Main Page Welcome

Since TPT-WG/16 in November. the APEC Secretariat has issued new guidance material for projects developed by the Budget and Management Committee (BMC). The "Guidebook on APEC Projects" is available for downloading from the APEC Secretariat website at: http://www.apecsec.org.sg/apec_organization/policy_procedure/finance/Content.html

It is important that all HODs are familiar with these guidelines when the TPT-WG is considering project proposals, and particularly important that project overseers in lead economies are aware of their requirements. New project proposals (other than "concept papers") should be written in conformity with the guidebook.

The TPT-WG agreed to its own project guidance material at TPT-WG/14 in October 1998, and revisions have been proposed at subsequent meetings as APEC's processes change. It is worth reminding ourselves that Senior Officials' at SOM III in 1999 endorsed a report by the BMC which was generally critical of APEC fora in complying with the APEC project process (TPTWG/16/HOD/3.3/1). In particular, BMC requires APEC fora to:

I believe that the TPT-WG's previous guidance material aimed to address those issues. At TPT-WG/16 we agreed to make further revisions to reflect changes to the BMC reporting and evaluation processes, and to incorporate the ECOTECH weighting matrix (now mandatory for all APEC fora). We also agreed to incorporate the (then) Lead Shepherd's suggestion for better determining the merit of proposals.

In this revision of the guidelines, the aim has been to reduce the content to that which is necessary to explain the relevance of the BMC guidebook and the TPT-WG's internal processes to comply with the expectations of higher APEC fora. Would HODs please be prepared to discuss this draft under item 6.2 of the Shepherds/SCCs/HODs meeting on Monday 27 March.

1 These guidelines are intended to supplement those issued by the APEC Budget and Management Committee (BMC). They detail the TPT-WG's internal processes to manage projects, and to improve the quality of information provided to enable approval of self-funded projects by the TPT-WG, or endorsement of APEC-funded projects for submission to the BMC.

2 These guidelines also detail the TPT-WG's process for submission of project progress reports and evaluation reports for completed projects. While these TPT-WG guidelines supplement the BMC guidelines, they are not a replacement for them and members are expected to conform to the BMC guidelines or other APEC instructions at every stage of a project.

3 Where APEC funding is sought for TPT-WG projects, the TPT-WG must work within the process established by the BMC and described in the "Guidebook on APEC Projects" (available for downloading from the APEC Secretariat website [www.apecsec.org.sg].) This provides that working groups should evaluate any project proposals in April/May and submit finalised proposals through the Lead Shepherd in June. The BMC considers proposals in July/August each year. All TPT-WG proposals for funding from both the APEC Operational Account and TILF Special Account must be ranked in priority order to assist the BMC. Once the BMC's recommendations are endorsed by the APEC Senior Officials Meeting (SOM) and APEC Ministers Meetings (AMM), the APEC Secretariat can inform fora of approval. Approved funds become available to the TPT-WG at the commencement of the next calendar year.

4 All project proposals intended for either TPT-WG or BMC consideration first require a written submission to the TPT-WG from the sponsoring member economy, endorsed by a minimum of two co-sponsor economies. It should contain adequate information to enable the TPT-WG to assess the project, and be transmitted to members at least four weeks in advance of the TPT-WG meeting at which it is to be considered. Minimum contents of the submission are as follows:

5 In considering proposals for approval/endorsement, the TPT-WG must be mindful of broad APEC goals and values as well as the TPT-WG's own objectives.

6 Proposals seeking support from the APEC Central Fund or the TILF Special Account require TPT-WG endorsement. Such endorsement should not be given lightly if TPT-WG is to have credibility with the BMC. Where funding is sought for several TPT-WG projects, then a means of prioritising our projects is necessary, particularly as working groups are required by the BMC to restrict proposals funded from the Operational Account to a maximum of 15% of the OA budget in any year.

7 The TPT-WG should develop and follow a consistent approach to the selection and prioritising of project proposals. The information contained in project proposals should be adequate to enable the TPT-WG to assess the project against the selection and ranking criteria. The role of TPT-WG Steering Committees is crucial, and they should apply a rigorous approach to their examination of projects before making any recommendations for approval to the Plenary. While Steering Committees are not required to formally rank projects, they may wish to give the Plenary an indication of their respective merit, and they should review, and amend if necessary, the proposed ECOTECH weightings of the project (if applicable).

8 At TPT-WG Plenary meetings, a form will be distributed to Heads of Delegations, on which competing project proposals will be clearly listed as seeking funds from either the APEC Operational Account or the TILF Special Account. For each listing, economies will rank the new projects/proposals in order of priority, assigning a "1" to the most important and lower numbers ("2; 3; 4" etc) to other proposals, using a ranking form as in the example at Annex 2. In determining economy rankings, Heads of Delegations should consider the criteria in Annex B of the "Guidebook on APEC Projects" for operational account projects and, in addition for TILF Special Account projects, Annex D of the Guidebook.

