EN 1 EN. 2.1 Sector context ANNEX 1. IDENTIFICATION. Title/Number

Transcription

1 EN EN EN

2 ANNEX 1. IDENTIFICATION Title/Number LIBERIA - Support to the Liberia Reconstruction Trust Fund (LRTF) - CRIS reference: 2009 / Total cost EC Contribution : 60,200,000 euros (40 % of IP- Envelope A) Aid method / Method of implementation Contributions of the other donors to the joint co-financing: KfW, 34,000,000 euros; World Bank, 1,900,000 euros Swedish International Development Association (SIDA), 7,500,000 euros; Irish Aid, 2,000,000 euros, DFID 17,600,000 euros. Project approach Joint Management through the signature of an Administrative Agreement with IDA (World Bank Group): 60,000,000 euros. Centralised management: 200,000 euros DAC-code Sector Road Transport 2. RATIONALE 2.1 Sector context The Liberia Reconstruction Trust Fund (LRTF) was established in 2007 to help rehabilitate Liberia s priority infrastructure and revitalise agriculture in support of the Pillar IV Infrastructure and Basic Service targets of its PRS 1. It is managed by the International Development Association (IDA) on behalf of the Government of Liberia (GoL) and enables multi-donor financing to be harmonised and projects to be quickly implemented. Financing for the LRTF has been provided by Germany, Sweden, Ireland and the IDA in 2008, while the EC announced a 2009 contribution of EUR 60m at the Liberia Poverty Reduction Forum in Berlin in June Further contributions in 2009 will be made by Germany, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Almost all the 2008 contributions have already been allocated to infrastructure projects and it has been confirmed that the EC contribution will be crucial for the rehabilitation of two of Liberia's most important primary roads, i.e. Cotton Tree-Buchanan, which,. connects Monrovia with the port of Buchanan to the south-east, and Monrovia-Ganta/Guinea border to the northwest. They are vital to the delivery of basic pro-poor services and the facilitation of inclusive economic growth, both of which are necessary if the country is to break away with its problematic past. LRTF support to the road sector faces a number of challenges. First, the road funding gap is large; an estimated USD358m is needed over the next three years and GoL only had firm commitments of some USD232m as of September The LRTF contributions are 58% of these commitments and just over a third of the overall funding gap. Second, the LRTF must accelerate reconstruction if it is to quickly reduce Liberia's extreme poverty, an important MDG 1 goal. Finally, the road sector implementation organisations are interim bodies set up to focus and support scarce GoL capacity as well as safeguarding GoL/Development Partner (DP) funds. Thus, the Special Implementation Unit (SIU) of the Ministry of Public Works (MPW) will be transformed into an Infrastructure 1 The PRS outlines the reconstruction of Liberia's economic, physical and social infrastructure and the four main strategies/pillars it will pursue to achieve the MDGs. Pillar IV is the most expensive and important during the PRS consultative exercise, Liberians frequently stated that roads are their number one priority. EN 1 EN

