Q&A's grant policy framework migration and displacement 2023 - 2028

1. What is the difference between this programme grant and the previous programme grant for Migration and Displacement from 2018?

Under the previous programme grant, all NGO’s were invited to submit proposals that align with the policy objectives for Migration and Displacement. The same NGO’s were the lead partner to implement their proposed activities.

Applicants of the current programme grant are NGOs  - indicated as ‘support partners’. To qualifiy for a grant, their main activity/activities must cover one or more of the following intervention strategies: (i) capacity strengthening of in-country partners, (ii) direct funding of in-country partners, and/or (iii) meaningful participation of refugees or migrants in national and international policy influencing.

In-country partners are the lead parties in determining the priorities and implementing the activities.  

2. How can I apply for this programme grant?

The Grant Policy Framework and application form to apply for a grant can be found on this website. Please also refer to chapter 11 in the Grant Policy Framework which describes the application process.

3. Should I already select in-country partners?

No. In-country partners do not have to be selected at this stage. The project proposal should, amongst others, describe the mechanism with and conditions under which in-country partners will be selected. If a grant is awarded to a support partner, there will be an inception phase during which the (the first round of) in-country partners will be selected, priorities will be set and activities will be determined by the in-country partners.

4. Can INGOs apply if:

• the project is with a local consortium to ensure localisation?

• two INGOs collaborate as support partners?

the proposal is submitted as a consortium (meaning that the lead applicant and all partners actively take part in the implementation process)?

No. As stated in chapter 5 and threshold criterion D2 of the Grant Policy Framework, applications made on behalf of, as well as by a consortium are not eligible for this programme grant. However, support partners may engage third parties with the delivery of the activity, once the programme has been approved.

5. Are UN agencies eligible for this programme grant?

Social profit organisations are eligible as support partner if they meet threshold criteria D1 until D7 concerning the applicant in the Grant Policy Framework. The organisation should be able to demonstrate that it does not make financial profit. This should be evidenced by the constitution and financial statements.

6. Are social profit organisations eligible for this programme grant?

Social profit organisations are eligible as support partner if they meet threshold criteria D1 until D7 concerning the applicant in the Grant Policy Framework. The organisation should be able to demonstrate that it does not make financial profit. This should be evidenced by the constitution and financial statements.

7. Are universities eligible for this programme grant, as support partner or in-country partner?

Universities are eligible as support partner if they meet threshold criteria D1 until D7 concerning the applicant in the Grant Policy Framework. As specified by threshold criterion D3, universities must have one of the three intervention strategies as main activity.  Universities are eligible as in-country partner if they meet the definition mentioned in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework.

8. Could you confirm eligibility for our INGO with local registration and a country presence?

No. Eligibility cannot be confirmed on a case by case basis and will be assessed after submission of a complete application. Chapter 5 and threshold criteria D1 until D7 of the Grant Policy Framework describe who are eligible for this programme grant. Local registration and country presence are not part of the threshold criteria.

9. Is it possible to schedule a meeting to introduce ourselves, discuss our organization's objectives, and gain a deeper understanding of the program's goals and requirements?

No. In order to create an equal level playing field, it is not possible for the MFA to schedule meetings to discuss the programme grant. The Q&A channel will be open until the 25^th of August for questions and answers will be shared on the publicly available Q&A page.

10. What are the eligible countries for this programme grant?

The list of eligible countries is listed in chapter 4 and threshold criterion D13 of the Grant Policy Framework.

11. For what reason is South Sudan not included in the list of countries?

The list of eligible countries is in line with the priority countries for migration cooperation and prospects for refugees and host communities, as decided in the Policy Document for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation: Do what we do best.

12. As a support partner do you need to be present in the suggested country with an office?

No. As stated in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework: the applicant is not required to have a country office. For applications focused on migration cooperation, experience in and having a network in the country for which the grant is requested will be taken into account in the assessment.

13. How is measured whether an organisation has one of the three intervention strategies as its main activities?

In order to pass threshold criterion D3 of the Grant Policy Framework one of the three intervention strategies should unambiguously come forward (i.e. constitute a central part) in at least one of the following documents:

• annexe i - the applicant's constitution
• annexe ii - recent registration certificate from the Business Register (no older than January 1, 2023)
• annexe iii - the most recent vision document or multi-year strategic plan (adopted and/or published no later than April 1, 2023)

The main activities should also be reflected in annexe iv: the applicant’s financial statements, or a summary of its financial situation for the past three years (2020, 2021, 2022).

14. Can we use the track record of our regional offices and country offices to show and support our experience with capacity strengthening of in-country partners, direct funding of in-country partners and meaningful participation of refugees or migrants in national policy influencing?

As described in threshold criterion D1 of the Grant Policy Framework, applications must be submitted by a single legal entity. Hence, if regional and country offices fall within the same legal entity as the head quarter, it is possible to use their track records. Note that in order to pass threshold criterion D3 of the Grant Policy Framework one of the three intervention strategies should unambiguously come forward in the documents of the legal entity, as listed in question 13.

15. In case of multi-country initiatives, do countries need to be in the same region? And what are the expectations in terms of how integrated the project should be in these different contexts?

No, it is not a prerequisite to base a proposal on countries in the same region. The overall approach of the intervention strategy will be assessed, as well as the country specific approach that should demonstrate contextual knowledge, potential networks at your disposal and an overview of the contextual and programmatic risks.

16. When does a funding contract between an INGO and a local civil society organisation qualify as direct funding? What criteria need to be met? In other words, what is the definition of direct funding that is used in the grant scheme 'Migration and Displacement 2023-2028?

Direct funding, in the form of a contribution or core funding, must have the sole purpose of strengthening local leadership and ownership, and therefore benefitting locally and independently led initiatives of in-country partners. Direct funding of in-country partners in return for service delivery (subcontracting) for an INGO (hence not directly accessible and independently led by in-country partners)  does not qualify as direct funding.

17. Would a proposal that describes a proposed collaboration with an in-country partner be eligible?

As described in chapter 10 of the Grant Policy Framework, the proposal should include a description of how the intervention strategy/strategies will take shape. This also includes the mechanism with and conditions under which in-country partners are selected to participate in the project. A proposal should therefore not describe a proposed collaboration with a specific in-country partner, but rather explain how in-country partners would be selected. The country specific approach within the project proposal template offers space to also demonstrate current networks (of in-country partners) at your disposal.  

18. Is it possible to act as a service partner/technical assistance to the support partner within the proposed implementation of the grant?

Yes. A service partner/technical assistance can be involved as a third party by the support partner during the implementation of the grant.

19. A proposal can serve several countries, but do objectives have to be the same in the proposed countries?

No. Objectives can differ per country. In the Project Proposal template this can be elaborated under the ‘context analysis’ section for each country. Please note that, under ‘intervention logic’ all intervention strategies to be applied must be specified. In case you include an (extra) intervention strategy at country level, which is not properly described in the general part of the proposal, the funding for this particular country will be rejected.

20. The Organisational Risk and Integrity Assessment (ORIA) does not appear on the website, could this be shared?

The ORIA form has now been published on this website. Please take note that the ORIA form does NOT have to be submitted with the application on 3 September 2023.

Only organisations that pass the threshold criteria will be invited by MOFA to submit the ORIA. For this the dedicated deadline is set at 3 October 2023.

21. Is it mandatory (at this stage or at a later stage) for the lead applicant to have a valid PARTOS-ISO 9001 certificate?

No. The applicant must be capable of adequate financial management, and able to ensure purposeful and efficient implementation of the proposed activities. Also an integrity policy has to be adopted. In order to evidence that it meets all three requirements the applicant may make use of either a valid PARTOS certificate or a valid ORIA (Organisational Risk and Integrity Assessment). If neither of the two is in place, the applicant has to draw up a new ORIA document. This can be done after explicit invitation of MOFA. (see question 20)

22. In regards to the requirement for support partners to demonstrate a proven track record in implementing projects targeting the specified target group, could you clarify what is meant by "experience in implementing projects"?

This relates to experience in providing support - in line with the three intervention strategies mentioned in chapter 6 of the Grant Policy Framework - to in-country partners as they carry out project activities focused on the target group, as defined in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework.

23. Could you clarify what is exactly meant by “worldwide experience”? Does it mean that we can focus our project on a single country, but our prior experience or track record can be from anywhere globally?

The track record with prior experience can be from anywhere globally, also if the proposal focuses on a single country. For applications focused on migration cooperation, experience in the priority countries will be positively taken into account during the assessment of proposals. 

24. Are proposed projects that focus on one country accepted under this programme grant? Or is there a preference to span multiple countries?

Yes. Proposed projects that focus on one country are accepted. Proposals that span multiple countries are assessed in the same way as proposals that focus on one country. As described in chapter 8 of the Grant Policy Framework,  the Minister will be able to award grants in accordance with a qualitative ranking until the available budget is exhausted, allowing for an even distribution of resources by the priority countries as mentioned in chapter 4, as provided in article 8 (3) (d) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Grants Decree.

25. Could you clarify if there is any expectation for support partners to contribute a certain portion of the funding, outside of the mentioned indirect costs? Or if there is any guidance on what proportion of the budget should be third party contributions? If we want to include a third party contribution to the project, where should we include this in the Budget template?

There is no expectation for support partners to contribute a certain portion of the funding, or requirement regarding the proportion of budget from third party contributions. In case of a third party contribution, we suggest that the organisation specifies the total amounts for the country/countries, and adds a last row to the table under the title ‘Of which requested from the NL MFA’.

26. Could you provide more specific examples of what could be included as indirect costs, and any specific expenditures that are not allowed under this category? As well as for direct costs?

