Working Better Together in a Team Europe Approach

Introduction

The Team Europe (TE) approach involves the EU, its Member States and their diplomatic networks, DFIs and implementing organisations, as well as the EIB and the EBRD. The Team Europe approach is a way of strengthening coordination, coherence and complementarities of actions to scale up European impact and raise Europe as partner of reference. Team Europe Initiatives (TEIs) are flagships of the Team Europe approach going forward and as such are open to the participation of all actors following a Team Europe approach. As part of the programming of NDICI - Global Europe, TEIs has been identified at both country and regional level¹³⁸.

The design of TEIs should be a flexible process nested in the Working Better Together (WBT) guidance, the NDICI - Global Europe programming guidance and policy notes developed for the MFF 2021-2027, the EU Results Framework, the Guidance on EU results and indicators for development, the EU Intervention Cycle Methodology Guide and the EU Budget Support Guidance. The TEI design should uphold EU values, notably contributing to the implementation of the Gender Action Plan III and systematically applying a Human Rights Based Approach.

However, key elements of the TEIs will either be new or will need to be defined at a larger and more comprehensive scale with many moving parts, given the focus on supporting transformational impact by bringing together many different contributions (see Annex 2 on pillars of Team Europe Initiatives). During discussions at EUDG level and during country-level talks, there is a call for more clarity on how to approach the design of TEIs. In addition to this, our effective communication as actors following a Team Europe approach with partner countries is intrinsically linked to the success of TEIs.

What?

This note aims to provide specific methodological support on the first steps of the country and, to a more limited extent, the regional TEI design process (short-term) in order to help EU Delegations and Member States in developing TEI concepts into a large strategically planned initiative made up of coherent components. The note draws on our collective experience of working better together as set out in existing guidance.

The note sets out the constituting elements of a TEI and acts as a one-stop-shop for guidance on TEIs. The premise of the TEI design is that a joint intervention logic is critical to providing the frame that holds together the complementary pillars and components, as it enables the definition of a common set of high-level results and the contribution responsibilities across all actors following a Team Europe approach contributing to the TEI. A model of a TEI joint intervention logic is shared for inspiration. The note also seeks to clarify the political steer and management of TEIs at country and regional level. Finally, the note includes information on HQ support and tools you can draw on, recalls the overall elements and timelines of the TEI process, and provides preliminary suggestions on how to operationalise TEIs.

Co-creating and participating in Team Europe Initiatives

At HQ level, Member States Capitals, Member States implementing organisations, EU DFIs the European Investment Bank and European Bank on Reconstruction and Development and other relevant networks are consulted periodically (every 3-4 months) on EU development cooperation issues (including on Global Gateway) through the relevant European Directors-General meeting. On such occasions, EU Directors-General are to be consulted on draft TEI concept notes under preparation for possible remarks before TEIs proceed to the design stage. Additionally, the Council through the Working Party on Development Cooperation provides the strategic steer to the Team Europe approach. The Practitioners’ Network Team Europe approach Task Force also offers a forum of dialogue with Member States implementing organisations.

At country level, it is required to ensure a systematic consultation of the ‘European cluster’, meaning EU Member States, EU Member States implementing organisations and EU DFIs, the EIB, the EBRD, as well as the EU civil society organisations and foundations and the EU private sector. However, for TEI design, consultation with TEI participants is not enough and systematic co-creation processes need to be developed with those participating in the TEI, in a whole of delegation/mission/country representation approach.

The TEI process should remain open to all interested actors following a Team Europe approach. Specific attention should be paid to ensure that non-resident TE partners, in particular accredited Member States or EU DFIs with regional offices, are consulted and receive a clear message so that they can join the TEI if an opportunity arises. Therefore, there is a group (restricted access for TE actors only) at Capacity4Dev called ‘Team Europe’, where TEI documents available and regularly updated. This will allow actors following a Team Europe approach that have not (yet) shown interest in the TEIs to stay abreast. Significant updates/changes could also be shared, for example, by sending a message to the list of TE members (EDFIs, Member States and their implementing organisations through CODEV, EIB, EBRD, the Practitioners Network.

