Digital illustration representing European monuments (Eiffel Tower, Pisa Tower, Roman Colosseum, among others) with Europe written in rainbow colours

Working Better Together in a Team Europe Approach

Resource
public
EU-official
Last Updated: 19 March 2025
Updated in 2023 | Working Better Together in a Team Europe Approach through joint programming and joint implementation Guidance

Table of contents

Annex 2: Four different joint programming scenarios

The table below outlines four different joint programming scenarios, with a progressively increasing set of components and associated level of effort. The EU Delegation will lead on coordinating and producing the joint programme, but the role and inputs of the Member States is indicated in the right-hand column (timings will be set out in a separate roadmap).

 

Level of joint programming and principal features EU and MS role / input
  1. Basic coordination (no joint programme)

Maintain the status quo: EU and MS maintain own programming documents / cycles.

  • Monthly cooperation meetings
  • Team Europe initiative (inclusive and green growth)
  • Access to initiatives and tools (blending, EFSD+, Twinning, TAIEX)

Ongoing coordination through:

  • Monthly cooperation meetings
  • Inputs to EU MIP and Team Europe initiative drafting
  • Agreed Team Europe initiative
  • Potential for co-funding
  • Use of blending, twinning etc.
  1. JP-light

A focus on developing a common understanding of challenges and a more coordinated approach to policy dialogue:

  • Joint analysis of country context, challenges and responses (aligned with GoU priorities)
  • Increased efforts for joint collaboration and co-funding (including with IFIs, UN)
  • Joint results framework (light, focused on areas identified in agreed response, e.g. guided by SDGs)
  • Joint dialogue with GoU and partners

During JP formulation, EU and MS consultand jointly develop a context analysis to guide respective programming and responses with an effort to coordinate and co-finance. Higher- level objectives can be developed into a joint results framework as part of a JP document.

On-going implementation includes annual progress review and dialogue with GoU and other stakeholders.
  1. JP-medium

Builds on the EU MIP exercise to identify priority sectors and a coordinated, results-driven joint response:

  • Mapping of EU & MS support
  • Joint response identifying priority objectives and sectors
  • Division of labour, common sector analysis and dialogue
  • Joint results framework (focused on agreed priority areas, reforms, SDGs)
  • Indicative financing (commitments where feasible, at least to 2024 if not 2027)
  • Concerted joint implementation efforts (financial and non-financial)
  • Joint communications and visibility (for transparency, accountability)

As per JP-light, plus:

During JP formulation, EU and MS validate the mapping, prepare joint priorities and identify a division of labour (and lead roles). Indicative financial support is associated with a more detailed joint sector level results framework.

On-going implementation requires sector leads to dialogue with GoU and other stakeholders while all EU/MS explore scope for joint implementation initiatives that boost visibility and impact. Communication initiatives promote a joint identity and message.
  1. Full joint programming

Building on above options to synchronise programming cycles (around the GoU cycle) and replace bilateral programming documents:

  • EU replaces MIP with JP (adopts MIP timeline for JP formulation)
  • “Beyond aid” priorities reflected in programming and dialogue
  • Integrated Civil Society Roadmap and Gender Action Plan
  • Focus on developing flagship joint implementation initiatives (€ & non-€)
  • Full financing framework
  • Elaborated results framework, communications, visibility efforts
  • Structured, scheduled, strategic policy dialogue/review with GoU

As per JP-medium, plus:

During JP formulation, EU and MS provide inputs to all substantive components listed. They confirm indicative financial support to priority sectors, prepare a detailed results framework.

Ongoing implementation requires sector leads to dialogue with GoU and other stakeholders to deliver more joined-up efforts that incorporate “beyond aid” priorities (with focus on joint implementation where feasible). Dialogue and consultations with GoU are based on the results framework with associated sector reviews.