Indirect costs cover most Headquarter costs, like HRM, financial management, regular monitoring and other support costs. An exception to this is dedicated time of professionals, like Programme managers or time dedication of thematic specialists, which can be budgeted separately as direct costs. The costs for externally contracted evaluations and financial audits can be budgeted too as direct costs. Furthermore, all other costs, such as programme staff, office rent outside the premises of the applicant, travel, etc., that can be invoiced to the programme, qualify as direct costs.

Examples of non-eligible expenses are:

• costs for developing the grant application and other costs incurred before receiving the administrative decision;
• value added tax (and sales tax) that can be settled by the applicant, lead partner or consortium partners;
• costs caused by inflation and exchange rate fluctuations greater than 5% of the total eligible costs;
• investment costs and depreciation that are not directly related to the activities financed by MOFA;
• profit margins on expenses such as salaries;
• PR and marketing;
• Research & Development
• costs of ascription and maintenance of intellectual property rights;
• the part of the total indirect costs that exceeds the permitted maximum of 15% of the sum of direct and indirect costs. For example, if the total indirect costs amount to 20%, 5% of this is classified as 'ineligible'.

27. What is the expected depth of detail regarding the activities of in-country partners in our proposal?

Involvement and decision-making with in-country partners is not required at this stage. The project proposal should reflect upon potential activities based on prior experience of your organisation with one of the three intervention strategies mentioned in chapter 6 of the Grant Policy Framework.

28. Can organisations with dual registration or international presence still qualify as in-country partners as long as they have significant local operations, impact and track record?

No. As defined in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework country offices or sister organisations of northern NGOs are excluded from the definition of in-country partners.

29. Is it correct that the role of the support partner is to contract individual organizations to implement activities defined under the selected intervention areas, rather than forming a consortium?

Capacity strengthening and direct funding under this grant must have the purpose of strengthening local leadership and ownership, and therefore benefitting locally and independently led initiatives of in-country partners. Direct funding of in-country partners in return for service delivery for an INGO (subcontracting, hence not directly accessible and independently led by in-country partners)  does not qualify as direct funding. (Also see Q&A 16). However, the applicant may (sub-)contract specialised services to fulfill its role as support-partner.

30. The target groups are: “migrants, refugees, internally displaced persons and host communities”. Is it possible to target some of these groups in the application, or is it required to target all four?

Please refer to chapter 4 of the Grant Policy Framework which elaborates on the objectives targeted by this grant policy framework. Although classification of these terms are not as straight forward, a distinction is made between migration cooperation (primarily targeting migrants and host communities) and prospect for refugees and host communities (primarily targeting refugees, internally displaced persons and host communities).

31. What is the definition of a sister organization?

A sister organisation has close connection with a third organisation through shared property and investments, joint activities, shared values, common board members (determined in the By-laws) and/or financial contributions.

32. Does the applicant need to be Dutch based? Would a national NGO be eligible as support partner?

As elaborated in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework, support partners are defined as both southern and northern NGOs and therefore do not need to be Dutch or based in the Netherlands. A national NGO would be eligible as support partner, if it meets threshold criteria D1 until D7 in the Grant Policy Framework.

33. Is Giro 555 funding considered Mofa funding?

No. This Emergency Appeal is not related to MoFa and does not involve structural/multi-annual funding.

34. Can we add work in another country, not listed as eligible country, as part of our program?

No. As elaborated in chapter 4 of the Grant Policy Framework, activities should exclusively take place in the list of countries mentioned in this chapter.

35. Should the track record only describe the lead applicant track record or also include the partner organizations track record?

The track record should only describe the experience of the applicant. There is only one (lead) applicant, consortia are not allowed and in-country partners will be selected or specified (in case already known) during an inception phase.

36. Can an individual apply for this programme grant?

No. The applicant should meet the threshold criteria D1 until D7 in the Grant Policy Framework. This includes being an organisation that possesses legal personality under civil law.

37. Regarding appendix 5A 1 and 2:

• Should the financial track record be limited to the focus country/countries indicated as a response by the applicant in D13?
• Should it be limited to the country/countries for which the applicant is submitting a proposal?
• Do we have to report only part of the budget of each project that falls within one of the 3 intervention strategies or the whole project budget?

As long as the resources were spent on the three intervention strategies mentioned in chapter 6 of the Grant Policy Framework and aimed at the target group mentioned in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework, the financial track record may include other countries besides the focus countries indicated in D13. Table 2 makes a distinction between resources spent worldwide and resources spent in focus countries. This does not have to be limited to the country/countries for which the applicant is submitting a proposal. The budget should cover the whole project budget if the entire project falls within that intervention strategy.

38. Does an organisation we would like to partner with as in-country partner have to be a not for profit NGO? Does the definition of in-country partners/local actors also include: local businesses, local Financial Service Providers, local authorities, local private sector, local TVETs, local learning institutes? And do in-country organisation also involve not registered organisations/informal groups and collectives?

As defined in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework, in-country partners may include local NGOs based in the country for which the results of the planned activities are intended (not being country offices or sister organisations of northern NGOs). Following the definition of NGOs in the Grant Policy Framework, this refers to a not-for-profit organisation which is not connected to a public authority. In-country partners therefore do not include local businesses, local authorities and local private sector. Local TVETs, learning institutes and local Financial Service Providers may be included if this meets the description of in-country partners in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework. Unregistered organisations, informal groups and collectives may be considered during the inception phase, based on the country specific context.

39. Is the call limited to applicants working exclusively in the field of migration cooperation or perspectives for refugees and host communities?

As defined by threshold criteria D4 in the Grant Policy Framework, the applicant should have a proven track record and at least 24 aggregate months of relevant experience in the past five years (July 1, 2018 - July 1, 2023) in the implementation of projects aimed at the target group. This includes both, direct implementation of projects as well as support (in line with the three intervention strategies mentioned in chapter 6 of the Grant Policy Framework) to in-country partners implementing projects aimed at the target group.

40. How does the MoFA look at the “equal partnership” during proposal phase, given that the deadline is rather short for full co-writing the proposal with in-country partners, and given that under 12.4 ‘Inception Phase’ it is mentioned that the inception phase can be used to identify and select (the first group of) in-country partners?

Experience with the three intervention strategies mentioned in chapter 6 of the Grant Policy Framework is a prerequisite to apply for this grant. The extent to which an ‘equal partnership’ approach will be put in to practice should therefore be based on previous experience and expertise in this field. At this stage it is not needed to identify and select in-country partners. The proposed collaboration with in-country partners - reflecting upon a. ownership of and control over direction-setting and decision-making on interventions implemented by in-country partners, b. the presence of a reciprocal accountability mechanism and c. the degree of risk sharing as mentioned in criteria D7 of the Grant Policy Framework - should be one of the elements included.

41. Is it correct to assume that under theme ‘Prospects for refugees and host communities’, objective 1 (Protection of refugees and internally displaced persons by in-country partners) access to health is part of basic socioeconomic rights? Would access to health as a fundamental right, in view of the call, have a higher of lower priority compared to other sectors (or fundamental human rights) that were explicitly mentioned as examples?

Although from a protection perspective, access to health can be considered a basic right, it is not a priority under the Dutch theme ‘Prospects for refugees and host communities’. Other sectors explicitly mentioned do have priority. 

42. Would an application from an applicant with subgrants to an international partner (“family member”) and in-country partners be perceived as a consortium?

Subgranting is only allowed to in-country partners. Please see Q&A 3, 4 and 14.

43. Is it possible to provide a certificate of registration other than that of the Business Registry? And is it acceptable to submit one that is older than 6 months?

Countries differ legally in respect to the entity where the organisation has to be registered. In case the applicant defers from this requirement, we recommend to specify the reasons for this. In such cases, the Ministry will evaluate on a case by case basis if the certificate of registration will be accepted. 

44. Is the minimum and maximum budget of proposals per year or per project period? And the maximum renumeration rates?

The minimum and maximum budget of proposals is for the entire project period. The maximum renumeration rates of individual management and board members of an applicant are per year.

45. When does the deadline close?

The deadline closes on September 3, 2023, 12:00 CEST.

46. Are think tanks eligible under this programme grant?

Think thanks are eligible as support partner if they meet threshold criteria D1 until D7 concerning the applicant in the Grant Policy Framework. As specified by threshold criterion D3, the think tank must have one of the three intervention strategies as main activity. 

47. Could you confirm whether, by digital information system, you mean an information management system that helps humanitarians understand the needs of the community based on beneficiary data or a digital information system that allows for two-way communication between the community and service providers?

Neither of these two interpretations is correct. “Digital information systems” should be understood in the broader framework of improved digital infrastructure that allows for quality digital connectivity for both refugees and host communities. Such digital connectivity should serve all sorts of purposes, including access to services, labour markets, entrepreneurship, finance etc. Improved communication with specific aid providers is a welcome consequence of the overall improved digital connectivity – but should not be considered as the main objective of these interventions.

48. Can an organization apply with more than one programmes (directly or as a sub-grantee)?

As elaborated in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework, organisations can qualify for up to one grant per policy framework objective - migration cooperation or prospects for refugees and host communities. Sub-granting is only allowed to in-country partners. Including a sub-grantee as support-partner is considered to be a consortium; please refer to the  Q&A 3 and 4.

49. Are country offices allowed to implement activities at all under this call?

As elaborated in chapter 4 of the Grant Policy Framework, activities that target the objectives of this grant policy directed at the target group should be implemented by in-country partners. If regional and country offices fall within the same legal entity as the head quarter, country offices may be involved in the role of support partner. Note that in order to pass threshold criterion D3 of the Grant Policy Framework one of the three intervention strategies should unambiguously come forward in the documents of the legal entity or vision document/strategic plan, as listed in Q&A 13.

