Working Better Together in a Team Europe Approach

‘Joint Programming should be promoted and strengthened, while being kept voluntary, flexible, inclusive, and tailored to the country context, and allow for the replacement of EU and Member States’ programming documents with EU Joint Programming documents’.

New European Consensus on Development, para. 75

Headquarters of actors following a Team Europe approach should have a say when it comes to finalising the document draft, as they will ensure coherence with bilateral programming documents and wider policy commitments and check the possibility of substituting bilateral country strategies/programming documents.

For EU colleagues, see chapter on the EU´s joint programming approval process to further understand the implications of the consultation with headquarters. Remember also that for the EU portion of the joint programming document, current internal EU programming instructions apply. 

A draft version of the joint programming document, jointly endorsed by Heads of Mission and Cooperation, should be sent to EU and MS Headquarters for a proper consultation round (depending on each one’s decisionmaking process of such documents). Headquarters (EU and MS) should be provided with a minimum of four weeks for approval. If more time is requested by HQ of certain participants, actors following a Team Europe approach should agree on a firm timeline which is acceptable to all. Once all feedback is collected back at country level, then the finalisation of the joint programming document should be agreed in-country at Heads of Mission level and be re-sent to HQ (EU and MS) for final endorsement by all.

For the EU and every Member State, there are two options for finalising the joint programming document:

1. A joint programming document that replaces the country programme/strategy/ plan to become the single programming document. It can apply only to those development partners whose policies allow it (i.e. it need not be applied to all participating development partners).
2. A joint programming document that does not replace a country programming document/ strategy/plan.

In both cases, the headquarters units responsible for joint programming should ensure that the position on replacing bilateral strategies is updated and communicated organisation-wide, especially to country-based staff. Specific country-level exceptions or pilots can be used to inform future policy on adopting the joint programme as a single programming document. For clarity and transparency, the joint programming document should clarify how – and for which development partners – the joint programming document replaces or complements the country programme/ strategy/ plan.

The endorsement or replacement process is determined by each participating member’s own rules. Each member should flag from the start what requirements are to be included in the document to facilitate approval from their end, by way of example, the EU’s own rules are included in the following paragraphs.

A joint programming document that replaces the country programming document/ strategy/plan

The draft joint programming document should clearly and individually identify the contribution of the EU and each Member States for each priority area. The contribution to the expected results should be explicit (for the EU, this informs the Commission Decision).

For the EU, a joint programming document will have the same legal status as the country programming document it replaces¹²⁸. The adoption process for Commission’s decision therefore apply. The EU Delegation should abide by the legal and programming requirements set by the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument-Global Europe (NDICI-Global Europe)¹²⁹ when adopted, or any applicable regulation. NDICI-Global Europe require that EU geographic programming documents set out priority areas, specific objectives, expected results, performance indicators, and indicative financial allocations. Regarding the signature, the Commission Decision can specify that the Commissioner for International Cooperation and Development Partnerships or the Commissioner’s designate is entitled to sign the joint programming document.

For Member States and other participating development partners, the replacement process is determined by each partner’s own rules. Respective headquarters are invited and encouraged to review the joint programming document and to take a decision on replacement of its own bilateral strategy. While the identification of priority sectors is determined at country level, each development partner should confirm their own indicative financial allocations¹³⁰.

Image

In Laos, The European Joint Programming Strategy 2021-2025 in Lao PDR serves as the EU’s Multi-Annual Indicative Programme (MIP) for the country in 2021-2027 (divided in two phases: 2021-2024 and 2025-2027) and combines the cooperation priorities and indicative commitments of European Partners within a common framework

A joint programming document that does not replace a country programming document/ strategy/ plan

The joint programming document will be reviewed and approved by participating headquarters¹³¹. They will ensure coherence with bilateral programming documents and wider policy commitments (e.g. EU Commission Decisions, in the case of the EU).

While the identification of priority sectors is determined at country level, each development partner should confirm their own indicative financial allocations. The draft joint programming document should therefore identify individual EU and Member States financial contributions. The financing framework will present projections of support over the JPD period and must detail funding by development partner and by priority sector. Funding may be further disaggregated by year, terms (loan/grant) and type (investment, technical assistance and humanitarian).

Once approved, consider giving the joint programming document an official visual identity and brand (e.g. Global Gateway visual identity if the majority of the sectors covered fall under the scope of Global Gateway) so as to ensure it is appropriate for the public. Translating into local languages can also trigger a wider circulation among the target audience. Alternatively, a user-friendly brochure could be produced as a follow-up product which avoids the joint programming jargon but explains the key goals of working together in the partner country through the Team Europe approach and how joint programming adds value. It could include combined financial allocations in both EUR and local currency, actors following a Team Europe approach participating, priority sectors as well as key results being pursued. The organisation of an official launch event around the publication of the strategy, co-hosted by all participating Heads of Mission, should be considered. The government and other national stakeholders should be invited to the event. Depending on whether the JP sectors fit within the Global Gateway priorities, use GG branding and visual identity during the launch event.