Heads of Mission involvement in TEI design is fundamental to ensure the political steer and the linkages between political/policy dialogue. Also, as the TEIs can go ‘beyond development’, or spill over into diplomacy, trade, triple nexus etc., it is advised to regularly schedule TEIs on the agenda of the Heads of Mission meetings. At a minimum, Heads of Mission should validate each TEI twice: once following endorsement of the concept note by EU Director-Generals, and once when the design process of the TEIs is finalised.

Other consultations

EU Multiannual Indicative Programmes (MIPs), which include the TEIs, should be the result of an inclusive process encompassing broad and transparent consultation both at country/region and at HQ levels with all relevant stakeholders. These include partner countries governments and parliaments; related national institutions; civil society organisations (CSOs) including women and the youth, local authorities, traditional authorities when relevant; private sector; non-EU development partners; the UN; and the International Financial Institutions such as International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. In the case of NEAR countries, consultations may be expanded to the latter group at the very early stages of the TEI design process.

EU Delegations, together with the other participating actors following a Team Europe approach, can choose how to manage this consultation process in the most appropriate manner, building on existing consultation mechanisms and opportunities. Thus, in addition to the consultation process organised for the MIP as a whole, relevant stakeholders should be approached on specific TEIs as part of the design process. Sharing a concept note with stakeholders will facilitate the consultations: the level of information to be shared with stakeholders should be decided at country level with all participating actors following a Team Europe approach, in line with country practices. Regional TEIs should also be consulted with stakeholders and countries potentially involved in the TEI.

Like-minded partners and other donors

Like-minded development partners can participate in TEIs, if relevant, agreed by EU Heads of Mission and HQ and in accordance with general instructions. In the case of regional TEIs, the decision should be referred to decisions by HQ. In addition, it is of course advisable to consult with like-minded partners, other development partners and international organisations and finance institutions, to understand how their activities and the TEI can complement each other. Such partners may also be potential implementing partners or co-funding partners for components of the TEI. In addition, European partners not present locally should also be considered when choosing co-funding or implementing partners. For more information on these situations, please consult Annex 3, which includes a Q&A on associating other partners to the TEIs.

Civil society

Involving local civil society in TEI design is key to increase insights on the local context, reach vulnerable groups and help ensuring that no one is left behind, as well as to ensure monitoring and oversight. Country level CSO roadmaps – which are joint EU and Member States documents – are the recommended tool to integrate consultation and exchange on TEIs in systematic and structured dialogue. This dialogue should continue during the implementation of the TEIs within existing structured dialogues to allow for genuine discussion, coordination, feedback and monitoring on the impact/results of the TEI as part of a long-term partnership. Specific entry points for strengthening CSO involvement in design and implementation are outlined in a guidance note. Several tools can also be found on the capacity4dev page on civil society. Particular attention should be paid to consulting women and youth organisations.

Local authorities

The contribution of local authorities to the SDGs is widely recognised and particularly important from a Team Europe approach perspective, as many local authorities in Europe are connected with and provide support to partner country local authorities. For Team Europe Initiatives that address issues where local authorities in partner countries have specific responsibilities for service delivery, a more in-depth consultation with national/ regional associations and/or Councils of local authorities and/or specific local authorities (both urban and rural) that are relevant for the TEI will be required in the design stage. Again, undertaking these consultations in a formation of actors following a Team Europe approach can further the visibility and understanding of the Team Europe approach. Part of these consultations can look at whether any of these local authorities have ongoing or planned decentralised cooperation (i.e. development cooperation projects directly carried out by municipalities, regions, provinces, etc.) with local authorities in the EU, as these could potentially be integrated and reinforce the TEI. As a reminder, a guidance note on Local and Regional Governments is available to support cooperation with local authorities.

Private sector

The private sector is a key actor in achieving sustainable and inclusive growth. Both the local as well as the European and international private sector should be consulted in the design phase. It is particularly relevant to consult the private sector for TEIs supporting policies such as green and resilient economies, renewable energy, digitalisation, jobs and growth (i.e. TVET, investment climate, trade, private sector development), as well as critical for TEIs that will make use of the EFSD+¹³⁹. Consultation should build on existing coordination mechanisms such as structured public-private dialogue mechanisms, national Chambers of Commerce, EU Business Groups and Councils and EU Chambers of Commerce in partner countries.