50. Should the track record demonstrate experience with a selected/proposed in-country partner?

In-country partners do not yet have to be selected at this stage (also see Q&A 3). The track record therefore does not have to demonstrate experience with a selected/proposed in-country partner.

51. Chapter 15 refers to an administrative burden. Is this burden covered by the ministry, or should an applicant cover this in the proposed budget?

This refers to a formal legal requirement from the Ministry. It has no practical consequences for the applicant.

52. Is it possible to get further clarification on the in-country partner requirements?

As in-country partners do not yet have to be selected at this stage, there are no additional requirements that can be shared. As stated in chapter 10 of the Grant Policy Framework, the project proposal of an applicant should also describe the mechanism with and conditions under which in-country partners are selected to participate in the project.

53. How do we apply the gross remuneration rates to our organisation?

Direct staff costs for non-local personnel are the actual costs for head office staff and posted staff that can be allocated demonstrably to an activity, in whole or in part. Staff cost are charged on the basis of actual costs through a P x Q-calculation. As stated in Chapter 12 of the Grant Policy Framework, the gross remuneration of individual management and board members of an applicant legally established in the Netherlands or in another EU member state must not exceed €205,000 (gross) per calendar year, as from the start of the period for which the grant is being requested.

54. Is this call made annually?

No. This call refers to the full grant period, and may be repeated at the end of this period, if still relevant for the policy objectives of the Ministry.

55. Our 2022 audited annual accounts will not be ready until 03 September 2023. Can we submit our 2022 audited accounts later on? If not, can we submit something else instead of the audited account?

For practical reasons, we suggest that you submit the unaudited annual accounts. However, the Ministry will request the audited accounts in September. In case these defer from the unaudited accounts at critical points, this might lead to exclusion.

56. Under intervention strategy ‘direct funding’, would core or unrestricted grants be eligible?

Yes. Core funding would be eligible, however as stated in chapter 10 of the Grant Policy Framework, the project proposal of an applicant should clearly describe the mechanism with and conditions under which in-country partners are selected to participate in the project.

57. Could the proposal be submitted in French? / Est ce qu'on rédiger la proposition du projet en langue française?

Unfortunately it is not possible to submit a project proposal in French for this grant. For future calls for proposals, this will be taken into consideration.

58. Can the financial statements also be interpreted as the financial statements of our core projects in the past three years (2020-2022)?

Yes, as long as these are linked to the financial statements at organisational level. In such cases: submit both.

59. Can you confirm that the annual reports can be used as a source of evidence to proof that the applicant satisfies threshold criterion D3?

The annual report, adopted and/or published no later than April 1 2023, could be added as extra source of evidence to proof that the applicant satisfies threshold criterion D3.

60. Can the Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirm that applicants that have a valid Partos 9001 certification get a waiver for the ORIA?

Yes, but the Ministry will request an additional statement on SEAH (Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Harrassment). For this part, please refer to corresponding section in the ORIA.

61. Is there additional information or documentation regarding your compliance rules that might not be detailed in the call document but could be shared? This could include specific legal requirements, financial management expectations, monitoring and evaluation guidelines, or any other necessary procedural or policy information.

No. All the compliance rules are listed in the Grant Policy Framework or in the ORIA (annexe ix).

62. Is it correct that an applicant must have experience in one or more of the 3 intervention strategies as stated in criterion D3 in the Policy Framework, instead of the addition on the main webpage that states that this should be related to in-country partners active on migration cooperation or prospects for refugees and host communities?

The definition of in-country partners in this policy grant includes ‘actors in the field of migration cooperation and/or prospects for refugees and host communities.’ Therefore, both criterion D3 as well as the main webpage refer to experience in one or more of the 3 intervention strategies that support in-country partners active on migration cooperation or prospects for refugees and host communities.

63. In the Q&A it was mentioned that it is permitted to subcontract some activities to a technical partner.

• Can you clarify what kind of organisation or contracts would qualify for this technical partnership?
• Would it be possible to have more than one technical partnership on different components of the project or in different countries?
• Should the technical partner be named in the proposal or, as with in-country partners, is it more appropriate to include the mechanism by which a technical partner would be chosen?

Subcontracting is permitted for specialised services that are needed to deliver the activities as a support partner. For example, in case an applicant prefers to contract a local financial specialist to train in-country organisations on ‘donor-proof’ financial reporting, this would be permitted. The same applies for any other capacities to be strengthened: programme management, HRM, leadership, negotiation skills, etc. Based on the show cases (track record) in combination with the proposed intervention strategy/strategies the Ministry expects to get a fair picture of the capabilities of the applicant to deliver; with, or without sub-contracting.

64. Could you confirm whether it is obligatory to submit all the annexes at the bottom of the registration form, or only those which are required as evidence of one of the criteria?

Yes. The mandatory annexes are listed in chapter 10 of the Grant Policy Framework and correspond with the annexes at the bottom of the registration form.

65. In Appendix 1, there is mentioning about Project Plan to be appended. Is this Project Plan the same as the project proposal (Annex VI) to the Application form?

Yes. The reference to project plan is the same as the Intervention Logic within the project proposal.

66. To what extent should “expenses related to the planned activities” be included in the budget proposal? Is it correct that one amount is sufficient in every cell of the Template Budget Proposal and Liquidity Forecast, which provides sufficient detail to the requested (cluster of) activities?

Yes, this is correct. Detailed budgets will be elaborated during the inception phase, after adequate involvement of in-country partners.

67.  Would it be possible to give (one of) the in-country partners the responsibility to manage the subgrants?
The responsibility of providing direct funding lays with the applicant/support partner.

68. Regarding the section 'Indicate the quantitative/qualitative outcomes and outputs with corresponding indicators and/or success criteria, including the underlying assumptions', we seek clarification on whether these outcomes and outputs should be explicitly related to the intervention strategies or to the underlying objectives for which the grant funding is requested.

The quantitative and/or qualitative outputs and outcomes with corresponding success criteria and/or indicators, including underlying assumptions, need to be directly related to the specific intervention strategies.

69. We like to receive additional information on what is considered 'direct funding'. Our organisation practices a model of funding where we provide direct financial support to our partners for the implementation of their activities. In return, we expect them to provide regular monitoring and evaluation reports. Our role is more of a capacity builder and supporter than a direct implementer of activities, yet our partners are accountable to us. Given this, we would like to clarify if this kind of arrangement is viewed as service delivery and thus falls into the category of subcontracting and therefore not eligible for funding.

On the basis of the example provided, it`s hard to assess the exact relationship and division of tasks and responsibilities between your organization and your partners. It is therefore hard to conclude whether your reality would be viewed as service delivery and thus falls into the category of subcontracting or not. What can be said is that the situation where an INGO has been hired by a donor to do a certain project, and then hires a local NGO to deliver the services and results that the INGO initially has been contracted to deliver, would not classify as direct funding, and will not be assessed eligible under this subsidy framework. Direct funding is a situation where support partners offer a financial contribution to in-country partners to deliver services in accordance with the existing mandate of that in-country partner. Example would be an INGO (support partner) providing direct funding to a local NGO with the mandate to develop and implement WASH services, and where -due to the contribution- the in-country partners would be able to (continue to) deliver WASH services that are based on the in-country partner`s own initiative, analysis and project/services design. See also answer provided to Q16.

70.  Given the current stage of the application process where in-country partners are yet to be selected, it is challenging to provide detailed breakdowns for ‘direct funding’ to in country partners. Therefore, we wish to know if it would be acceptable to account for 'direct funding' to in-country partners as a lump sum within our proposed budget. This lump sum would be allocated on the understanding that it would be distributed among selected in-country partners at a later stage for the implementation of their respective activities. Could you please advise if this approach is in line with your guidelines for budgeting under the grant policy framework?

Detailed budgets will be elaborated during the inception phase, after adequate involvement of in-country partners. Therefore, a detailed breakdown other than the division of funds between the intervention strategy(s) does not need to be submitted as part of appendix 5C:2. See also answer provided to Q66.

71. Criterion D6 c) states: The gross remuneration of individual management and board members of an applicant legally established in other countries must not exceed, per calender year, the amount specified for the country in question in appendix 4 to these administrative rules, as from the start of the period for which the grant is being requested. Could you please provide a definition of ‘individual management’ and/or confirm which staff within an organization this criterion should be applied to?

With ‘individual management member’ is meant a member of the management team or Board of Directors. As stated in appendix 4 this criteria need to be applied to the manager(s), director(s) and board members of the organisation; it concerns the individual management team and board members who are solely or jointly responsible for the (daily management of the) entire organisation. 

72. In the definition of in-country partners you do not refer to local state/government actors (municipalities, law enforcement actors, etc.), does that mean they are not considered as in-country partners under this call?

Correct, local state/government actors are not considered as in-country partner under this call.

73. Are local NGOs eligible to apply? If so, can a consortium of local NGOs apply as well? 

Please refer to chapter 12 and chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework. According to threshold criteria D.1 and D.2 applicants should be an ngo with as main activity/activities one or more of the following intervention strategies: (i) capacity strengthening of in-country partners, (ii) direct funding of incountry partners, and/or (iii) meaningful participation of refugees or migrants in national and international policy influencing). As stated in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework this implies that support partners are eligible for a grant. The definition of support partner is: both southern and northern NGOs reinforcing and empowering in-country partners in carrying out their independent activities in migration cooperation and/ prospects for refugees and host communities. So also local NGO’s can apply if they meet the requirements. Please be aware that only one partner (as support partner) can apply. As also stated in chapter 5 and threshold criterion D.2 of the Grant Policy Framework, applications made on behalf of, as well as by a consortium are not eligible for this programme grant. However, support partners may engage third parties with the delivery of (parts of) the activity, once the programme has been approved.  

