• List of Abbreviations
  • Executive Summary
  • 1 Background of the Evaluation
  • 1.1 Object of the Evaluation
  • 1.2 Objective of the Evaluation
  • ...
  • 1.3 Methodological Framework
  • ...
  • 1.4 Structure of the Report
  • 2 Relevance
  • 2.1 General notes
  • 2.2 Has the underlying strategic rationale and design of Twinning assistance been appropriate for Turkey, at programme/sectoral levels?
  • 2.3 Has Twinning been used in the circumstances foreseen in the Commission’s Twinning Manual?
  • 2.4 Are there certain sectors or Accession Partnership fields in Turkey where Twinning could be an adequate tool but is not used?
  • 2.5 Can synergies be identified between Twinning and other types of EC projects, and/or with projects funded by other donors?
  • 2.6 Is the needs assessment relevant, i.e. are mandatory results precisely defined in the Project Fiches
  • 2.7 Is the interaction between key stakeholders (beneficiary institutions, ECD, DG ELARG) adequate and performing efficiently to ensure successful programming of Twinning?
  • 3 Efficiency
  • 3.1 General notes
  • 3.2 Are inputs/activities being efficiently transferred into the planned outputs?
  • 3.3 Is the selection of twinning (as opposed to any other instrument, i.e.Technical Assistance or Direct Agreements) adequately assessed and justified?
  • 6 Review of Twinning in Turkey: Final Report3.4 Could the same results and impacts be achieved more cost-effectively?
  • 4 Effectiveness
  • 4.1 General notes
  • 4.2 Has the Twinning support under evaluation achieved (or will likely to achieve in the case of ongoing support) the objectives pursued?
  • 4.3 Are quality and quantity of resources allocated by both beneficiary and the Member State/Twinning partner appropriate?
  • 4.4 Is the interaction between key stakeholders adequate and performing effectively to ensure successful implementation of Twinning?
  • 5 Impact
  • 5.1 General notes
  • ...
  • 6. Sustainablity
  • ...
  • 7 Horizontal evaluation questions
  • ...