New funds, new rules: how European planning and the role of local organisations, institutions and foundations are changing.<\/p>\n
There has been much talk in recent months about the future budget of the European Union and the next programming of funds 2028-2034. This is not just an “institutional” debate: the choices that will be made in the next two years will have very real effects on how European projects are designed, financed, and implemented in local organisations. <\/p>\n
We have already analyzed some of the major changes, which are still ongoing. Among the points that seem clearest, or at least most likely, is that the next programming cycle will see: <\/p>\n
This means, on the one hand, more competition<\/strong> among organizations and among thematic priorities; on the other hand, more opportunities to tailor interventions to real-world contexts if you are able to present solid, coherent, and measurable proposals.<\/p>\n In particular, the future National and Regional Partnership Plans (which will take the place of the current Structural and Rural Funds) will concentrate a very large share of the EU budget and will be managed in a more centralized and results-oriented way, following (in terms of principles and operation) a model similar to that of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan. Perhaps not coincidentally, the two forms of intervention have a very similar acronym: PPNR and NRP<\/strong>. <\/p>\n In recent discussions between institutions, foundations, and civil society, new elements have emerged regarding not only the nature or scope of future European programs, but also how they will work and how different components of civil society will be called upon to participate in them.<\/p>\n This was discussed at theMarch 9 event<\/a>, “Growing with European Projects: initiatives in local organisations and future prospects<\/strong>.”<\/p>\n In this article we want to return in summary the main thoughts that emerged from the debate.<\/p>\n One of the most interesting aspects that emerged during the March 9 event is the need for a change in perspective<\/strong>: from the perspective of stakeholders in the local organisations, there is a gradual shift from participating in already defined calls to contributing as much as possible to the construction of programs and priorities.<\/p>\n Territories, local organisations and third sector organisations<\/strong> will increasingly be called upon to:<\/p>\n This approach is more challenging, but also potentially more effective, especially for those who work permanently in local organisations and are familiar with their social, economic and environmental dynamics.<\/p>\n For organizations, associations, local authorities and professionals<\/strong>, this means:<\/p>\n This evolution also affects the role of foundations<\/strong>, one of the major themes addressed during the March 9 event.<\/a> Foundations have long worked<\/a> alongside the third sector and local governments to facilitate access to European funds. EUknow.it itself was created with this goal in mind: to strengthen skills, information and planning capacity. In this new context, foundations will be able to contribute not only to training, information, counter and co-financing activities, but also to: <\/p>\n Some foundations are already experimenting with this approach. One example is the experience initiated by the CRC Foundation<\/a>, a partner of EUknow.it, in the province of Cuneo. <\/p>\n In fact, in recent years the CRC Foundation has launched a structured process of medium- to long-term strategic territorial planning, known as Cuneo 2030 Strategy<\/strong>, which involves public institutions, economic entities and social organizations in the province. The process aims to build a shared vision of development, aligned with national and European policies, and to translate it into a coordinated set of priority actions, with clear objectives and measurable results. Such an approach allows local organisations to present themselves in a more structured and credible way with respect to the new logic of European programming, anticipating needs and projects before calls for proposals are issued. <\/p>\n The overall picture is still evolving, but one thing is certain: the next two years will be decisive in defining rules, priorities, and operational arrangements for the 2028-2034 cycle. In this context, the first official positions are beginning to emerge from the European Union’s advisory bodies, the European Economic and Social Committee and the European Committee of the Regions. <\/p>\n In its opinion on the MFF 2028-2034<\/a>, approved in January, the European Economic and Social Committee<\/strong> stressed the importance of preserving adequate space for civil society within the new EU budget. The EESC recalled the need for accessible and stable funding for civic organizations, a real application of the partnership principle, and greater involvement of social actors not only in the implementation but also in the programming of funds. Particular attention was paid to the risk that an excessive focus on competitiveness and performance could penalize long-term social and territorial interventions. <\/p>\n In March, the European Committee of the Regions also expressed its position<\/a> on the future EU budget, calling for a strengthening of resources allocated to cohesion policy and a central role for regions and cities in defining investment priorities. The Committee of the Regions highlighted that the new programming tools must take into account territorial specificities and ensure effective multilevel governance, avoiding excessive centralization of decisions. According to the Committee, only a strong involvement of local organisations can ensure that European funds produce concrete and lasting impacts at the local level. <\/p>\n On April 27, the European Court of Auditors<\/strong> gave a cautious assessment of<\/a> the proposed MFF 2028-2034, highlighting significant risks: uncertainty about new own resources, which could reduce the level of ambition of the budget; the strong concentration and more centralized role of the Commission, which is bound to significantly change access to European funds; and increased budget flexibility, which (while useful for dealing with unforeseen situations) could reduce the size and