Consulting with the private sector in a TEI formation will further help raise understanding and visibility, while, importantly, it can help start a process of building and identifying relevant pipelines of bankable projects for the EFSD+ guarantee. A reinforced relationship is established in the Team Europe approach context with the EU DFIs, including through the networks they are part of such as EDFI and JEFIC, that are publicly mandated to invest in private sector projects in developing countries bringing expert knowledge and using the EU guarantee/ blending schemes. that are publicly mandated to invest in private sector projects in developing countries bringing expert knowledge and using the EU guarantee/blending schemes.

Policy dialogue with partner countries/national authorities

The Council Conclusions on Team Europe (April 2021) underline that TEIs need to abide by the principles of transparency and accountability, sustainability, effectiveness and results, ‘do no harm’, country ownership and inclusive partnership.

Therefore, policy dialogue with the government should be a central part of the design process. Consultations should be carried out through the best and most appropriate partner country government interlocutor(s). At country level, the outreach and dialogue with partner country governments and public institutions should be scripted to make best use of dialogue opportunities including those for joint dialogue in Team Europe approach formation as well as privileged existing dialogue entry points TEI actors may have. TEIs should therefore be mainstreamed in general and thematic discussions with the partner government.

Policy dialogue with government and other national stakeholders, particularly through engagement in the relevant sector level coordination processes, will be essential throughout TEI design and implementation. Policy dialogue at sector level and associated support to sectoral development management processes are likely to be key in TEI implementation. This to ensure that TEIs support and align with the partner country’s development priorities, that supportive national and sectoral policy and regulatory frameworks are in place and that national systems have the capacity to sustain the investments and benefits that the TEI delivers. TEIs should leverage reforms and contribute to creating an enabling environment for the relevant sectors.

It is recommended to have specific outreach to the national entity in charge of women’s rights/gender equality as part of this policy dialogue. While national capacity may be limited, this helps raise the visibility of gender inequality in the country context and the opportunities to tackle this through the TEI.

Where the effective functioning of a specific sector is important for the success of the TEI, support for the strengthening of the sectoral development process should be explicit in the design and programming of the TEI. EUDs and Member States could consider using the methodology developed by INTPA for the GPEDC Effectiveness to Impact initiatives as an approach to strengthening the effectiveness of sectoral development cooperation processes.

The exchange of European public sector expertise can also support the TEI design work. EUDs and Member States could consider mobilising existing TAIEX (Technical Assistance and Information Exchange Instrument) funds to share Member States public policy approaches, standards and institutional set-ups in the relevant TEI policy objective areas. TAIEX can provide rapidly mobilised short-term technical support using EU Member States’ public sector experts in response to requests for assistance from public institutions in partner countries. TAIEX events can be organised at the national and/or regional level and the request can be for a single event or a sequence of TAIEX activities. Depending on needs, TAIEX events can involve a workshop or an expert mission. This can provide another source of Team Europe approach input to ongoing dialogue with partner country Governments and analysis work both in advance of the TEI actions and as part of their implementation. For more information, watch this video (available in EN/FR/ES/PT & subtitles) or contact the NEAR INTPA TAIEX team. Further strengthening of TEI-related national institutions can be developed through long-term peer-topeer cooperation under the Twinning instrument.

Beyond short-term public-sector expertise mobilisation, TEIs can leverage structured permanent dialogue mechanisms of actors following a Team Europe approach with Partner Countries when already in place under EU regional or bilateral public technical cooperation programmes. These mechanisms are a useful tool for EU Delegations to stablish policy dialogues with partner countries and identify shared priorities and lines of actions that could be included in TEIs.

Determining TE approach actors’ contributions

Once actors following a Team Europe approach have agreed on a first concept note, participating members will need to start preparing their contributions to the TEIs.

TEIs will have different components, funded by the different TEI participants. TEIs are about bringing these different elements to the table and placing them in a coherent whole. TEIs will not have an overarching independent budget and co-funding or pooling resources are not a requirement for Member States contributions to TEIs.

The objective of a TEI is to coalesce funding around a common challenge and not to create a pooling mechanism. While it is not expected to be the norm, pooling resources can be useful (limiting fragmentation, visibility, ease of implementation) and where relevant, financial contributions can be ‘delegated’ between contributing partners or pulled together in investment packages. This may include assigning Member States funds to the EU budget. To note that the existence of such a pooling mechanism in a TEI should not exclude Member States from participating in the TEI if they wish to implement their contribution through a partner of their choice or by themselves.