For the EU, in addition to the above, the minimum requirements for the joint programme are as follows:

1. The joint programming document should contain a section that explicitly states that the document fully reflects the existing EU country Multi-Annual Indicative Programme Single Support Framework and that the MIPSSF remains the legal basis for EU support until it expires (see wording below). ‘La base légale de la contribution de l’UE est le PIM /IEV 2014-2020 (pays). Ceci prévoit une allocation indicative de... EUR aux priorités de la stratégie conjointe comme suit: allocation EUR du PIM/ IEV au domaine prioritaire 1, allocations EUR au domaine prioritaire 2’. [‘The MIP/SSF 2014-2020 remains the legal basis for the EU support to (country). It foresees an indicative allocation of EUR... to the priorities of the joint strategy as follows: allocation of x EUR from the MIP/ SSF to priority area 1, allocation of y EUR to priority area 2’.] To clarify the relationship between the MIP/SSF and the joint programme, an internal breakdown of the EU contribution to the joint programme should be provided (in an annex to the document or in a note from the Head of Delegation) according to the template below:

   Joint Programming document	EU contribution	Other EU funds if applicable: with appropriate references	Previous bilateral suppor	Regional funds (RIP)	Thematic budget lines	Others (EIB, Trust Funds, etc)
   Priority 1		Funding by each MIP sector
   Priority 2
   Priority 2+N

   
   EU country MIP/SSF (with reference)

2. Joint programming documents under preparation should be reviewed by the relevant HQ geographical units (EEAS/INTPA/NEAR for the EU). They will consult with the corresponding sections (Commission services/EEAS for the EU) before country-level Heads of Mission agree the final document.
3. EEAS in association with INTPA/NEAR geographical units will hold a country team meeting with Commission DGs and services and EEAS will inform the EU Delegation of its outcomes. These outcomes should be taken into account as the process of finalising the joint programme continues.
4. Financial contributions for each partner should be respectively reviewed and confirmed by headquarters and country teams. The presentation of the combined financial contribution will form a key part of the ‘working better together’ commitment. For the EU it should also confirm coherence with the sectors of the MIP/SSF.
5. After the final joint programming document draft has been completed, the document is formally transmitted by Member States Heads of Mission to the relevant geographical unit directors, with the joint programming units/division (functional mailboxes) in copy, with the request to start the approval procedure.

Once the EU geographical unit(s) has/have checked the consistency of the joint programming document with their own country programming documents (MIP /SSF in the case of the EU) (sectors and financial allocations), they will confirm to the central services (in the case of the EU: Legal Service, SecretariesGeneral and DG BUDG) whether the joint programming document is fully coherent in financial and sectoral terms with the country programming document.

The EEAS regional director replies via a signed letter to the Head of Delegation, stating that the formal requirements for the joint programming document have been met, that the joint programming document is fully consistent with the MIP/SSF, and confirming their support for the joint programming document.

When the joint programming document has been approved by all participating partners according to their own rules and procedures, country-level visibility events (such as a press release or signed joint declaration) can be organised. Texts should be checked with the EEAS Legal Division and INTPA/NEAR legal unit(s) (who will liaise with the Commission Legal Service) to ensure that the content does not create any legal obligations.

The EU and [list of development partners] in [partner country] today launched the [local name for joint response /joint programme] for the period [—]. The [Joint Programming document] sets out how the EU and participating partners will coordinate their support for the [national development strategy]. This support is focused on the following priority areas: [—]. These are the bases for sustainable development of [partner country] and its commitment to the achievement of the SDGs.

The EU and participating partners estimate their contribution through the JP document to be [EUR and local currency]. These resources will support [partner country] in implementing its national development strategy/national reforms/[sector strategies]/achieving the SDGs, particularly Goals on [priority sectors].

When a draft joint programming document is received by geographical unit desk officers, they are encouraged to contact the joint programming teams in the EEAS/INTPA/NEAR to request the paper on ‘How to setup a Country Team Meeting in the context of joint programming’.

A joint programming document that does not replace a country programming document should not be signed if it causes legal ambiguity. A Declaration may be issued instead to promote visibility and national ownership, along the following lines:

As a result of strengthened coordination carried out by the EU Delegation in [name of country] with [list of participating Member States], [other development partners as appropriate] and the Government of [name of country], the Joint Programming document for the period [—] is launched today. Together we look forward to implementing the [local name for joint programming document] in close partnership with the Government of [name of country] and other stakeholders [indicate as appropriate: civil society, private sector, other development partners, etc.]

Signature and date (HoMs and partner country representative).

128 For example, the Multi-annual Indicative Programme (MIP)/National Indicative Programme (NIP)/Single Support Framework (SSF) for Commission services/EEAS
129 COM(2018) 460 final
130 Global development effectiveness commitments, principally the 2008 Accra Agenda for Action, include the provision by donors of indicative medium-term financial projections to partner countries
 131 For the EU (Commission services and EEAS), the references are the relevant NDICI programming instructions.