BFSE Recommendations A proposal for a common

template

Dorotea Daniele, Facilitator

Targets of recommendations

• European institutions: mainly European Commission (DG EMPL, DG ENT, DG MARKT, DG REGIO) but also EP, EESC, Committee of Regions ;

• ESF Managing Authorities at national and regional level;

• Social economy (umbrella organisations at EU, national and regional level, support structures, networks);

• Banks and financial institutions

The structure of the recommendations

• Background information to justify the recommendation (1 page max)

• Recommendations and sub-recommendations (in bullet points)

• Concrete case (short and lively description of a practical example related to the recommendation)

Recommendations to EU institutions

• Background information: main relevant EU regulations, strategies and documents that are related to the recommendation (e.g. Social Business initiative, EC communications, Toia Report, etc.)

• Recommendations and sub-recommendations: what the EU should do - common recommendations of the BFSE network and specific recommendations for each strand

• Concrete case: example from network countries or from other MSs to explain better how social economy help to provide answers and solutions

Recommendations to ESF managing authorities

• Background information: main relevant ESF regulations (present programming period ad next – if possible), OPs and other ESF documents that are related to the recommendation

• Recommendations and sub-recommendations: what the ESF managing authorities should do directly and how they can influence other relevant public authorities (e.g. ministries, regions, public procurement office, etc.) - common recommendations of the BFSE network and specific recommendations for each strand

• Concrete case: example of ESF funded initiative from network countries or from other MSs to explain better how social economy helps to provide answers and solutions

Recommendations to Social Economy

• Background information: relevant data on SE, needs and problems to tackle that justify the recommendation

• Recommendations and sub-recommendations: what SE organisations should do directly and how they can influence other relevant actors (both public and private) - common recommendations of the BFSE network and specific recommendations for each strand

• Concrete case: concrete example of successful lobbying of SE

Recommendations to banks and financial institutions

• Background information: relevant data on finance for SE, needs and problems to tackle that justify the recommendation

• Recommendations and sub-recommendations: what banks and financial institutions should do directly and how they can influence other relevant actors (both public and private) - common recommendations of the BFSE network and specific recommendations for each strand

• Concrete case: concrete example of financial institutions operate for social economy from network countries or from other MSs

Recommendations to EU institutions - example 1

• Background information: social business initiative, 2020 strategy

• Recommendations and sub-recommendations to all EU institutions

• General recommendation: Promote social enterprises as a tool for innovation

• Concrete case: an example of social innovation in social enterprises, e.g. a social enterprise working in renewable energy

Recommendations to EU institutions - example 2

• Background information: present EU regulations on PP, green paper on PP reform, BFSE response to consultation,

• Recommendations and sub-recommendations: to DG MARKT (but also DG ENT and EMPL for support) and EP

• General recommendation: Promote PP opportunities for SEs in the new regulations

• Sub-recommendations:

clarify use of social clauses by law e.g. by providing examples like an open catalogue of social clauses that can be used by MS;

not only life-cycle costs, but also social accounting should be taken into account in procurement processes;

develop contract performance clauses that take social considerations into account (rather than loosening the link with the subject matter of the contract);

encourage social innovation in MS, e.g. through exchange of good practices, particularly successful technical specifications or sets of award criteria;

social services should be recognised as a local issue and not one of international competition. They should therefore be excluded from the directives’ scope or be subject to directives only on a very limited scale (some countries find the room for them up to EU threshold using negotiation without the prior publication);

include recommendations on quality standards of social services and the stakeholders or bene ficiaries’ involvement in service provision, monitoring and evaluation;

to safeguard quality and continuity of services, either limit the weight which contracting authorities can give to the price while identifying economically most advantageous offer (MEAT) or introduce a third possibility of award criteria apart from the lowest price and MEAT;

reservation of a share of contracts for social services for non-profits & social economy (below/above threshold?). Concrete case: reserved tenders in IT and BE, etc. (?)

Issues to discuss

• Are general recommendations too general?

• Any further target groups ?

• How many recommendations ?

• How many concrete example (one or more per recommendation)?

• Format of recommendation (attractive message vs. technical approach)

• How do we proceed?

Thank you for your attention