank accounts and legal entities coupled with the high number of grants resulted in unavoidable delays in issuing grant agreements.

An additional difficulty was the late signature of some Financing Agreements for Tacis 2003 Action Programmes. As a consequence grant agreements for Tempus projects involving institutions from the countries concerned were also delayed.

Project monitoring

The evaluation of the third phase of the programme recommended the reintroduction of field monitoring as a necessary complement to desk monitoring. Field monitoring had been reintroduced in 2003 in combination with information days and continued in 2004. Further to that, in 2004, a systematic programme for field monitoring was adopted by the European Commission services. It targets 10% of running projects and involves around 30 projects to be visited each year. The first monitoring visits under this programme were carried out in October 2004 by DG EAC in close cooperation with National Tempus Offices and the support from the European Training Foundation.

As part of its preventive monitoring policy, the European Commission provided training to around 160 project representatives from the newly selected Cards and Meda projects at a meeting held in Berlin in September 2004. Training materials and contract management documentation were developed and are available on the web. Due to delays in the signature of Financing Agreements between the European Commission and Tacis partner countries, a special session is to be held in 2005 for projects involving institutions from the countries concerned.

With a view to further simplifying reporting obligations, on-line report forms for Structural and Complementary Measures and Individual Mobility Grant projects were developed and made available on the Tempus web site during the second half of 2004.

INFORMATION DAYS

Tempus information days were organised in most partner countries, as well as in some EU Member States. In 2004, the authorities responsible for higher education were systematically involved in the information campaigns in the partner countries with a view to presenting Tempus national priorities.

NATIONAL TEMPUS OFFICES AND TEMPUS NATIONAL CONTACT POINTS

National Tempus Offices in partner countries play a key role in the implementation of the programme providing information to prospective and actual programme users, as well as providing feedback to the European Commission services on on-going projects. In 2004 the European Commission services continued to work closely with National Tempus Offices seeking to bring greater coherence to this network and to ensure an adequate flow of information. The European Commission services sought in particular to bring greater horizontal consistency to National Tempus Offices work programmes and grant agreements with a view to further reinforcing their role.

In 2004 new National Tempus Offices were set up in Russia and in the territories under the Palestinian Authority.

Tempus National Contact Points in Member States play also an important role in the programme facilitating the involvement of European Union higher education institutions through information and assistance in partner searching. In 2004 the European Commission services continued to reinforce its collaboration with National Contact Points.

Representatives from National Tempus Offices and National Contact Points met in Brussels in March and in November 2004.

THE FUTURE OF TEMPUS III

Following the conclusions of the mid-term evaluation, and in accordance with Article 12 of the Council Decision establishing Tempus III (OJ L 120 of 8 May 1999), the Commission proposed that the programme would combine the bottom-up, multilateral cooperation approach with top-down complementary measures to support the modernisation of education and training systems and would seek to enhance the volume and quality of transnational mobility. The preparation of the future Tempus programme is in progress.

Conclusion

The implementation of the programme in 2004 was guided by the results of the 2003 interim evaluation of Tempus III (2000 - 2006). Dialogue and consultation with the authorities responsible for higher education in partner countries led to reinforced national priorities which should contribute to maximise the programme’s impact on partner countries’ higher education development. Tempus has been instrumental in supporting partner countries’ efforts to put Bologna related issues high on their reform agenda. The increased support for individual mobility of higher education professionals and the introduction of Structural and Complementary activities, coupled with dialogue and national priorities, contributed to confirm Tempus as an instrument of choice for the implementation and formulation of partner countries’ higher education policies.

1. ANNEX

Financial overview – Tempus 2004 (amounts committed per region in €) |

CARDS | TACIS | MEDA |

JEP | 9,836,694.56 | 14,552,916.00 | 19,711,751.17 |

IMG | 683,830.00 | 768,030.00 | 802,900.00 |

SCM | 1,443,036.56 | 1,918,102.32 | 1,708,116.00 |

NTO | 281,592.00 | 244,488.00 | 627,459.00 |

ETF | 237,500.00 | 337,500.00 | 275,000.00 |

Other | 105,700.10 | 213,098.12 | 213,888.98 |

Total | 12,588,353.22 | 18,034,134.44 | 23,339,115.15 |

- JEP Joint European Project

- IMG Individual Mobility Grant

- SCM Structural and Complementary Measure

- NTO National Tempus Office

- ETF European Training Foundation

2.1. ANNEX

Joint European Projects (JEP) Selection Tables 2004 |

- The tables presented below cover the selection of Joint European Projects (JEPs) carried out in 2004 following the call for proposals closed on 15 December 2003.

- Multi-country projects involve more than one Tempus partner country. For each partner country, the number of multi-country applications indicates the number of applications in which institutions from this country are involved.

- Types of Joint European Projects (JEPs): Curriculum Development (CD), Training Courses for Institution Building (TCIB) and University Management (UM).

JEP – TEMPUS CARDS (Annex 2.1 – Table 1) |

- The tables presented below cover the selection of Structural and Complementary Measures (SCMs) carried out in 2004 following the calls for proposals closed on 15 October 2003, 15 February 2004, and 1 March 2004 (special SCM “Bologna call”).

- Multi-country projects involve more than one partner country. For each partner country, the number of multi-country applications indicates the number of applications in which institutions from this country are involved.

- Types of Structural and Complementary Measures (SCMs): Information and Dissemination (I&D), Pilot Project (PP) and Training Project (TP).