3 Implementation Unit (IIU) before evolving into a Road Authority 2. The LRTF needs to strengthen this nascent institution if it is to increase its capacity to plan and maintain its road assets and move towards sector programming and budget support. The LRTF addresses these challenges in several ways. First, the creation of the LRTF is an innovative solution to allow Development Partners to contribute to Liberia s reconstruction without having to establish a significant ground presence. The LRTF is confident that it can attract more funds because of this innovative approach. Second, the LRTF plans to use Output and Performance-based Road Contracts (OPRC 3 ) for the rehabilitation and maintenance of the two prioritised roads. This use of OPRC has a number of advantages: The GoL can use development partner funds to leverage private sector finance. It reduces the time needed for detailed design and focuses on the procurement of Contracting Entities (OPRC-CE) who will meet and maintain specified "Service Levels" over the contract period. The OPRC Concept Consultants (OPRC CC) started in November 2008 and the OPRC CE should mobilise in October In contrast, a conventional methods-based 4 contract would take about months to design and would need six months for tendering before works started as late as in the 2010/11 dry season. To deliver high "Service Levels", the OPRC includes routine and periodic maintenance costs over a 7/10 year contract period, which represents best value for money for the investment. OPRCs should provide sub-contracting opportunities for Liberian road contractors and labour intensive routine maintenance systems creating jobs in an economy with widespread unemployment. Complementary investments in feeder roads, agriculture production, rubber processing plants etc. will be that much more sustainable if primary road "Service Levels" are high. 2.2 Lessons learnt A number of lessons, most of which revolve around the capacity constraints of the public and private sectors and the lack of maintenance, have influenced the LRTF's choice of OPRCs. The interim PRS fell short of its plans to rehabilitate 430 miles of primary and secondary roads. Directlyfunded donor partner programmes such as the EC Community Rehabilitation Component (CRC) and the USAID Liberian Community Infrastructure Programme (LCIP) have also fallen behind schedule and retain responsibility for maintenance as an interim measure. Staff, data and documentation shortages have badly affected MPW's ability to use method-based contracts hence the need to contract in international experts to the SIU/IIU and the OPRC Concept Consultancy (OPRC-CC). This should facilitate the SIU/IIU transition into a NRA by demonstrating current approaches to asset management and the contracting out of construction and maintenance services. For the private sector, the OPRC offers direct employment and sub contracting opportunities through for example routine maintenance contracts. The realisation of these opportunities will require some The IIU will assume responsibility for the planning, programming, design, and supervision of MPW infrastructure projects before being divested into a Road Authority. OPRC is a term used to describe an implementation concept in which a Contracting Entity, usually a consortium of engineering consultancy, financing and contracting companies, are contracted to Design, Build, Operate and Maintain (DBOM) road infrastructure for a fixed period of time. They differ from method-based contracts in that the contractor is required to deliver and maintain an outcome i.e. a "Service Level", specified as a minimum road standard/condition needed to carry the forecast volume and range of vehicles using the road under normal climatic conditions. The Client specifies the techniques, technologies, materials and quantities to be used while payments are based on the volume of inputs and materials used to complete the road. EN 2 EN

4 capacity building. Both ILO and USAID are involved in providing such support to road contractors, while a Transport Sector Training Needs Assessment, provides a strategic framework to improve the capacity of the sector as a whole. 2.3 Complementary actions There are a number of complementary actions underway in the road sector. First, there is evidence of integration of road investments with agricultural development the ILO feeder road rehabilitation project links both roads to the Firestone Rubber Concession's out-grower replanting programme. Similarly, the EC co-financed Agricultural and Infrastructure Development Project (AIDP) will rehabilitate a number of feeder roads linking productive areas in Bong, Lofa and Nimba counties to the Monrovia-Guinea border road. Secondly, there are several road maintenance initiatives within the sector. The ILO has been training labour-intensive routine maintenance contractors, whereas LCIP are using mobile maintenance crews. Similarly, CRC's rehabilitation of feeder roads has piloted a community maintenance system funded by locally collected road user tolls with limited success. SIU's experience with these maintenance initiatives may be used to support the maintenance phase of the OPRC. Thirdly, the MPW has launched two Design, Build and Transfer (DBT) hybrid OPRCs, financed by the IDA under the Urban and Rural Infrastructure Rehabilitation Program (URIRP) to (1) improve Monrovia's town roads and (2) rehabilitate the Cotton Tree Bokey Town section of the Monrovia- Buchanan road. The LRTF is convinced that these contracts and the World Bank's international experience is sufficient for the SIU/IIU to be able to oversee full a OPRC on the two proposed roads and ensure the sustainability of "Service Delivery". 2.4 Donor coordination PRS implementation mechanisms are weak and it has been difficult to coordinate the work of all donor partners and agencies involved in the road sector. This explains GoL support to the LRTF as a means of simplifying aid flows, increasing harmonisation and facilitating ownership. Once the EC has signed the Administrative Agreement, it will become a voting member of the LRTF OC, along with the WB, Germany, Sweden and Ireland and three voting GoL members, including the Minister of Public Works. This affords an opportunity to support the alignment of LRTF projects with the PRS and sector concerns as well as track OPRC implementation progress. 3. DESCRIPTION 3.1 Objectives The overall objective is to contribute to inclusive economic growth and poverty reduction in line with the Liberian PRS, through fostering LRTF coordinated planning of infrastructure reconstruction 5 (specific objective). 3.2 Expected results and main activities The programme aims to achieve the following result: The rehabilitation and maintenance of at least one section of the two primary roads. 5 This objective is in line with the EU's support to fragile states in transition (European Strategy for Africa; 2005) and its achievement will show Liberia's progress in linking relief with rehabilitation and development (LRRD) identified in the CSP&IP. EN 3 EN