74. Is there a limit on the grant amount that the applicants can request? 

As stated in chapter 12 criterion D.8 of the Grant Policy Framework, grant applications aimed at Migration Cooperation can request for a maximum of €8 million and grant applications aimed at Prospects for Refugees and Host communities can request for a maximum of €10 million.

75. Reading the Q&A from last week we saw that social enterprises are eligible to submit a dossier. Under Appendix 1, however, does this mean that the social enterprise must tick the box NGO? Please can you confirm.

See also answer to Q6. Social profit organisations are eligible as support partner if they meet threshold criteria D1 until D7 concerning the applicant in the Grant Policy Framework. It is up to the applicant to show it meets these criteria. The organisation should be able to demonstrate that it is a not for profit organisation. Any profits made should not be meant for distribution among the owners of the organisation. However, there is no objection to organisations that produce a surplus to strengthen the general reserves. Meeting the criteria should be evidenced by the constitution and financial statements. If the organisation meets the criteria you can thick the box NGO.

76. For the lot on Migration Cooperation (a) the call document states several times that the applicant needs to show that it has access to a network in these priority countries. Could you define/describe what is seen as a network? Are there any formal criteria that should be present such as for example an MOU, or other proofs?
There are no formal criteria that should be present. Having a network in the priority countries can be demonstrated by, for example, previous or ongoing working experience/programmes with in-country partners.

77. For the lot on Migration Cooperation (a) the call document states under chapter 4 : "Applications aimed at migration cooperation must address at least one of the following objectives, through in-country partners and intervention strategies listed in chapter 6." The part "intervention strategies" is written in plural. Does this mean that you need to address at least two intervention strategies from chapter 6  for the lot Migration Cooperation?

No. It is not obligatory/a requirement to address more than one intervention strategy for this grant. Please refer to chapter 12, threshold criterion D.12.

78. For the lot on Migration Cooperation (a) the call document states three objectives: could you explain if the following reading is correct: that from 1-3 the target group is growing going from individual (migrant) to group (community) to organised group (CSO/NGO)? We would also like to ask a definition or description of what is specifically meant with 'community'

This is correct. A ‘community’ as mentioned in the second objective for Migration Cooperation refers to the local structure in which migrants reside. Generally speaking, it can be defined as “A number of persons who regularly interact with one another, within a specific geographical territory, and who tend to share common values, beliefs and attitudes.” [1] However, the definition of community is context-specific and depends on cultural, social, political and economic conditions as well as local migration trends.

79. For the lot on Migration Cooperation (a) the call document states in objective 3 "Promoting an enabling environment". Is it possible to explain more in detail what is meant with that?

The enabling environment refers to the broader system within which organizations and individuals function, which can facilitate or hinder their work, including policies, legislation, regulations, institutions, power relations and social norms [2]. Promoting an enabling environment means undertaking efforts to improve the environment that enables/facilitates NGOs and human rights defenders to advance migrants’ rights. This may include coalition building, mobilising support in cases of criminalisation and protecting civil society organisations and migrants' rights advocates.

80. Can Dutch MoFA please clarify the word count limits in Appendix B? For Section 2, does the "3.000 words per intervention strategy" limit mean that we address points 2.1-2.6 for each of the three possible intervention strategies ((i) capacity strengthening of in-country partners, (ii) direct funding of in-country partners and/or (iii) meaningful participation of refugees or migrants in national and international policy influencing) in 3,000 words for each strategy proposed?

This is correct, points 2.1-2.6 need to be addressed per chosen intervention strategy with a maximum of 3,000 words narrative explanation per selected intervention strategy.

81. Questions related to Appendix 5C: Template Budget Proposal and Liquidity Forecast. 1) Can Dutch MoFA please clarify that the requested budget tables only need to be submitted in a Word format / document without a supporting excel file showing all the calculations ? 2) Can Dutch MoFA please advise the level of detail required for the budget tables ? (For example, should we include in the tables a separate line (row) for each budgeted cost (e.g. for every staff position budgeted) or is budget category level is sufficient at this stage? (e.g. a row for total support staff, total travel, total equipment, total office running costs etc. ?

A Word format is appropriate for the proposal. The ministry does not need more detail (rows) than requested in the application form.

82. Section 9. Eligible costs: Can Dutch MoFA please clarify if the Indirect Cost Recovery (ICR or overhead) limit of 15% of the total costs for support partners and in-country partners refers just to the % overhead rate that partners normally add to their direct budgeted costs per a documented overhead policy, or does the 15% limit also need to cover all support staff/costs (i.e. support staff, equipment / supplies, etc…) budgeted by partners for this project?

The ICR of 15% covers the overhead for both the support partner and the in-country partners. Please see also answer given to Q26.

83. In the Appendix 5B there is specified that we must: “Indicate the quantitative/qualitative outcomes and outputs with corresponding indicators and/or success criteria, including the underlying assumptions”. The question is: Can we use a standard Logical Framework Template, where the outcomes, outputs, activities, indicators, targets and so on are all in one standard template? Or you will upload a Standard Logical Framework Template in the website?

Yes, you can use your own frameworks for indicating the quantitative/qualitative outcomes and outputs with corresponding indicators and/or success criteria, including the underlying assumptions. This as long as it is incorporated in the Word document/appendix 5:B template project proposal and meets the requirement of a narrative explanation of maximum 3.000 words per intervention strategy.

84. If we apply as a "support partner", would we able to include in the application that we will open a call for "in-country partners" after receiving the fund? 

Yes, opening a call for proposals for in-country partners after the approval of the grant of the Ministry would be admissible.

85. We would like to ask whether we can apply under two themes, namely capacity building for local partners and direct implementation?

What you call ‘Themes’ is called ‘Intervention Strategies’ in the Grant Policy Framework.  An organisation can apply for more than one intervention strategy. Please note threshold criterion D.7, according to which one organisation should not submit more than one application per policy objective (migration cooperation or prospects for refugees and host communities).
 

86. I wanted to seek clarity on the eligibility criteria. On page 14, under D.14 the guidelines state: "the application must not relate to...activities which already receive grant funding or a contribution directly or indirectly from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs." We do have a separate grant from the Netherlands MFA's program on justice. However, on page 13, under D.5 it states: "In the 2020-2022 period on average at least 25% of the applicant’s total annual income must have come from sources other than direct or indirect grants and/or contributions from the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs (including missions)." Which we interpreted as permitting existing funding for The Netherlands while applying to this new grant. Can you please clarify if we are still eligible for this grant given our existing funding?

There is no objection in receiving multiple grants from the Ministry, as long as criteria D.5 and D.14 in chapter 12 of the Grant Policy Framework (25% criteria from other sources) are respected; any activities proposed under the Grant Policy Framework should not concern the same activities as for which a grant already has been awarded by the Netherlands MFA, so it should not concern activities with the same target group on the same location.

87. Can project proposals still be submitted for Niger, considering recent developments?

Yes, proposals that cover Niger can still be submitted. The Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation and the Minister of Foreign Affairs have decided to suspend direct cooperation with Niger’s central government until further notice and are currently exploring which programmes funded through international organisations or local partners can be continued in order to provide support to the population. A decision regarding ongoing and new programming will be made in the near future. At the moment, we are unable to make this decision because the situation is still developing and it is not clear yet what the lasting impact of the coup will be on the political context in the country. Proposals that cover Niger can be submitted, pending developments and our Ministers’ decision regarding new activities in Niger.

In case Niger is part of a proposal covering multiple countries, this will not negatively affect the assessment of the project proposal. If necessary, the country focus can be revised at a later stage, within the boundaries of the Policy Framework and taking into account the level playing field.

88. Are Returnees considered as IDPs in this call for proposal, or would they be considered as vulnerable host community? Indeed, returnees often are still considered having great needs and their inclusion in projects is critical to address the issue of migration and displacement in the context;

In the context of ‘Prospects for refugees and host communities’, returnees can be considered as former refugees who have returned to their country of origin. They might not yet have been fully integrated and can be regarded as members of vulnerable host communities in that context. In the context of ‘Migration cooperation’, returnees can be considered as migrants.

89. In Appendix 5A: Template Track Record, 1. Financial track record – intervention strategies, are you looking for the financial track record for our organization as a whole? Or only financial track record in the countries in which we are applying?

Financial track record of organization as a whole. See also answer to Q37.

90. Could two organisations but part of the same federations apply separately for a grant under the same policy objective but in different countries –  or would the two proposals be considered as coming from the same NGO?

Yes. Two sister organizations, if each has its own legal personality, can apply separately for a grant under the same policy objective but in different countries. See also answer to Q31.

91. My question is whether applications that seek to address the second set of objectives have to address refugees, or whether internally displaced people can be the target group of an application under this objective.

As stated in chapter 4 of the Grant Policy Framework under the second set of objectives also internally displaced people can be target group of the intervention.

92. Are support partners expected to include 15% of indirect costs in their proposed budgets by default, or is 15% to be considered the maximum possible amount to be included in the budget?

It is meant to be a maximum to be shared between in-country partners and the support partner. Please see also answer given to Q26.

93. Could you clarify if the expectation is for support partners to transfer a share of the indirect costs to in-country partners? If so, what is the expected ration for the split of indirect costs between support and in-country partners?
Yes, budget for indirect costs need to be shared between support partners and in-country partners. However, during the inception phase this need to be further specified and elaborated on.