effectiveness of long-term investments; the management of large portions of the budget by states, which could reduce the pursuit of common European objectives, adherence to the specific needs of local organisations, increase the administrative burden on states and present critical issues in terms of control and traceability (of spending and “performance-based”), in a context where several administrations have shortcomings in this regard. <\/p>\n With the plenary vote on April 28, the European Parliament<\/strong> officially set its negotiating position on the MFF 2028-2034<\/a>, supporting a more ambitious budget than the Commission’s proposal. Here is a summary<\/a> of the preparatory work of Parliament’s Budget Committee. MEPs call for a budget of 1.27 percent of EU gross national income, an increase of about 10 percent, to be allocated in a balanced way to key European priorities. With regard to funds of interest to civil society, Parliament insists on the need for separate and adequate funding for policies included in the National and Regional Partnership Plans (in particular cohesion and the European Social Fund), a strengthening of directly managed programs such as Erasmus+, AgoraEU and Horizon Europe, and dedicated allocations for actions traceable to the LIFE and EU4Health programs. While supporting the goal of simplification, the Parliament rejects the risk of a “renationalization” of funds and calls for increased flexibility not to compromise transparency, predictability and access for beneficiaries, stressing the central role of local and regional authorities and the added value of European versus national spending. <\/p>\n The debate is still open and a common position from member states is now awaited. EUknow.it will continue to follow these developments closely, offering updates, analysis, and practical insights to help those working on European projects navigate a changing environment. Understanding in time what is happening is the first step in turning change into opportunity. <\/p>\n In conclusion, we offer a summary of the interventions from theMarch 9 event<\/a> Growing with European projects: initiatives in local organisations and future prospects. A selection of contributions that help to understand the main changes in European programming 2028-2034 and the change of perspective required of local organisations, organisations and foundations, through the direct voice of those involved in the ongoing debate and negotiations. <\/p>\n The first video<\/a> collects the initial interventions of the event and introduces the central theme of the role of foundations in the new phase of European programming. From the need to overcome a purely disbursement logic, the idea of foundations as agents of territorial development emerges strongly, capable of integrating public and private resources and working in partnership with institutions and civil society. It is stressed how tools such as EUknow.it help make Europe more concrete and accessible in local organisations and how, in a more competitive context, it becomes essential to strengthen skills, project culture and the ability to work “as a system.” Networking, exchange of experiences and dialogue with European institutions are mentioned as key elements in facing the new programming. <\/p>\n This video<\/a> provides a clear and concrete overview of the main changes in the Commission’s proposed spending architecture for the 2028-2034 MFF. The shift to three major areas of intervention – National and Regional Partnership Plans, Competitiveness and External Action – and the sharp reduction in the number of programs is explained, with the aim of simplifying rules and reducing fragmentation. A central element is an increase in budget flexibility, with significant portions not pre-allocated to respond to crises and unforeseen events, along with an increased focus on performance, results and financial instruments. Another key message underlying the proposal is that, in a resource-constrained environment, it will become essential to maximize the impact of every euro, with greater leverage on co-financing shares, guarantees, financial instruments and public-private partnerships. <\/p>\n This video<\/a> goes into the major transformations envisaged by the 2028-2034 MFF. The shift from more than fifty programs to a much smaller number of instruments is explained, with the creation of a large “mega-fund” that amalgamates historically distinct policies, in an approach that closely recalls the PNRR experience. Regulatory simplification and the introduction of a strongly “performance-based” logic represent a radical change for those working on European funds. At the same time, questions emerge about governance, the risk of centralization and the need to prepare in advance, studying rules, recommendations and documents that will frame the next programming. <\/p>\n In the fourth video<\/a>, the discussion focuses on the PNRR experience as a laboratory for future planning. It is highlighted that the main change is not only in the measurement of results, but especially in the ability to read and write the needs of local organisations. Programming 2028-2034 will require thinking less by individual projects and more by integrated plans, capable of combining different interventions without the rigid boundaries between funds. This implies dealing with larger programs and investments and equipping oneself with appropriate administrative and strategic skills. Foundations are identified as key players in preparing local organisations and local organizations for this leap in scale. <\/p>\nFoundations, third sector, European funds: from “writing projects” to “building programs”<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
MFF 2028-2034: the position of the community institutions<\/h2>\n
Growing with European projects: initiatives in local organisations and future prospects. The videos <\/h2>\n
1. Foundations, local organisations and European planning<\/a><\/h3>\n
2. The new EU budget architecture proposed by the Commission: concentration, flexibility and performance<\/a><\/h3>\n
3. MFF 2028-2034: structure, simplification and governance.<\/a><\/h3>\n
4. The legacy of the NRP and the new MFF: a change of mindset<\/a><\/h3>\n
5. The European point of view: foundations, civil society, and the new MFF 2028-2034<\/a><\/h3>\n