9 The Shepherds will collect and collate the rankings for each project proposal. The combined "score" will determine the overall ranking of a particular proposal against any others. The project receiving the lowest score will be ranked first, with the others in descending order. In the event that two or more projects receive equal scores, an opportunity to discuss the merits of each proposal will be given followed by a further ranking exercise. In the event that this does not produce a clear ranking, then the Lead Shepherd will determine the relative priority of the "tied" proposals, in consultation with the Deputy Lead Shepherd and Steering Committee Coordinators.

10 As a means of determining the relevance of a project proposal to the APEC ECOTECH and priorities, the following guide shall be used:

Score	Compliance with APEC's ECOTECH priorities
0-8	Very low. (Project should be redesigned, or rejected.)
9-15	Medium. (Project may benefit from some reconsideration to align it more closely to ECOTECH priorities.)
16-20	Above Average. (Project complies with ECOTECH priorities.)

11 The TPT-WG's approval of a particular project shall be formally advised to the Lead Economy contact and project sponsor by the Lead Shepherd, with any conditions or requirements decided by the TPT-WG. The project sponsor may then commence the project and shall ensure that BMC financial guidelines are followed as appropriate, and progress shall be reported regularly to the Lead Shepherd.

12 The TPT-WG's approval for a particular project shall be formally advised to the Lead Economy contact and project sponsor by the Lead Shepherd, with any conditions or requirements decided by the TPT-WG. The project overseer (formerly the "project sponsor") will then complete a final proposal for APEC Operational Account or TILF Special Account funding as appropriate, using the TPT-WG version of the BMC Facesheet (Annex 3 to these guidelines). The proposal shall then be forwarded to the appropriate Steering Committee Co-ordinator for checking and onward transmission to the Lead Shepherd in sufficient time for the Lead Shepherd to submit it to the Secretariat by the specified deadline. The TPT-WG submission to the BMC must be "signed off" by both the Steering Committee Coordinator and the Lead Shepherd.

13 Following advice of approval from the APEC Secretariat, the Lead Shepherd will inform the Lead Economy contact and project overseer of the decision of the BMC. If approved, the TPT-WG Programme Director will be able to assist the Project Overseer with any queries on the implementation of the project, if required.

14 In cases where outside contractors are to be employed on TPT-WG projects, it is essential that the BMC guidelines for selecting contractors be followed.

15 These guidelines do not preclude the submission of a "concept paper" to the TPT-WG in order to assess the level of interest among member economies before developing a project proposal for formal consideration by the TPT-WG.

16 While APEC works on voluntary principles, it is implicit in approval of project proposals by the TPT-WG that its member economies should support the project objectives in a cooperative manner, to the extent possible. Members should inform the respective Lead Economy contacts and project overseers when they are unable to participate fully in a particular project.

17 When an APEC-funded project is completed, the project overseer should formally advise the APEC Secretariat in accordance with the BMC Guidelines, and copy the communication to the Lead Shepherd, Deputy Lead Shepherd and the appropriate Steering Committee Coordinator.

18 The APEC Secretariat requires all WGs to evaluate the overall performance of their projects (based on self-assessment) in line with the SOM "Guidelines for Evaluation and Reporting System for APEC Projects", 1999. (These guidelines are incorporated in the "Guidebook on APEC Projects".) As well as enabling the TPT-WG to fulfil its reporting requirements to other APEC fora, regular and high quality internal evaluation of projects will assist the TPT-WG to put forward projects better targeted to the needs of APEC economies, and more closely reflecting the aims of the APEC Action Agenda.

19 Progress reports on "current" projects are to be submitted to the BMC prior to its 2^nd meeting in July/August each year (refer Annex G of the "Guidebook on APEC Projects"). On receipt of a request from the Lead Shepherd, TPT-WG project overseers should complete a report in the required format, and forward it to through the appropriate Steering Committee Coordinator to the Lead Shepherd to enable the Lead Shepherd to submit it to the APEC Secretariat by deadline.

20 Evaluation reports are to be submitted immediately after a project, or defined stage of a multi-year project, is completed (refer Annex G of the "Guidebook on APEC Projects").

21 The project overseer should forward the evaluation report to the Deputy Lead Shepherd. The Deputy Lead Shepherd, together with a representative from each TPT-WG Steering Committee, will form a small group, which is to review the evaluation report and assess the outcome of the project, within four weeks of receipt. The Deputy Lead Shepherd will then send the evaluation report and review to the Lead Shepherd for additional comment or endorsement, within two weeks of receipt.

22 The BMC has determined further measures for evaluation reports and seven small groups of economies are responsible for reviewing evaluation reports on behalf of the BMC. The economies responsible for reviewing the TPT-WG's reports are Chile, Mexico and Chinese Taipei. The Lead Shepherd will therefore copy the completed evaluation report(s) to the Heads of Delegations of those economies, who will in turn forward them to their respective APEC Senior Officials.

This is an application for funding under the [ ] Operational Account
[ ] TILF Special Account (please tick one box only)

PROJECT APPROVAL GUIDELINES