94. Does the Dutch MOFA encourage the collaboration with specialized actors for certain elements  of capacity-strengthening (for example human resource management) so that the support partner can fully focus on capacity-sharing within its own areas of expertise?

It is not clear what would be the legal status of such a collaboration. It`s important to refer to chapter 12 and threshold criterion D.2 of the Grant Policy Framework, which states the application needs submitted by an independent applicant, not on behalf of a consortium. However, support partners may engage third parties with the delivery of (parts of) the activity, once the programme has been approved.
95. Is a multi-country submission allowed for this call? Say for example 1 submission for Kenya and Uganda for the prospects for refugees and host communities component

Yes, a multi country submission is allowed for this call for proposals.

96. For other countries that are not explicitly mentioned for the prospects for refugees and host communities component eligible to apply. For example South Sudan host a lot of refugees from Sudan. Would the embassy accept  a submission from activities targeting the Sudanese refugees being hosted in South Sudan?

See also answers provided to Q10 and Q11. The list of eligible countries is listed in chapter 4 and threshold criterion D13 of the Grant Policy Framework. The list of eligible countries is in line with the priority countries for migration cooperation and prospects for refugees and host communities, as decided in the Policy Document for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation: Do what we do best.

97. Regarding the Gross Remuneration rates described in Chapter 12 of Grant Policy Framework. Does the limit apply to the highest levels of Executive staff at headquarters level, even if those individuals time will not be charged directly to this program? Please confirm that an organization is not eligible to apply if there is any staff member (including staff that are not directly contributing to this project such as CEO, CFO etc) that has gross remuneration above the specified limit.

As defined by threshold criteria D6 in the Grant Policy Framework, there is a maximum for the gross remuneration of individual management and board members of an applicant, which maximum varies depending per country where the applicant is legally established. This criteria need to be applied to all organisation staff, even if those staff will be not directly charged to this program. See also answers to Q53 and Q71.

98. Is there restriction for the country of origin for the support partner organization or not. For instance, can support partner be from the same country as in-country partner?

No, there are no specific requirements related to the country of origin/nationality of the support partner. The support partner can be from the same country as the in-country partner.

99. Is it true that there is no co-financing requirement for this grant?

Yes correct, there is no co-financing requirement.

100. For the budget: Can you provide a definition (and possible examples) of what is considered ICR in the Dutch government?

As mentioned in appendix 5C indirect cost recovery (ICR or overhead) is the total for support partners and in-country partners and is limited to a maximum percentage of 15% of the total costs. Subdivision(s) to be determined during the inception phase of the programmes. See also answer to Q26.

101. As a support partner, can you include your own FTE to the amounts of the three major intervention strategies mentioned in the table of appendix 5C-2: proposed budget?

Yes, you need to include all expected costs related to the implementation of the chosen intervention strategy(s) in the table appendix 5C-2: proposed budget.

102. Chapter 15, 1st paragraph "The administrative burden of implementing this grant policy framework amounts to €71,700 for the total grant period. Administrative burden is the burden associated with information obligations related to making the application and, in case grant is given, meeting the related accountability obligations. The amount of €71,700 represents 1.9 per cent of the total grant budget. The calculation is based on the estimation that up to 15 organisations are interested in the grant policy framework and will submit an application that can be honoured." What exactly is meant by this? Is this a burden borne by the Grant Government? Or is it a burden that applications have to budget anyway in its own proposal to allocate to the Grant Government? Please provide some clarification on this paragraph.

This estimate is obligatory for the Government to quote as part of an effort to reduce administrative burden for applicants, by being transparent about the estimated administrative burden that incurs with applying for and/or receiving a grant. The paragraph is for information and does not play any role in the assessment and selection of applications.

103.We would like a clarification of the definition included under chapter 12, more specifically under "Threshold criteria about the applicant" in section D.1: "The applicant is a not-for-profit organisation with a social purpose, not attached to a public body in the articles of association or in practice, with a legal personality under civil law, not established by a public body, or which is completely independent after establishment by a public body".  Is it the case that the legal form of the organisation must be non-profitable, or is it possible for an organisation with a social purpose to propose a non-profitable project for this grant framework? We ask this question in particular because the Dutch-language definition is exactly slightly broader than the English variant in the Grant Framework.

According to threshold criterion D.1, the applicant has to be a not-for-profit organisation not connected to a public authority either de facto or under its constitution, which serves a public interest and possesses legal personality under civil law, and which either was not established by a public authority or has become fully autonomous from the public authority that established it. So, the applicant cannot be a for-profit-organisation proposing a non-profitable (not-for-profit) project. See also answer to Q6. To be eligible, each applicant needs to show it meets threshold criteria D1 until D7 concerning the applicant in the Grant Policy Framework. So the organisation should be able to demonstrate a.o. that it is a not for profit organisation and it has a social purpose. Any surpluses should not be meant for distribution among the owners of the organisation. However, there is no objection to organisations to add  a surplus to the general reserves. Meeting the criteria should be evidenced by the constitution and financial statements.  

104. Annexe ix must be submitted before the separate deadline of 12:00 CEST on October 3, 2023" what do you mean by annex ix and where we could find it? is it an obligatory document to be submitted in separate date? 

See also answer given to Q20. The ORIA form does NOT have to be submitted with the application on 3 September 2023. Only organisations that pass the threshold criteria will be invited by MOFA to submit the ORIA. For this the dedicated deadline is set at 3 October 2023.

105: On page 11 of the Grant Policy Framework, it is mentioned that annexes written in another language (than English) should be accompanied by an English translation. Is a translation by an accredited translator required?

An accredited translation is not a requirement.
106. With regard to the reporting of financial track record according to fiscal year in Appendix 5 of the template document, we would like to know if the time period (listed in the table as 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022) can be interpreted in terms of our previous project’s time period (with full explanation in our narrative), or if the expenditures reported in Appendix 5A (Questions 1 and 2) must be according to the calendar year?

Fiscal years and calendar years are both acceptable, as long as they constitute periods of 12 months.

107. Intervention strategy/Meaningful participation (cf. section 6C of the Grant Policy Framework): Can the support partner support eligible in-country partners to represent the views/aspirations of refugees or migrants in national, international and institutional processes of policy making? For example, a national NGO, which works with refugees or migrants but is not necessarily refugee/migrant-led, participates in discussions with national government representatives to advocate for refugees’/migrants’ right to access specific services. 

Please refer to threshold criterion D.12 and chapter 5 and 6 of the Grant Policy Framework.

As stated in chapter 6 of the Grant Policy Framework, the proposed approach should focus on reinforcing and empowering in-country partners who carry out migration cooperation or prospects for refugees and host communities independently of the support partner. As stated in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework, the in-country partners are actors in the field of migration cooperation and/or prospects for refugees and host communities who are enabled by this grant policy framework to take on a larger and independent role in pursuing development objectives aimed at migration cooperation or prospects for refugees and host communities. It is not required that the in-country partners are refugee/ migrant led. The proposed activities should belong to one or more of the intervention strategies mentioned in threshold criterion D.12 and chapter 6, among which ‘Meaningful participation of refugees or migrants in national and international policy influencing’. The in-country partners can reinforce meaningful participation of refugees or migrants, helping to ensure that refugees or migrants can have their voices heard directly in national, international and institutional processes of policy making, adaptation, implementation and/or compliance.  As noted it is important that support partners put refugees or migrants forward/first as much as possible in national and international forums, rather than acting as conduits for local knowledge. Therefore, the Grant Policy Framework prefers for refugees or migrants to be on the forefront of the advocacy efforts.

108.  On page 9 of the Grant Policy Framework, at point 10 it is stated that the application form accompanying the grant application requires the following mandatory annexes: v,vi, vii, viii. Does this mean that besides providing related information in Appendix 1 and 5, separate annexes are required presenting this information as well?

As stated in chapter 10 of the Grant Policy Framework grant applications must be submitted using the form stipulated by the Minister: appendix 1-Application form. This application form (appendix 1) must be completed in full and must be accompanied with the mandatory annexes listed on the form: i; ii; iii; iv; v; vi and vii incl. viii.

Appendixes 2-5 instead provide additional information on these annexes. So ‘Appendix 5- Templates track record project proposal and budget proposal’ for example provides information on which templates need to be used for these annexes.

109. Appendix 1, Criterion D4: In the template, the table for explanation on project track record consists of 3 rows. The template is password-locked so adding more rows is not possible. Are we allowed to add more projects in an Annex to demonstrate 24 aggregated months of relevant experience aimed at the target group?  

As explained in the application form (appendix 1) the applicant need to show in the box “explanation by applicant D.4” that it has a proven track record and at least 24 aggregated months of relevant experience in the past five years (July 1, 2018 - July 1, 2023) in the implementation of projects aimed at the target group. Adding more rows to this explanation box “explanation by applicant D.4” is not possible. However, if you need additional rows to show your track record, please choose the two most relevant projects/experiences for the first two rows and use the last line as a ‘other experiences’ row including all the other main experiences you want to demonstrate in the track record. 

110. Inception period (cf. section 12.4 of the Grant Policy Framework): could you please confirm 1) whether the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs will prefinance the inception phase, 2) to what extent the disbursement of grant funds is linked to the successful completion of inception phase? 

As stated in chapter 12 of the Grant Policy Framework after a grant is awarded, the grant recipients will go through an inception phase. The inception phase will be prefinanced by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs and is included in the grant amount that is awarded to the applicant. If the country-specific plans, part of the inception report, are found to be satisfactory, the costs associated with the activities to be carried out in the remaining project period become eligible for funding.
 