5 3.3 Risks and assumptions The main assumption is that the EU contribution will be used by the LRTF to procure at least one OPRC-CE to rehabilitate and maintain a significant section of the two prioritised roads. The wide range of risks and the difficulty of quantifying them make Liberia a high risk country for OPRC-CEs. We can expect interest and tender prices to reflect this. It is likely that the PRS has underestimated the full cost of Liberia's infrastructure rehabilitation needs 6. If the EC contribution is used to finance the mobilisation of all contracts on these two roads, then there is a risk that LRTF/GoL funding constraints will shorten the length of the planned maintenance period and undermine the viability of the full OPRC approach. Capacity constraints mean that the LRTF/IIU is reliant on the OPRC-CC to define the level of service, prequalification procedures and performance indicators as well as to attract interest from prequalified contractors in the OPRCs. Similarly, services to monitor the performance of the OPRC-CE and to apply appropriate contract penalties and payments will have to be contracted out. 3.4 Crosscutting Issues The OPRC-CC will undertake an Environmental Impact Assessment and where necessary a Resettlement Action Plan in line with national Environmental Protection Agency requirements. The EC through its mandate as LRTF OC member will seek to address the issues of maximising local youth employment by encouraging the OPRC Contract Entities to sub contract routine maintenance to local contractors and of gender sensitive planning. 3.5 Stakeholders The primary stakeholders are the vehicle operators, transporters and people living in the catchment area of the two roads. The MPW, MoF, MoT, the Public Procurement and Concessions Commission, LRTF and the road sector DPs are the main institutional stakeholders who will use the OPRC to protect the investment while they develop appropriate maintenance management and funding systems. Within the MPW, the main departments to be affected will be the SIU as the implementing arm of the MPW for large works projects. This unit will be affected by the LRTF contribution insomuch as upgrading of the unit to an IIU will be necessary in order for the MPW to successfully implement these major road projects. 4. IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 4.1. Method of implementation Joint management through the signature of an LRTF Administration Agreement in line with the existing EC-WB Trust Funds and Co-financing Framework Agreement (TFCFA). Thereafter, the, EC will become a voting member of the LRTF OC. This will enable the EC together with other contributing donors to align the PRS focus of the trust fund contribution. Project preparation and implementation within the LRTF have been delegated to the SIU at the Ministry of Public Works, which has the responsibility of ensuring speedy execution of works, while 6 The Gbarnga-Guinea border sections of this road are likely to be less heavily trafficked and there may be scope for cost savings along this stretch of road. EN 4 EN

6 fiduciary responsibility for the Trust Fund is held by the IDA,, which has the responsibility of overcoming the project implementation difficulties associated with the use of pooled funds. The 200,000 euros budgeted for evaluation will be implemented through centralised management Procurement and grant award procedures All contracts implementing the action are awarded and implemented in accordance with the procedures and standard documents laid down and published by the World Bank. EC procedures will apply for evaluation contracts Budget and calendar The estimated costs of the planned activities are as follows: Activity Cost (EUR) Contributions to LRTF 60,000,000 Evaluation 200,000 TOTAL 60,200,000 The implementation phase of the OPRC should start in December It is likely that the bulk of the EC contribution will be used to finance one OPRC legal commitment and be linked to the payment regime used in the financial/cost recovery model developed by the OPRC-CC. The operational duration is 84 months as from signature of Financing Agreement Performance monitoring The generalised standard indicators will be the main standard monitoring indicators used to monitor the effect of LRTF expenditure on the sector i.e. 710 the number of km maintained, 711 the number of km rehabilitated and the number of km constructed. Such monitoring might be combined with EC participation in IDA-led LRTF project supervision missions Evaluation and audit EC membership of the LRTF OC will enable it to monitor the progress of the OPRC and receive audit information and narrative progress reports of LRTF expenditure as set out in the Administrative Agreement. It is intended that that EC funds at least one verification mission during the project period to inform particularly on the cost effectiveness of the OPRC model and that this will closely resemble a standard EC Financial and Technical Audit. Similarly, the European Court of Auditors will be able to undertake on the spot verification of accounts Communication and visibility The LRTF Administrative Agreement will make provision for clear identification of EC-funded activities. EN 5 EN