What contributions does a TEI consist of?

Contributions by TE approach actors should preferably financial140. In order for a TEI to support transformational impact and have a visible European character (Europeanness), the overall budget of a TEI should be commensurate to the transformational ambition of the TEI. Therefore, as a general rule:

• For a country TEI, we expect that at least three TE approach actors participate with a financial contribution (e.g. EU and 2 Member States; 2 Member States, EU and EIB). In countries or specific sectors where few European actors operate, this could be reduced to at least two TE members.
• For a regional TEI, we expect that at least four TE approach actors participate with a financial contribution to the TEI. In regions or specific sectors where few European actors operate, this could be reduced to at least two TE members (see Annex 4 on principles and criteria for regional TEIs).

Financial contributions could be through any implementation modality (grant, loan, guarantee, blended finance, TA action etc.). To support the use of a full range of modalities, the design work should reflect on the appropriate mix of instruments to support a transformational TEI. 

How are contributions made?

Each participating partner in the TEI is responsible for the approval of its financial contribution through its own processes. A financial contribution can be a pre-existing programme or action that fits the design of the TEI or a new commitment programmed in the next Team Europe approach funding cycle(s). TEIs remain open to future contributions from EU Member States, ensuring a continuing inclusive and open approach.

The EU’s contributions to a TEI will mobilise the EU budget through the usual process i.e. inclusion in Action Documents (AD) and the Annual Action Plan (AAP), approved through NDICI comitology (resulting in a Commission Decision). The TEI – which can consist of many components – does not need to be covered in one single AD/AAP but can be based on multiple Ads/AAPs throughout the implementation period. If the EU contribution to a TEI includes assigned revenues received, the Commission remains autonomous as regards decision-making on the use of these funds.

For EU contributions to TEIs, we can draw on all EU financing envelopes and aid modalities possible under the NDICI, including investment tools under the EFSD+ (blending and budgetary guarantees covering sovereign and/or private sector operations), technical assistance, budget support, Twinning and TAIEX etc. For this reason, different components of TEIs can be developed and supported through both country and regional MIPs. Similarly, contributions from thematic lines are also possible.

When should contributions be known?

At the design level of a TEI, it is important to have an indicative financial table of contributions envisaged. While the financial table remains indicative (until all contributions are approved) and will therefore likely also evolve over time, it provides transparency on the expected funding of the TEI and some details on expected timeframe. This is notably useful for the planning and programming blending and guarantee instruments, which could take longer to programme compared to ODA grants.

To help collect information on potential financial contributions and build the ambition of a TEI, a survey on the support and indicative contributions by each of the actors following a Team Europe approach could be set up by EUDs (country level TEIs) or HQ colleagues (regional TEIs). In Annex 5, there is an example of such a survey for inspiration.

Components of country TEIs will also likely support the impact and ambitions of regional TEIs in light of the alignment and synergies being sought between the two levels. In this context, regional TEIs can in their overview highlight the relevant contributions from country TEIs which will directly support their expected results at regional level.

How should TEI contributions be visualised/presented?

All TE member contributions to a TEI should be reflected in the indicative financial overview with the details (that can be provided at the time – this table will no doubt evolve through the life of a TEI) on the instruments and modalities for each component¹⁴¹. The indicative financial overview therefore reflects an approximate total support figure, and it is expected that this is about a 1-page document. In Annex 6, an illustrative financial overview can be found.

Designing Key Elements

The design of the TEIs is a balancing act of flexible cooperation arrangements between TEI participants and the need to have a minimum common frame that keeps the TEI together. This common frame is envisaged as an overarching joint intervention logic for the TEI and its associated results.

In addition to this minimum common frame, TEI participants may decide to undertake more detailed design work jointly to deepen their coordination: for example, undertaking further joint analysis; preparing joint logical frameworks for specific TEI pillars; or jointly agreeing on how to mainstream issues such as human rights and democracy, gender equality, environment and climate change, etc. The decision among participating partners on the detail of the TEI design work should reflect on the added value to implementing and monitoring the TEI and the investment that such closely coordinated processes will require. Experiences and practices in joint programming processes could prove very helpful here – see for example the relevant chapter on ‘Conducting joint analysis’ in the ‘Working Better Together as Team Europe’ guidance.