111. Accounting for multi-country costs (cf. Appendix 5): the budget template found in Appendix 5C requires the breakdown of costs for Year 1 vs. Years 2-5 per country (table 1). However, we anticipate that some costs will be borne by our regional or main office (e.g. project management and reporting, capacity-building design, regional/international advocacy support, etc.). Should we account for these costs in a separate line or distribute them among the country lines? 

If your application covers multiple countries and the support partner makes overarching costs which concerns several countries, but is not part of the indirect cost recovery, please distribute these costs among the country lines.

112. Supporting documents (cf. Appendix 1): applicants are required to attach their most recent vision document or strategic plan. Is the requirement to submit only one vision document/strategic plan or can applicants submit more than one vision document/strategic plan? 

As stated in chapter 10 of the Grant Policy Framework the most recent vision document or multi-year strategic plan adopted and/or published no later than April 1, 2023 need to be submitted. This requires only one document, the most recent one.
 

113. In Annex 5 – Track Record, Project Proposal, Budget Proposal, under Section 5.1. “Overview – requested budget in EUR (incl. liquidity forecast first 12 months)”, I see that applicants are requested to provide a liquidity forecast for first 12 months. However, the structure of the table seems to be intended for only 1 row of entry per country. So I am not sure how to provide a detailed liquidity forecast for the first year. Do you have an example you could share with me?

 This observation is correct. Normally, the Ministry provides a standardised (detailed) budget sheet. In this particular case many details of the budgets at country level will be known as the result of the dialogues between the support partners and the in-country partners during the inception phase. After the approval of the proposals the detailed budget sheet will be made available to the support partners.

114. We have gone through the ORIA in October 2020. Shall we state that in the application form? Do we need to go through the ORIA again in case we are selected?

In case the applicant has a valid ORIA at the moment of application, an update form, especially on the integrity section will be requested. The organisations concerned, will be informed in due time.

115. Can the documents to be attached (in particular constitution and financial statement) be submitted in the original language?

For the Articles of Constitution and the financial statements translation to English is requested, in addition to the original documents (in case these are not already in English).

116. Instead of filling in quite sensitive data about individual’s salaries in the application template table as “Evidence”, could we submit as an evidence a letter signed by our Director of Administration and the Chair of Board, confirming that the gross remuneration limit is not exceeded?

No this is not sufficient, meeting threshold criterion D.6 should be demonstrated as stipulated in the application form. Please be aware that such information will be kept confidential by the Ministry.

117. Regarding Lot 1: can interventions such as economic empowerment and access to livelihoods initiatives fall under objective 1 on protection and assistance?

Applications aimed at migration cooperation must address one or more of the migration cooperation objectives as described in chapter 4 of the Grant Policy Framework. In line with the Grant Policy Framework economic empowerment and access to livelihoods related initiatives are instead aimed at Prospects for refugees and host communities objectives, and not Migration cooperation objectives. Please note that and as stated in chapter 5 organisations can qualify for up to one grant per policy objective - migration cooperation or prospects for refugees and host communities. A proposal aimed at both Prospects for refugees and host communities objectives and Migration cooperation objectives is not permitted and will be rejected (please refer to threshold criterion D.11).

118. Is providing seed funding in the form of grants to social entrepreneurs eligible under this opportunity?

As indicated in chapter 6 of the Grant Policy Framework support partners can offer a financial contribution to in-country partners to benefit locally-led initiatives aimed at (one or more of) the objectives for prospects for refugees and host communities as described in chapter 4. Chapter 4 of the Grant Policy Framework includes promoting economic development and job opportunities (for example support to engage in income-generating activities) through in-country partners as one of the objectives of the Grant Policy Framework. Seed funding to social entrepreneurs could therefore be eligible, if the social entrepreneur qualifies as an in-country partner.

119. With regards to the intervention strategies, why does C specifically include migrants while A and B don’t?

As stated in chapter 6 of the Grant Policy Framework to be eligible for a grant under Migration and Displacement 2023-2028, applications must address either (one or more of) the migration cooperation objectives or (one or more of) the prospects for refugees and host communities objectives.
The starting point for this grant policy framework is locally led development. Therefore, the proposed approach should focus on reinforcing and empowering in-country partners who carry out migration cooperation or prospects for refugees and host communities independently of the support partner.

Given the above, applications should be for activities that belong to at least one of the three intervention strategies described in chapter 6, in each of which the distinction between goals 1 and 2 of the Grant Policy Framework is visible. These three intervention strategies (A, B and C) are in the end all aimed at reaching the target group described in chapter 5 of the Grant Policy Framework with migration cooperation or prospects for refugees and host communities objectives. The target group of migrants is also included in this description of the target group.   
 

120. With regards to intervention strategy C, what is the difference between national, international and institutional levels of policy making processes?

The national level of policy-making regards the policies of the governmental authorities of the target countries; the international level refers to the (joint) policies of donor countries. Policy-making at the institutional level refers to the processes of major actors in development cooperation, such as UN-agencies and the World Bank.

121. Our work does not take place in any of these countries however WITH the displaced citizens of them, in a transit between /these/ countries of origin and their final destinations in Europe. We are based in Serbia where a big number of persons from Sudan, Pakistan, Iraq and others transit, creating our beneficiary group for activities of protection, empowerment, education, information sharing etc. could you please elaborate if we would be eligible to create a programme aimed to the displaced citizens of target countries in a third country /serbia, western balkans/ or not.

The list of eligible countries, where a programme could be initiated under this grant application, is listed in chapter 4 and threshold criterion D13 of the Grant Policy Framework. Proposed activities must be conducted in or be aimed at these countries. See also the answers given to Q10 and Q11. Serbia or other Western Balkan countries are not on this list.

122. How can I access Appendix 1 – Application form? Is the template available in MS Word as well, I cannot access the main application, from row 16 to row 140. Kindly guide.

The Applicant has to answer/confirm the questions of appendix 1 till row 15 first. If these are completed and the rows from row 16 onwards remain inaccessible, the applicant does not meet the basic threshold criteria. In such case the proposal will be rejected without any further assessment.

123. Question regarding Appendix 5 and Grant Framework P 10 vii: In which format does the liquidity forecast has to be presented? Is there a template available for this presentation.

The liquidity forecast for the first 12 months is part of the budget proposal annexe vii incl.viii and need to be in line with the template in appendix 5 to the Grant Policy Framework. So, using the template provided in appendix 5 and completing the tables is requested for.

Another question related to this In Appendix 5C, a liquidity forecast is requested for the first 12 months. However, the table provided does not allow for 12 monthly figures to be included in Year 1. Please can you confirm how and where we should include the liquidity forecast – as additional columns in Appendix 5C, or as a separate annex to the proposal?

Please refer to the answer given to Q113.

124.  Question regarding Grant Framework P 10 vii: “The budget provides insight into income, including contributions from third parties, and expenses related to the planned activities. The budget must be accompanied by a financial estimate for the remainder of the period covered by the application” a)       Can you kindly explain, where in the appendix 5 section 5 Budget, the third party contribution as well as the expenses related to the planned activities should be mentioned? The Overview charts 1 is structure per year and the second per intervention strategy.  b)      For what type of document you are looking for as accompany by a financial estimate for the remainder of the period covered by the application?

As stated in chapter 10 of the Grant Policy Framework grant applications must be submitted using the form stipulated by the Minister: appendix 1-Application form. This application form (appendix 1) must be completed in full and must be accompanied with the mandatory annexes listed on the form: i; ii; iii; iv; v; vi and vii incl viii.

The budget proposal annexe vii incl.viii need to be in line with the template in appendix 5 to the Grant Policy Framework. So, using the template provided in appendix 5 and completing the tables is requested for. Among others third party contributions, expenses related to the planned activities and also the financial estimate for the remainder of the period covered by the application should be included in these tables. Other accompanying documents besides annexes i; ii; iii; iv; v; vi and vii incl viii are not requested for.

125. What is the reason for not including Afghanistan as one of the eligible countries for implementation, also given the interlinkages around challenges (and opportunities for creating prospects) for refugees and migrants between Afghanistan and Pakistan?

The support provided by NL in Afghanistan currently focusses on needs-based humanitarian aid via the Afghanistan Humanitarian Fund and the Dutch Relief Alliance, and basic needs provision through multilateral funds and support to civil society. All activities take place under strict conditions (no support to or via the TLB, no interference by the TLB, support should be available for women and girls equally and women need to be able to work) and in a principled by women, for women approach. Additional efforts in the field of migration cooperation and durable solutions to forced displacement are not under consideration since the takeover of the TLB, as it is not in line with the Dutch long term approach in Afghanistan that was formulated in July 2022.

126. How much space will there be in the proposed intervention to implement activities related to building capacity of CSOs around Meaningful Youth Participation and ensuring that the voice of youth (migrants and refugees) are strengthened inside organisations and in external decision-making spaces?  

Activities related to building the capacity of CSOs around Meaningful Youth Participation can be built in, as part of learning and support needs determined by in-country partners themselves. However this should be coupled with building the capacity of young people themselves (and possibly capacity building of youth-led organizations). Meaningful Youth Participation should not be a goal in itself, but lead to improved outcomes and impact of the proposed interventions which should contribute to one of the two policy goals of the grant policy framework.

127. With regard to the Annexe: "Recent registration from the Business Register, no older than January 1, 2023". I am attempting to determine the closest equivalent. We will include our Certificate of Incorporation, which identifies our organisation as non-profit organisation registered in the state of New York. However, these are not updated annually, so the originally filed document (2007) remains in force. The same is true for our 501(c)(3) registration statement.