7 EN EN EN

8 ANNEX 1. IDENTIFICATION Title/Number LIBERIA - Support to the National Health Plan (CRIS 2009/021591) Total cost EC Contribution : 20,000,000 euros (13,3% of Envelope A) Aid method / Method of implementation Project approach Centralised management. DAC-code Sector Health policy and Management 2. RATIONALE 2.1. Sector context Liberia s population is estimated to 3,4 million, with an annual growth rate of 2.1%. Total fertility rates have dropped from 6.6 births per woman in 1986 to 5.2 in The use of modern family planning methods among women remains low at 11.4% (DHS, 2007). Liberia s health status remains poor in regional comparison except for the infant mortality estimated to be 72/1000 live births (DHS, 2007). Malaria, acute respiratory infections and diarrhoea are the most common causes of morbidity and mortality. HIV prevalence rate estimate in adults is 1.5% (DHS 2007). Considering that prevalence rates are higher in the region, Liberia faces the risk of an increase in HIV/AIDS. Access to water from improved water sources is 51% (CWIQ, 2007) but significant rural/urban disparities exist. There are currently 354 functioning health facilities in Liberia, this represents approximately 70% of needs in terms of infrastructures according to the international standards. There are approximately 4000 full-time and 1000 part-time health professionals. This is less than 1/3 of the health work force recommended by WHO for a country with Liberia s population. In 2007, the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MoHSW) elaborated the National Health Policy and the National Health Plan (NHP) These documents were coherently integrated into the Poverty Reduction Strategy. The Policy identifies two main challenges: 1) Expanding access to basic health care of acceptable quality; 2) Establishing the building blocks of an equitable, effective, efficient, responsive, and sustainable health care delivery system. The corresponding Plan focuses therefore on four key components: 1) the Basic Package for Health Services (BPHS, integrated combinations of minimum healthcare and social welfare services relevant for delivery at each level of care); 2) Human Resources for Health; 3) Health Infrastructure; and 4) Support Systems. A two-year implementation plan with key activities and benchmarks is contained in the NHP. The GoL s spending on Health care has increased rapidly: from $4.2m in 2004/05 (5.5% of total expended) to $21.4m in 2008/09(7.7% of the total national budget). In relation to GDP, government expenditure on health more that doubled from 0.9 to 2 % between 2004/05 and 2007/08. The budget implementation rate has improved from 66% in 2004/05 to 98% in 2007/08. The current absorptive capacity of public health sector is very high. NGOs and international organisations provide the majority of funding for Health service provision in EN 1 EN

9 Liberia, but oversight of these assistances and financial reporting is weak. Although data is incomplete, the MoHSW estimates that donor-funded expenditure amounted to at least $45m in 2007, while future commitments made by donors indicate that this could rise to $90-120m over the medium term. Household expenditures on Health care are also significant. These were estimated at $15.5m (2% of total household expenditure) in 2006/07(CWIQ 2007). Hence total expenditure on Health care in Liberia in 2006/07, from the GoL, donors and the private sector, is estimated at above $70m, of which only 14% was funded from the GoL s budget. The GoL s Health spending is dominated by recurrent expenditure, with main part on capital investments funded by donors off budget. More than 40% of the GoL s Health expenditure is allocated to curative services and about a 25% consists of transfers to the two major hospitals. The share of spending on administration has declined from 21% in 2004/05 to 9% in the 2007/08 budget. Preventive services receive a very low share of the GoL s Health spending. The NHP includes a proposed annual budget for , to be updated for annual implementation. The credibility and accountability of the MoHWS is high as showed by its initiative to publish its Financial Statements for the fiscal year The GoL has established a Health Sector Pool Fund in order to cover the financing gap of the NHP. DFID, Irish Aid and UNICEF are contributing to this Pool Fund in the framework of the PFM reform plan, the GoL foresees the development in 2009 of sector MTEFs on a pilot basis, including in particular the Health sector. Health will indeed most likely be the first sector to have an MTEF given its considerable advance in relation to other targeted sectors (Education, Roads) in the development of a sound mid-term development strategy and plan, of a financing framework, and in terms of budget and financial management capacity development Lessons learnt Since 2006, EC has supported the establishment of the Health Policy and Plan. The Assessment Report of the year I implementation of the NHP (July 2007-June2008) include recommendations for each component of the NHP and particularly the establishment of policy guidelines for health care delivery at the community level to guide the implementation of the BPHS. During the second semester of 2008, several pilot contracting approaches have been put in place at county level in order to verify the contracting modalities ( contracting in, contracting out, performance contract, etc.) and the responsibilities of parties (Ministry, County Health Team, Services Providers). The phasing out of the humanitarian aid will probably be the main challenge of the MoHSW. ECHO is supporting the health sector in Liberia with approximately 5million/year/50 health facilities but will phase out during the next years and MoHSW needs to find equivalent additional resources Complementary actions This programme will benefit from the 9th EDF long-term technical assistance for the health sector in the domains of health planning, human resources, decentralization and pharmaceuticals. Geographical complementarities and coordination will be necessary in order to implement the BPHS at county level in particular with USAID Donor coordination The reduced number of donors in the health sector and the strong leadership of the MoHSW define the coordination modalities: 1) The Programme Coordination Team (PCT) is the major EN 2 EN

