Within the framework of the granting of assistance procedure through selection appointed by the Head of Managing Authority (MA), the commission assesses and classifies the submitted project proposals. The work of the evaluation committee takes place in two stages: 1. verification of administrative compliance and eligibility; 2. technical and financial evaluation.
Rejection at Stage “Administrative compliance and eligibility”
On basis of the administrative compliance and eligibility check, the evaluation committee draws up a list of project proposals, which are not eligible for technical and financial evaluation. The non-admission shall be communicated to each of the candidates on the list, stating the grounds for non-admission. In this case,the applicant may file a written objection to the head of the MA within one week of receipt of the message.. The Head of the MA shall deliver its decision within one week after the submission of the objection. The Head of the MA may deliver a decision returning the project proposal for technical and financial evaluation or terminating the procedure in respect of the applicant. The decision of the Head of the MA, which terminates the proceedings, is subject to appeal before the administrative court.
Rejection at Stage “Technical and Financial Assessment”
Next, the commission presents the executed evaluation and ranking in an evaluation report which contains:
- a list of project proposals proposed for financing;
- a list of standby project proposals;
- a list of project proposals proposed for rejection.
The Head of the MA issues a motivated decision refusing the granting of assistance to candidates with rejected project proposals. This decision is an administrative act because it affects the legitimate interests of the candidates and is subject to judicial appeal before administrative court.
The candidates from the standby list are also entitled to appeal. Though formally their project proposals are not rejected, obtaining grant depends on the availability of additional financial resources and the position they are ranked at. Granting of assistance to the reserve projects with additional financial resources is done in the order of their ranking – unlike the projects approved and proposed for financing here it is not guaranteed. This means that the probability of funding in this case is directly dependent on the evaluation of the project proposal – the higher in ranking the respective standby project proposal, the higher the probability that it will be financed. It is also possible that upon change in ranking, the standby project proposal moves to the project proposals proposed for financing list. Therefore, candidates from the standby list also have interest in lawful assessment and may appeal before court the act by which the Head of the MA approves the commission evaluation report as they do not receive from the Head of the MA an explicit individual administrative act addressed to them.
Appeal before court
It should be noted that the court cannot judge whether the assessment submitted for the project proposal is correct and cannot reassess by itself. The jurisdiction of the court comprises the right to exercise control over the lawfulness of the application of the requirements for the formation of the Evaluation Committee, the observance of the rules for its work, incl. those for documenting and reporting its activities, as well as for observing the rules for performance of the assessment activity. If the court finds that the project proposal is assessed against the legal requirements, it returns it to the evaluation committee for reassessment.
Time term for appeal: 14 days from notification.
State fee: 1% of the project proposal cost, but not more than BGN 1700., and for project proposals with value over BGN 10 000 000 – BGN 4500.