SCM – TEMPUS CARDS (Annex 2.2 – Table 1) |

- The tables presented below cover the selection of Individual Mobility Grants (IMGs) carried out in 2004 following the calls for proposals closed on 15 October 2003, 15 February 2004, and 15 June 2004.

IMG – TEMPUS CARDS (Annex 2.3 – Table 1) |

Partner Country | Total Received Applications | Total Funded Applications | Success Rate | Total Awarded in € |

1244-Kosovo | 12 | 5 | 42 % | 15,650.00 |

Albania | 138 | 55 | 40 % | 237,750.00 |

Bosnia and Herzegovina | 17 | 13 | 76 % | 39,010.00 |

Croatia | 44 | 26 | 59 % | 67,700.00 |

former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | 58 | 44 | 76 % | 148,280.00 |

Serbia and Montenegro | 106 | 67 | 63 % | 214,310.00 |

IMG – TEMPUS TACIS (Annex 2.3 – Table 2) |

Partner Country | Total Received Applications | Total Funded Applications | Success Rate | Total Awarded in € |

Armenia | 64 | 27 | 42 % | 90,160.00 |

Azerbaijan | 17 | 15 | 88 % | 30,420.00 |

Belarus | 20 | 10 | 50 % | 36,500.00 |

Georgia | 32 | 16 | 50 % | 50,000.00 |

Kazakhstan | 13 | 8 | 62 % | 18,800.00 |

Kyrgyzstan | 34 | 21 | 62 % | 76,820.00 |

Moldova | 66 | 22 | 33 % | 88,000.00 |

Mongolia | 24 | 14 | 58 % | 68,700.00 |

Russian Federation | 196 | 104 | 53 % | 344,400.00 |

Tadjikistan | 2 | 1 | 50 % | 2,350.00 |

Turkmenistan | 2 | 2 | 100 % | 8,300.00 |

Ukraine | 50 | 22 | 44 % | 68,060.00 |

Uzbekistan | 105 | 49 | 47 % | 190,180.00 |

IMG – TEMPUS MEDA (Annex 2.3 – Table 3) |

Partner Country | Total Received Applications | Total Funded Applications | Success Rate | Total Awarded in € |

Algeria | 103 | 41 | 40 % | 102,500.00 |

Egypt | 247 | 69 | 28 % | 254,000.00 |

Jordan | 12 | 9 | 75 % | 34,900.00 |

Lebanon | 73 | 41 | 56 % | 129,800.00 |

Morocco | 64 | 34 | 53 % | 104,100.00 |

Palestinian Authority | 25 | 18 | 72 % | 60,700.00 |

Syria | 125 | 36 | 29 % | 151,800.00 |

Tunisia | 38 | 17 | 45 % | 32,900.00 |

3. ANNEX

JOINT EUROPEAN PROJECTS (JEP) - STRUCTURAL AND COMPLEMENTARY MEASURES (SCM) SELECTION TABLES BY EU MEMBER STATES’ PARTICIPATION |

- The table below indicates the number of institutions by EU Member State involved in the received and the funded applications.

- Types of Joint European Projects (JEPs): Curriculum Development (CD), Training Courses for Institution Building (TCIB) and University Management (UM).

- Types of Structural and Complementary Measures (SCMs): Information and Dissemination (I&D), Pilot Project (PP) and Training Project (TP).

JEP & SCM – TEMPUS All regions - EU Member States’ Participation |

EU Member State | Total Received Applications | Total Funded Applications | Success Rate |JEP CD |JEP IB |JEP UM | SCM BC |SCM ID |SCM PP |SCM TP | |Austria | 121 | 29 | 24 % | 10 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 4 | 3 | | Belgium | 147 | 37 | 25 % | 13 | - | 8 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 6 | | Cyprus | 4 | 1 | 25 % | - | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | | Czech Republic | 16 | 4 | 25 % | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | - | - | - | | Denmark | 44 | 9 | 20 % | 6 | 1 | - | 1 | - | 1 | - | | Estonia | 3 | - | 0 % | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | | Finland | 71 | 12 | 17 % | 6 | - | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | France | 296 | 62 | 21 % | 30 | 2 | 9 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 5 | | Germany | 313 | 56 | 18 % | 31 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 5 | | Greece | 106 | 23 | 22 % | 14 | 1 | - | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | | Hungary | 21 | 5 | 24 % | 3 | - | - | 1 | - | 1 | - | | Ireland | 25 | 7 | 28 % | 2 | - | 3 | - | - | 2 | - | | Italy | 275 | 62 | 23 % | 26 | 2 | 9 | 7 | 3 | 9 | 6 | | Latvia | 7 | 1 | 14 % | 1 | - | - | - | - | - | - | | Lithuania | 10 | 1 | 10 % | - | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | | Luxembourg | 4 | 1 | 25 % | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | - | | Malta | 3 | 3 | 100 % | 2 | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | | Netherlands | 112 | 27 | 24 % | 12 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | | Poland | 30 | 8 | 27 % | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | - | - | 1 | | Portugal | 47 | 16 | 34 % | 6 | 1 | 6 | 1 | - | 1 | 1 | | Slovak Republic | 15 | 6 | 40 % | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | - | 1 | - | | Slovenia | 21 | 6 | 29 % | - | 1 | 1 | 3 | - | 1 | - | | Spain | 173 | 49 | 28 % | 24 | - | 9 | 1 | 2 | 9 | 4 | | Sweden | 105 | 30 | 29 % | 13 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 3 | | United Kingdom | 231 | 62 | 27 % | 26 | 7 | 11 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 5 | |