Budget allocation for individual projects and activities. The size of individual grants for network projects can be assessed in relation to the achievement of specific objectives and feedback from project coordinators and other participants in the projects. During the period under review, transnational networks typically received just under EUR 220,000 for a year-long project with maximum Commission co- financing of 80%. As shown in the chart, projects on disabilities were awarded over 135% of average funding per project, while networks on volunteering received about 20% less than the average. Given that most project coordinators interviewed felt the budget satisfied their requirements, flexibility regarding the precise size of network grants does not appear problematic. 350 299 300 250 243 223 219 216 200 187 172 150 100 50 0 Disabilities Doping Gender equality HEPA Social Education & Volunteering inclusion training € tho usand Figure 16: Transnational networking funding, by subject area Source: DG EAC As pointed out elsewhere in this report, many of the project objectives were not SMART or short-term enough to make a straightforward assessment of the extent to which the objectives were achieved. However, even taking a conservative view it is clear that most of the projects have resulted in positive outcomes closely related to their objectives. According to the online survey, recipients of 2009 and 2010 grants were overwhelmingly positive, with three in four respondents claiming that the project objectives had been achieved to a great extent. Project coordinators recalling their experiences in interviews pointed out that, while larger grants would have enabled more ambitious projects, the available funding was adequate to carry out the planned activities. In some cases, coordinating organisations were required to supplement the Commission grant with funding from other sources, but only a small minority of interviewees reported that the scope or scale of activities planned had to be substantially curtailed. Similarly, event organisers expressed satisfaction with the scale of the EU subsidy, and the evidence does not indicate any shortcomings in absolute terms. However, in terms of achieving „greater EU visibility at European sport events‟ (the stated objective of EU involvement) the relative size of the EU grant, in relation to the total event budget, appears to be of tantamount importance. In general, it is clear the inability of the Commission to carry out a competitive tendering process and set specific object...