10 decision-making body, who's responsibilities cut across planning, human resources and coordination. It is comprised of the Ministry s senior staff. The PCT coordinates all projects and funding mechanisms of the MoHSW including the Global Fund for AIDS/HIV, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM), the Health System Reconstruction Project financed through the World Bank and other major activities supported by USAID, Irish Aid, BASICS, GAVI, and others. 2) The Health Sector Coordination Committee (HSCC) is the largest of the national coordination bodies for effective coordination of the health sector. It gathers once a month all the relevant Government agencies, donors (World bank, USAID, UN Agencies, EC, Member states and other bilateral donors) and main implementing partners, including civil society representatives. 3) Additionally, a monthly Pool Fund Steering Committee constituted of Government, contributors and other main health sector stakeholders representatives provides oversight of the Pool Fund (review of funding proposals and budget submitted by the MoHSW, and their consistency with the NHP, overseeing the implementation of activities under Pool Fund approved programs). 3. DESCRIPTION 3.1. Objectives In keeping with the NHP: The overall objective of this Sector Policy Support Programme is therefore to reduce poverty by improving the health status of the population through more effective, efficient and equitable access to healthcare. The purposes of the programme are: 1) To expand access to basic health care of acceptable quality; 2 To support the restructuring, rationalisation, development of human resources and management capacity of the public health system Expected results and main activities EC support will be focussed in two components of the National Health Plan: (1) To expand access to the Basic Package for Health Services Expected result: The access to health services (BPHS) is improved Main activities: 1) training of health workers on the BPHS; 2) Implement the BPHS in the existing functional health facilities; 3) Restore Ambulance and Communication services to strengthen the referral system at county hospital level; 4) Support the development and implementation of drugs supply master plan; 5) Establish basic Emergency Obstetric Care Unit in the health centres and strengthen comprehensive Emergency Obstetric Care Services in the hospitals at county level. (2) To build human resources for health Expected results: Health workforce/inhabitant increased; Health workers formally trained; Health workers retained and deployed increased; gender equity programmes in place. Main Activities: 1) Train certified midwives in Life Saving Skills (LSS); 2) Train traditionally trained midwives in Home-Based LSS 3) Decentralize Human Resources management to county Level; 4) Place health workers on the standardized incentive package; 5) train and deploy midwives, physician assistants, and laboratory technicians in health facilities; 6) Improve the training infrastructures of the Rural Health Training Centre at Phebe hospital. EN 3 EN