Joint Intervention Logic

The joint intervention logic will lay out the theory of change through which the TEI interventions are expected to deliver their expected outcomes and impacts. TEIs are likely to be relatively complex interventions with a number of pillars, which the TEI will address, in order to reach the agreed results. Good practice dictates that the joint intervention logic should be periodically reviewed to allow for adaptation.

The joint Intervention logic should:

• Draw on the existing joint analysis to identify and prioritise policy overall objectives;
• Define the different pillars in the TEI and how these contribute to achieving policy overall objectives;
• Identify and quantify the expected results that will contribute to the transformational impact of the TEIs.

Annex 7 provides an example of a joint intervention logic and associated results that acts as a frame for a TEI. This is purely indicative of the minimum framing to coordinate the implementation and monitoring of the TEIs and is expected to be about a 1-page document. The example is entirely illustrative and is not an attempt to design a TEI for a specific country or context.

For reporting on the achievement of results, experience in joint results frameworks shows that a few, well-selected ‘higher-level results’ is most effective¹⁴². Results at this level will be particularly useful for communication and political messaging purposes and should also be formulated with this mind. The detail and specificity of the results for a TEI should be determined by the TEI participants with reference to the joint intervention logic. Clearly defined results are useful for the ongoing monitoring, management and adjustment of TEI implementation and should be formulated to an appropriate level of detail.

The TEI will be the sum of a number of coordinated, but mostly independent, actions implemented by the individual TEI contributors. It is unlikely that the components implemented by TEI partners will correspond directly to the structure of the intervention logic, i.e. each component supporting one pillar only. Nevertheless, it is essential that the contributions and responsibilities of each TEI partner be visible in the joint intervention logic, and the example in Annex 7 shows how this might be done.

Identifying the right mix of modalities: what to reflect on at design stage.

To achieve the high political ambition of the TEI and the desired transformational impact, the right mix of EU and Member States aid modalities is an important element in securing meaningful policy dialogue and development effectiveness. Among the questions to consider are which modalities for example:

• provide the strongest link to policy dialogue and public policy reform.
• offer opportunities for financial leverage.
• are best suited to supporting public investment delivery.
• are best suited to supporting public sector capacity building and the provision of policy advice linked to European standards.
• are best suited to raising public awareness, supporting change in societal norms (such as gender equality) and building social accountability.
• are best suited to long term economic and / or financial sustainability.
• can best support improvements in the investment climate and the growth of the private sector and/or trading relationships.

Building on a shared understanding of the partner countries’ context and political economy, actors following a Team Europe approach should reflect on how best to take forward policy dialogue linked to the implementation of the TEI across all relevant actors and stakeholders. This reflection should keep in mind the variety of experiences and existing networks of each actor and partner in a Team Europe approach and draw on the full range of EU and Member States toolboxes of implementation modalities that each can mobilised. For example, reflecting on how best to use European public sector expertise through tools such as TAIEX and Twinning and other peer to peer learning tools to complement budget support or how best to use technical assistance to build pipelines of ‘‘green’ bankable projects with private sector actors.

When choosing the right mix of modalities, bear in mind that the more ‘traditional’ modalities could be further enhanced through the financial leverage that may be generated by blending operations and the use of guarantees. Also, the potential benefits for the relationship with the partner country, as well as potential benefits for the organisational coordination of actors following a Team Europe approach can be taken into account.

Examples of potential benefits may include partner country preferences and political interests, existing relationships with actors following a Team Europe approach, influences from local civil society and local private sector, existence of potential ‘agents of change’, and international processes. Examples of potential benefits for the organisational coordination of TEI participants may include representation in-country, participation in related TEIs at country or regional level, pre-existing expertise in a given sector, predictability or flexibility in deploying resources in the specific partner country context.

The design process should reflect on the various policy dialogues (and the coordination for maintaining these dialogues) needed to support the full impact of the TEI by ensuring the linkages to political, legislative and regulatory structures, government departments and other public entities, civil society and special interest groups, private sector actors and wider communities while understanding their respective interests and power.

As early as possible, TEI participants should coordinate policy messages delivered in the policy dialogues, or whenever possible undertake joint policy dialogues, to reinforce a coherent approach and maximise the transformational impact of TEI. Particularly in the case of DG NEAR regions, this policy dialogue can also be jointly undertaken with all IFIs as relevant.