On an annual basis, we also file a CHAR500 (NY State annual filing for charitable organizations) and IRS Form 990 (return of organization exempt from income tax), but these are filed towards the end of the year. So our 2021 returns were filed in November 2022, and our 2022 returns will be filed around that date (or slightly earlier) this year. Will the above referenced documents be sufficient, and if not do you have any advice on how we can proceed?  

Please refer to the answer given to Q43.

128. Consulting the term of reference, we are still unclear what is the definition of not-for-profit and if our status as a charitable institution could fit the criteria. We therefore kindly request for information on whether charitable institutions such as ours qualify to apply for the grant as support partners

An applicant should be a not-for-profit organisation not connected to a public authority either de facto or under its constitution, which serves a public interest and possesses legal personality under civil law, and which either was not established by a public authority or has become fully autonomous from the public authority that established it (threshold criterion D.1). In this stage no conclusions can be drawn about this organisation. It is up to the applicant to show it meets this criterion. MOFA will assess whether this is the case for each applicant on the basis of the information provided by the applicant.  See also Q&A 103.

129. Are projects focused on research and data collection on the programme themes eligible?
 

No, chapter 6 of the Grant Policy Framework presents the eligible activities, which do not include interventions focused on research and data collection.

130. We are reaching out to seek clarification on the details and structure of the budget to be submitted. The template is quite general and does not specify the level of the details that shall be provided. Is it expected to provide details on positions, activities, support costs, or we are only providing general lumpsums for these categories? Can you please provide more detail on the forecasting structure as well?

Please refer to answer given to Q113.

131. Are two separate members of a federation (one each from the global north and global south) eligible to jointly propose a country intervention under any of the objectives to be led by any of the two federation members as prime applicant, and together respecting the indirect costs of support partners is not more than 15% of total budget?

As stated in chapter 5 and threshold criterion D2 of the Grant Policy Framework, applications made on behalf of, as well as by a consortium are not eligible for this programme grant. See also answers given to Q4 and Q90.

As also described in chapter 5, the definition of in-country partners is: actors in the field of migration cooperation and/or prospects for refugees and host communities who are enabled by this grant policy framework to take on a larger and independent role in pursuing development objectives aimed at migration cooperation or prospects for refugees and host communities. These may include local NGOs based in the country for which the results of the planned activities are intended, however not being country offices or sister organisations of northern NGOs.

132. liquidity forecast - Does it refer to the project spending plan for funds received in the frame of the programme, or does it refer to the liquidity of the applying organisation? What exactly should be included in the forecast?

It refers to the funds needed to deliver the programme, by the applying organisations. See also answers given to Q66, Q113 and Q125.

133.  track records - our understanding is that track records for Prospects for refugees and host communities cover worldwide experiences and prior experience can be anywhere globally. Please confirm.

Yes, this is correct.

134. Our organization has made an ORIA in October 2021 and received a grant from Dutch MFA, so that means we have a positively assessed ORIA. But, how could we know if the ORIA is still valid or not?

It is still valid, but an update form, especially on integrity policies has to be provided. Only organisations that pass the threshold criteria will be invited by MOFA to submit the ORIA. For this the dedicated deadline is set at 3 October 2023.

135. In regards to the liquidity forecast; it is requested in the framework document, yet in appendix 5 it's written that it should not be submitted separately, how does that translate into the actual number of documents that need to be submitted? How do you define «Liquidity forecast”, what exactly is expected under “Liquidity forecast” by the MOFA? In the application form it looks rather like a budget forecast for the first 12 months.   

The liquidity forecast for the first 12 months is part of the budget proposal annexe vii incl.viii and need to be in line with the template in appendix 5 to the Grant Policy Framework. So, using the template provided in appendix 5 and completing the tables is requested for. Please also refer to the answer given to Q113.

Liquidity forecast in the Grant Policy Framework refers to the cash flow needed for the first 12 months.

136. Do threshold criteria D2 and D7 need to be separately proven by a statement or other information?

No information/documents need to be submitted other than mentioned in the explanatory notes D.2 and D.7 of the application form (appendix 1).
 

139. Criterion D3: The applicant has as its main activity/activities one or more of the following intervention strategies: (i) capacity strengthening of in-country partners, (ii) direct funding of in-country partners, and/or (iii) meaningful participation of refugees or migrants in national and international policy influencing). Is it sufficient to upload only the relevant document(s)? Should the relevant documents be named annexe i-iv? Is it necessary to highlight the sections that are relevant?

Yes, and you may highlight this for the evaluator’s convenience.

137. Am I correct in assuming that criterion D4 will be addressed through the track record, and will not need to be addressed separately?

No, threshold criterion D.4 and qualitative criteria Q.1 and Q.2 should be addressed separately. Criterion D.4 is a threshold criterion, a minimal requirement. With qualitative criteria Q.1 and Q.2 the quality of the track record will be evaluated.

138. Our annual budget last years due to covid-19 pandemic didn't reach 5M EUR and we want to ask you if this will be an obstacle for us in submitting our 5-years proposal or in the ORIA check by the ministry? 

There is no  minimum amount of expenditure for the past years, which implies that there is no obstacle for submitting a 5-year proposal .

139 In case the ICR will be shared with the in-country partners, does the ICR component to be audited, or only the ICR of the support partner?

ICR (overhead) is not subject to audits.

140. The Criterion D.4 seems to be different from the track record tables in the proposal document. Shall we showcase different projects or can they overlap?

Yes, threshold criterion D.4 and qualitative criteria Q.1 and Q.2 should be addressed separately. However, this doesn’t mean that some overlap of experiences/projects is not allowed. See also the answer given to Q140.

141. In the proposal document, chapter 2, track record (geographical), shall we mention only the focus countries we are applying for (Pakistan) or also others (e.g. Turkiye)?

In the case of applications concerning Prospects for refugees and host communities relevant experience worldwide will be evaluated.  However, in the case of applications concerning Migration Cooperation relevant experience worldwide and in focus countries, including access to networks in these countries, will be evaluated. For the list of focus countries please refer to chapter 4 of the Grant Policy Framework. 

146. In the proposal document, chapter 1 track record (intervention strategies), this can be globally and not only for the project region, right?

Yes correct, you can include resources spend globally on the intervention strategies described in chapter 6 of the Grant Policy Framework.
 

147. When would you notify that the threshold criteria have been met and invite an organisation to submit the ORIA, which would be due on 3 October? How much time will be given to prepare the ORIA? If some of the responses in the ORIA are insufficient, would you request further explanation and supporting documents, or is it a one-step past or failed procedure?

Organisations will be notified at least two weeks in advance of the deadline to submit the ORIA. Organisations may already start with the ORIA, as the application form is already published online. Further explanation and supporting documents may be requested by MOFA after assessment of the ORIA’s.

148. Please could you provide details of the intellectual property rights in relation to ownership of foreground IP and licensing?

If a grant is awarded, one of the obligations attached to the grant will be that the minister is entitled to make use, free of charge, for the purpose of the grant’s objective, of all documents and other products produced in connection with the grant to which the grant receiver may have intellectual property rights. Where appropriate, the minister will ask to issue him with the necessary licences free of charge. The grant receiver must incorporate a clause to this end in any legal arrangement with third parties.

149. In the Application Form, Criterion D.4, the applicant has proven track record and at least 24 aggregated months of relevant experience in the past five years in the implementation of projects aimed at the target group: A) Who is the target group in this case? The in-country partners or the final target group therefore refugees, internally displaced persons and host communities ?

As stated in chapter 5 of the of the Grant Policy Framework with target group is meant: migrants, refugees, internally displaced persons and host communities.
 

150. Also in the Application Form, Criterion D.6, and after reviewing question 71 of the Q&A page, the organisation has a board, but it’s the directors of the organization who are those jointly responsible for the daily management of the entire organization, not the board. Do we only then have to report the required information on the directors or also the board members?

Both management members and board members (hence the parentheses in Q&A 71, “it concerns the individual management team and board members who are solely or jointly responsible for the (daily management of the) entire organisation”).

151. In the call, it says that the application form should be signed and submitted as PDF. Is it possible to submit it also in excel format or to get an unprotected version in order to expand the cells to make sure that our whole explanations can be seen?

After completing the Excel format, the applicant can simple use the ‘Print as PDF’ function and sign the document.

Related question: We would like to confirm the format of Appendix 1 – Application Form, which is originally an excel file but we understand the Ministry expects this document to be submitted as PDF? Some of the fields, such as those under section D.4 do not allow us to fit our responses within the fields – is it ok to edit the text in pdf to ensure that our responses are legible?

The Ministry recommends that the applicant stated the two biggest programmes and uses the third line for ‘others’ to cover the complete experience of the applicant.

152.Would the Dutch government allow an action for a joint implementation by support and in-country partners for a definite period of time (“twinning approach”) as part of the capacity building strategy to then allow a smooth transition and handover implementation fully to the in-country partner? / Can the support partner implement and carry out specific capacity building activities /advocacy activities aiming to support the in-country parties or should all the activities be implemented by the in-country partners?

Please refer to chapter 6 and threshold criterion D.12. As stated in chapter 6 of the Grant Policy Framework, as part of the eligible activities, support partners can provide guidance and advice to in-country partners in designing, establishing, deploying, implementing, managing, monitoring and evaluating activities linked to (one or more of) the objectives for migration cooperation or prospects for refugees and host communities, based on the learning and support needs determined by in-country partners themselves. While support partners can be on the ground to provide such guidance and advice, for which a grant can be used, the grant framework does not finance support partners implement activities concerning designing, establishing, deploying, implementing, managing, monitoring and evaluating activities themselves.