11 3.3. Risks and assumptions The most substantial risk is the low institutional capacity in the sector. The proposed programme will address some of this through the implementation of the BHPS and through the 9th EDF Technical assistance programme. In the longer term, the most pivotal requirement will be the GoL capacity to recruit more and better remunerate public servant posts. Without high level political commitment to support this increase in state recurrent expenditures, sustainability may be at risk. It is therefore key that inter-ministerial dialogue is maintained at a high level, and that donors keep this issue high on the agenda. Linked to this is the GoL s high Budget dependency on external funds, in the current post-conflict phase, it is unlikely that the GoL will be able to take over the entire cost of public health services delivery even by the end of the current SPSP. In the longer term, sound revenue policy and concerted donor exit strategies should avoid sudden shocks in this respect. The assumption is made that the GoL pursues its commitment to the NHP and reform process, including the PFM reform agenda and its implementation at sector level Crosscutting Issues The PRS and NHP demonstrate the GoL s commitment to ensure mainstreaming of crosscutting issues: 1) Democracy, Good Governance and Human Rights (The GoL is preparing the ground for decentralisation and the corresponding reforms); 2) Gender equity (by organising services so as to ensure equal access and benefits for both men and women, and giving particular recognition to the special needs of the most vulnerable, with child and maternal health at the core of the BPHS and free health care as a core principle); 3) Fight against HIV/AIDS and others communicable diseases are included in the BPHS Stakeholders The identification and formulation of this programme has been jointly made with the MoHSW. Other health partners have been also consulted. DFID has been supporting the enhancement of the MoHSW financial management capacity. USAID and MERLIN, GAVI and the Global Fund have been working with the MoHSW on the developing HMIS system and capacity. MoHSW(at central level) will need to strengthen its legal, regulatory, strategic planning, procurement, supervision, monitoring and evaluation capacity. In addition, the CHTs will require additional support and ongoing management training in public health, strategic planning, operational planning, accounting and financial management, supervision, and M&E, to build upon the new skills they have acquired through BASICS training and other capacity building efforts. International and local NGO will continue to support the implementation of the National Health Plan at county level (CHT, health districts, hospitals, health centres and clinics). 4. IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 4.1. Method of implementation The overall responsibility for the implementation of the programme lies with the European Commission, acting on behalf of the NAO. The project will be implemented by centralised management through the signature of financing conditions. EN 4 EN

12 4.2. Procurement and grant award procedures The design and supervision of the building and rehabilitation works in the health training facility will be implemented by service contracts. The works and supplies in this training health facility will be implemented through works and supplies contracts respectively. All activities concerning the implementation of BPHS and training activities will be implemented by NGO through grants contributions following call for proposals. All contracts implementing the action must be awarded and implemented in accordance with the procedures and standard documents laid down and published by the Commission for the implementation of external operations, in force at the time of the launch of the procedure in question. Participation in the award of contracts for the present action shall be open to all natural and legal persons covered by EDF. Further extensions of this participation to other natural or legal persons by the concerned authorising officer shall be subject to the conditions provided for in article 20 of Annex IV of the revised Cotonou Agreement. The essential selection and award criteria for the award of grants are laid down in the Practical Guide to contract procedures for EC external actions. They are established in accordance with the principles set out in Title VII 'Grants' of the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund. When derogation to these principles are applied, they shall be justified, in particular in the following cases: Financing in full (derogation to the principle of co-financing): the maximum possible rate of co-financing for grants is 90%. Full financing may only be applied in the cases provided for in Article 109 of the Council Regulation on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund. Derogation to the principle of non-retroactivity: a grant may be awarded for an action which has already begun only if the applicant can demonstrate the need to start the action before the grant awarded, in accordance with Article 108 of the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th EDF Budget and calendar The total project cost is estimated at 20,000,000 euros, to be financed from the NIP in the framework of the Cotonou Agreement. Indeed, the NIP includes 30,000,000 euros to support the health sector. The remaining 10,000,000 euros could be contributed through the health pool fund depending upon a favourable outcome of the compliance audit. Item Amount (EUR) To expand access to BPHS and build HR for Health 16,800,000 (grants) Works & Equipment of Rural Health Training Centre 2,000,000 Design & Supervision of Works and supplies 200,000 Audit 200,000 Evaluation 200,000 Reserve 600,000 Total 20,000,000 EN 5 EN

13 The operational period of implementation of this programme is 48 months 4.4. Performance monitoring The overall monitoring of this programme will follow the modalities established by the MoHSW and the Health Sector Coordination Committee (HSCC): Annual sector review of the NHP and Annual review of the LPRS (matrix of deliverables). Specific indicators will include in each grant contribution Evaluation and audit An external mid term evaluation and an external final evaluation will be included as well as a provision for external audits. Grants will be audited according to the modalities of the standard grant agreements Communication and visibility EC will continue the participation into the HSCC and steering committee in order to ensure the communication and visibility of EC support. An EC communication and visibility strategy will be included in each grant as well as for works and supplies. EN 6 EN