Monitoring and evaluation

Showing progress against the expected results, including the transformative impact of TEIs and the added value of the Team Europe approach will be crucial. The identification of the right indicators at outcome level and impact level in particular will thus be relevant also in terms of the political narrative and for accountability purposes, as relevant.

The milestones of a monitoring and evaluation strategy need to be identified in the design phase of a TEI to:

• steer and adjust actions, so that these remain close to the political narrative of the EU priorities and can adapt to evolving contexts.
• assess progress against the achievement of specific objectives (outcomes) and overall objective(s) (impact).
• take stock of lessons learned to further feed our knowledge processes and continuously improve our guidance.

The basis for monitoring and evaluation activities should be the result indicators, as set out in the joint intervention logic. Because of TEIs’ nature, the monitoring should be designed in a way to effectively feed policy dialogue and provide a basis for joint messaging linked to communication on the TEI.

On how to carry out monitoring and evaluation activities, there are two main options:

• As several actors are working together, partners can agree on a set of joint monitoring activities and a joint mid-term and/or final evaluation. This would facilitate the capturing of the overall TEI results. External consultants can be tasked to perform external monitoring and/or evaluation on the basis of joint terms of reference agreed by all partners. These joint monitoring and evaluation activities could be financed fully by one component of the TEI or through a jointly funded specific action to which a number of partners could contribute by delegating funds to a ‘lead’ organisation.
• If the different components are considered too different in nature for joint monitoring and evaluation, each partner could carry out the monitoring and evaluation activities of its respective component, with agreement that a joint reporting is envisaged to aggregate the knowledge in a single product. For the purpose of aggregation, this monitoring and evaluation activities need to have as a basis the joint intervention logic. Individual partners’ agreement will therefore be required on timelines (each component being a building block) and the information needed for the reporting. This joint reporting can form an important input into policy dialogue and visibility communications. In this case, it could be appropriate to agree on joint review at mid-term of the implementation phase, to assess overall coherence, complementarity and EU added value.

Support to monitoring of TEIs can be made available through the external EU Result-Oriented Monitoring (ROM) system. The ROM system provides an external opinion on implementation of EU-funded interventions.

ROM services include 1) support to design of logframes, M&E and reporting systems; 2) ROM reviews for an external assessment; 3) support to results data collection. ROM reviews can be carried out for TEI component(s), or individual TEIs. Joint ROM missions can be organised upon request. Further information is available in the ROM Handbook.

Political steer and management of TEIs

Under the strategic guidance of CODEV on the joint engagements in a Team Europe approach, the political steer and management of TEIs should be part of a ‘whole-of-Delegation/Embassy’’ approach and build on the existing coordination structures and ensure TEIs are a regular point in the exchanges.

Political steer

‘Political steer’ will be used for the political orientation of a TEI, the decision on strategic lines of action and of communication, and the operational use of the political leverage of the TEI in the dialogue with partner countries and the rest of development and political actors.

Management

‘Management’ refers to the coordination and implementation of activities, the overall monitoring of the TEI’s impact and the joint communication. Each TEI will need to agree its own management mechanism according to the specificities of its context. The mechanism should be light and flexible, whenever possible using existing mechanisms of coordination among TEI participants. This can be set out in the joint intervention logic (see right column in example of annex 7) in line with the principle of subsidiarity¹⁴³.

137 INTPA Companion, Chapter 5A, link: https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/fpfis/wikis/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=1460077384
138 It is anticipated that most country programming documents (MIPs) will outline 2 TEIs, but this depends on country context and potential for impact: some countries may have more, while some may have less. At regional level TEIs should fulfil the agreed principles for regional TEIs. As the EU contribution to TEIs is embedded in the MIP priority areas, this contribution to NDICI targets will be tracked at the level of MIPs
139 Informative sheets on the use of EFSD+ are under preparation and will be shared soon.
140 Financial contributions can include any DAC-able and non DAC-able funding from the budget of a TE member. In-kind contributions can be accepted as part of the TEI in exceptional cases.

141 Cfr section 5.2 on aid modalities
142 Cfr section 5.2 on aid modalities
143 Country TEIs will be managed at country level, usually by the EU DEL, and multi-country/regional TEIs will be managed also at country level as much as possible, while guaranteeing the overall oversight and direction of the process by HQ