As further stated in Chapter 6, support partners can implement activities aimed at reinforcing meaningful participation of refugees or migrants, helping to ensure that refugees or migrants can have their voices heard directly in national, international and institutional processes of policy making, adaptation, implementation and/or compliance. Please note that it is important that support partners put refugees or migrants first as much as possible in national and international forums, rather than acting as conduits for local knowledge.

153. In Appendix 5C: Template Budget Proposal and Liquidity Forecast, under the Overview template, do we need to list the support partner’s host country as one of the countries and all related expenses separate from the country of intervention? Or should the costs spent in the HQ (SP) country be apportioned according to the intended target country of intervention?

At this stage, it is requested to assign all HQ costs, excluding ICR/Overhead) to the country/countries of intervention.

154. We have submitted an ORIA in 2020, but we would need to update the ORIA with new information I see there is a pdf available online, is there also an ORIA form available that can be filled in online? It seems like only a static pdf version is available. We would like to see what needs to be updated in the coming weeks already and for that reason raising this question.

Please refer to the answer to Q114.

155. In the Application template, under Appendix 5A (Track record): Should the “show cases” include the focus country (even under objective 2) or can we show cases from other countries than the focus countries?

Showcases from other countries are admissible, since the Ministry is interested in the applicant’s general capacity to achieve results. However, in the case of Migration Cooperation experience in the mentioned focus countries will be an additional aspect of evaluation. Please also refer to the answer to question 145.

156. Under criterion D4, should we include projects/programmes in the focus countries or can we show projects in other countries only?

Focus countries are not required under D4.

157. Are you accepting applications from West African Countries?

Please refer to chapters 4 and 5 of the Grant Policy Framework  and threshold criterion 13. The applicant (support partner) may originate from any country. Concerning in-country partners, interventions are limited to the focus countries listed in the Grant Policy document.

158. With respect to the list of annexes in appendix 1, could you please specify whether annexes V, VII and VIII, which are those required in appendix 5, should be sent separately or whether you are referring to what has already been produced in appendix 5? If they are to be sent separately, is it necessary to further develop the concepts already expressed in Appendix 5?

As stated in chapter 10 of the Grant Policy Framework grant applications must be submitted using the form stipulated by the Minister: appendix 1-Application form. This application form (appendix 1) must be completed in full and must be accompanied with the mandatory annexes listed on the form: i; ii; iii; iv; v; vi and vii incl. viii. Appendixes 2-5 instead provide additional information on these annexes. See also answer given to Q108.

159.We understand that it is possible to subcontract some activities to a technical partner, can this technical partner be an international organization/specialist? Is it possible to pre-identify/select this technical partner at proposal stage?

There are no specific restrictions in subcontracting international specialists or international organisations to carry out some specific tasks. Pre-identifying technical partners in the proposal is possible, but the assessment of proposals will focus on the previous experience of the applicant rather than technical partner.
 

160. Our 2022 annual accounts will only be available at the end of October 2023. The unaudited accounts will also not be available by the submission deadline of 3rd September 2023. Can we instead submit the 2019, 2020 and 2021 audited accounts now and submit our 2022 audited accounts later on towards the end of October 2023, when they become available?

This is acceptable for the Ministry, but it is preferred that the applicant provides a reliable estimate of the income and expenditures for 2022. In case the applicant does not meet the threshold based on the 2020-2022 series, the proposal will be rejected.
 

161. Comprehensive Documentation: Our website features our mission, vision, as well as details of our past and ongoing educational initiatives. Is this documentation sufficient for the application, or should we also include a multi-year strategic plan as mentioned in the grant documents? We are committed to transparency and can provide any additional information required to showcase the long-term impact and sustainability of our programs.

A website cannot be accepted as the publication date will not be verifiable. Please refer to the requirements mentioned in chapter 10 of the Grant Policy Framework, a.o. a multi-annual plan (approved before 1 April 2023) is requested. In case the applicant does not have a separate multi-annual plan (or one of the other documents mentioned in chapter 10), but another document providing comparable evidence, this may be submitted (while clearly mentioning which required document it aims to replace)’.

162. In our opinion,  two of the mentioned intervention strategies are inter-dependent and rather complimentary and therefore have a lot of overlapping activities. Therefore the question is: Do we need fill in the "intervention logic” separately for "A. Capapcity strengthening of in-country partners” and "B. Direct funding of in-country partners”. This would practically mean repetition of some of the text. OR Can we propose the "intervention logic” for both of these strategies together with clear identification of activities, oututs and indicators that contribute to both strategies and stand alone activities oututs and indicators of each strategy? If this is allowed, does this mean that the word limit for the two strategies combined will be 6,000 words.

The Ministry recognises this point. However, some applicants might apply for only one or two intervention strategies. To allow for an equal level playing field, the Ministry requires an adequate level of separation. The minimum requirement for this is to explicitly specify which outputs, outcomes and related indicators are relevant for which intervention strategy. (e.g.: 1 & 3). The number of words per strategy is 6,000 words.

163. Each section has a word limit mentioned. Is there a margin to over shoot this word limit by say 10%? So if a section requires 800 words, can we go up to 880? Or will the first 800 words will only be considered for evaluation purposes?

While evaluating, the Ministry considers a margin of flexibility of 10%.

164 Our has the status of a foreign NGO that has been authorised to operate in country x by the Ministry of Interior, General Directorate of Civil Society Relations. Although this operating license seems to be a permit for our activities in country x, we have so far carried out all of its activities with financial resources consisting of local, national and international funds, apart from our Dutch sister organisation and The Dutch Ministry of Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, and continues to execute. For this reason, we are not qualified as an In-country Partner. However, in line with the abovementioned situation, can we apply for a grant as a Support Partner?
 

In addition to the above question, when our Dutch sister organisation is entitled to receive a grant as a Support Partner, can the operation in country x be carried out by our country x organisation with the grant support of the project besides In-country Partners? (For technical and administrative processes instead of implementation)

To evaluate the admissibility of any construction,  the Ministry has to take a very close look the Articles of Constitution of the applicant and other relevant parts of the application. At this stage no definitive answer can be given. Please carefully study the Grant Policy Framework and than decide, who will be the applicant. Please note it is up to the applicant to show alle criteria are met.

165. Could you kindly provide guidance on the questions regarding the Threshold Criteria in the ‘Application Form’ document. Is the applicant itself advised to give explanation on the criteria? As I understand, it will be evaluated from your end, whether an applicant meets the criteria or not? How should the documents that show that the threshold criteria are met be presented? Per issue in a separate appendix with the number of the criteria? Do all D questions need to be addressed in a separate appendix?

As stated in chapter 12 the Grant Policy Framework all applications received by the deadline will first be assessed on the basis of the threshold criteria. Applications must satisfy all threshold criteria in order to be eligible for a grant. These threshold criteria are described in chapter 12 of the grant policy framework and also further explained in the application form with information you need to provide for each criterion (see boxes with “explanatory note xx” appendix 1).

In addition, for each threshold criteria in the application form you need to indicate, in the boxes “explanation by applicant” (appendix 1) whether the application complies with this criterion, what this is based on, and where precisely evidence of this compliance can be found, in the documents provided by the applicant. So, it is up to applicants to show that they meet all criteria and up to MOFA to assess this information.

166. I am contacting you under the Grant Migration and Displacement Programme to find out whether Côte d'Ivoire is eligible and the exact target of the programme.

As listed under Chapter 4 of the Grant Policy Framework and threshold criterion D.13 Côte d'Ivoire is not listed as a target country.

167.  Does the 15% threshold for ICR include support costs at the country level, such as office premises of support partner and in-country partners, finance/admin/HR/log staff, etc.?

This question is too general to provide a specific answer at this stage. As a general rule, the 15% has to be shared between the support partner and the in-country partners. The costs mentioned above, are case-specific, and will be discussed during the inception phase.

168.  What level of flexibility (%) will be granted on realignment among budget headings and sub-headings?

This will typically be determined in the Grant Decision. At least during the inception phase, there will be a flexibility margin, especially between intervention strategies per country, since the Grant Scheme is designed to be demand driven, according to the needs and priorities of the in-country partners.

169. Regarding the Criterion D.6; Directors and Managers remuneration. We want to confirm that the allocated ceiling is per person, per annum. In the case of Egypt, and as per appendix 4, the remuneration ceiling is EGP 1.941.024. This is the annual Gross income of each individual board director or manager? 

The ceiling is for each individual management and board members.

170. With regards to the caps on the maximum remuneration for directors and managers, in Annex 4 of the Call for Grant Proposals for this programme, do the restrictions also apply to local organisation implementing partners also, or is this just applicable to the Applicant?

Threshold criterion D.6 applies to the applicant.

171. Could you clarify ‘direct funding of in-country partners’: for country x direct funding of in-country partners has proven to be a continuous challenge: related to registration/banking/liquidity issues affecting the financial management capacity of in-country partners. If the Support Partner does not transfers funds directly to in-country partners, but issues payments of all costs incurred by the in-country partner, after submission of due justifications (e.g. timesheets, payroll sheets, contracts, invoices, activity reports, delivery notes, etc. for procurement of goods and services), will this practice (mitigation measure to ensure operations/activities can be effectively implemented by the partners, with timely payments/financial transactions) be considered as direct funding of in-country partners?

The Ministry recognises that, due to legal issues or payment system restrictions, it might not in all cases be possible to work with direct funding. In such cases reimbursement of costs made can be an option. However, the Ministry will request an appropriate explanation for such exceptions. In such cases the Ministry will evaluate the proposed mechanism against the grade of autonomy given by the support partner to the in-country partners.