Strategic methods for assessing an undertaking in a grant application: SWOT, PESTEL, Business Model Canvas, TRL, NPV and IRR

Successfully applying for funding begins with establishing which programme the planned undertaking falls under, which institution is responsible for the call and which sources will provide the data substantiating the project. The following overview sets out the architecture of the system for implementing European Funds for 2021–2027 in Poland and defines the terms programme, managing authority, intermediate body and implementing body and presents in tabular form the sources of information on calls and the sector data used in application documentation.

What a programme is in the context of European Funds

Programme is the basic planning and implementation document setting out the objectives of the intervention, priorities, specific objectives, planned results (indicators), the budget and the institutional system responsible for implementation. Programmes for 2021–2027 are approved by the European Commission and implement the Partnership Agreement – the document setting out the strategy for using cohesion policy funds in Poland.

The conditions for applying for funding derive from lower-level documents. The table below sets out the conceptual structure that determines whether an application is correctly addressed.

Hierarchy of programme and call documentation

Knowledge of the rules for implementing a project is dispersed. There is no single document containing the full set of requirements. Each institution may introduce additional requirements in a specific call. From the point of view of preparing an application, two layers of documentation are distinguished.

Programme documentation

• Programme content – priorities, objectives, indicators, budget.
• Detailed Description of Priorities (SzOP) – types of projects supported, funding levels, list of eligible beneficiaries, limits and eligibility conditions specific to the measure.
• Guidelines on the eligibility of expenditure for 2021–2027 – rules for recognising expenditure as eligible, the principle that the cost must actually be incurred, the competitiveness principle, rules on the purchase of real estate, VAT, depreciation and leasing, and project staff costs.
• Call schedule – updated at least once a quarter and covering planned calls for the next 12 months.

Call documentation

• project selection rules,
• project selection criteria,
• instructions for completing the grant application together with the application template,
• grant agreement template,
• templates of annexes and supporting documents specific to the given call.

According to the guide published by the Ministry of Development Funds and Regional Policy “European Funds – a guide for businesses” in competitive procedures, the call for applications lasts at least 10 days, and the period from the announcement of the call (publication of the complete documentation) to the closing date for applications must be at least 40 days. In practice, calls last from several weeks to several months, and the institution may shorten the deadline (e.g. when the value of applications submitted significantly exceeds the allocation) or extend it (e.g. in the event of an IT system failure).

Operational conclusion: documentation should be assembled in advance, before the call is announced. Assuming that the deadline will be extended is a risk that should not be built into planning.

Managing authority, intermediate body and implementing body – division of tasks

The system for implementing European Funds is based on the delegation of tasks. The legal basis is Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council (the Common Provisions Regulation, CPR) and the Act of 28 April 2022 on the principles of implementing tasks financed from European funds in the 2021–2027 financial perspective (the so-called Implementation Act).

Managing authority (IZ)

The entity responsible for implementing the entire programme, for its management, monitoring, control and promotion, and for the correct spending of funds. In national and supra-regional programmes, this function is as a rule performed by the Ministry of Development Funds and Regional Policy; in regional programmes, by the voivodeship board (performing its tasks with the assistance of the Marshal’s Office). The managing authority may entrust some of its tasks to specialised institutions, while retaining responsibility for the programme as a whole.

Intermediate body (IP)

An entity to which the managing authority has entrusted, by agreement or contract, the performance of some tasks in relation to a specific priority, measure or group of measures. In practice, it is most often the intermediate body that announces the call, assesses applications, concludes grant agreements and settles projects.

Implementing body (IW)

An entity to which the intermediate body has entrusted a further part of the implementation tasks. It exists only in some programmes, most often where the substantive scope requires additional specialisation (e.g. the National Fund for Environmental Protection and Water Management in the environmental area).

In addition, the system includes the European Funds Ombudsman, who receives and analyses reports of problems in programme implementation, examines procedures and proposes improvements to institutions. Ombudsmen operate within national programmes, while in the regions persons performing similar tasks are designated.

Institutions in national programmes 2021–2027

Institutions in regional programmes 2021–2027

Source of Tables 3 and 4: own compilation based on “European Funds – a guide for businesses” (Ministry of Development Funds and Regional Policy), the European Funds Portal and the Detailed Descriptions of Priorities of the individual programmes. The composition of intermediate and implementing bodies may change – before submitting an application, verify the current status in the SzOP and the call rules.

Where to look for information on funds and calls

The primary source is the European Funds Portal (funduszeeuropejskie.gov.pl). The programme websites tab provides descriptions of national and regional programmes and the KPO (National Recovery Plan). All websites have a similar structure, which makes it easier to compare conditions.

Search tools

• Grant Search Engine – an AI-powered tool available at https://wyszukaj.dotacje-online.pl/. It contains up-to-date information on available calls and support programmes, which are continuously added and verified by Dotacje Online experts.
• Call schedules – published on each programme’s website, updated at least quarterly and covering a 12-month horizon.
• Mapa Dotacji (mapadotacji.gov.pl) – a database of projects already funded: titles, values, descriptions and beneficiaries. Useful for benchmarking and estimating the competition in a given measure.
• European Funds Information Points – the Central Information Point in Warsaw, Main Information Points in each voivodeship and Local Information Points. Consultations are free of charge.

Cohesion policy funds vs the KPO – differences that matter when choosing a source of funding

• Similarities: financing from the EU budget, availability of non-repayable support (grants) and repayable support (loans), the requirement to comply with environmental principles (including DNSH), support for the digital and green transition.
• Differences: cohesion policy operates in seven-year budget perspectives (2014–2020, 2021–2027) and serves to reduce development disparities between regions; the KPO is a temporary instrument (2021–2026) aimed at rebuilding the economy after the COVID-19 pandemic and increasing its resilience.

Where to look for sector and statistical data

The justification of the need for the project, market analysis, baseline values of indicators and financial analysis require data from sources that the assessor can verify.

Data without a stated source and date of access are a typical reason for lower scores under the substantive criteria.

Most common mistakes in selecting sources

• Basing the diagnosis on press materials and commercial studies instead of official statistics or data from sector institutions.
• Using an outdated version of the SzOP or guidelines after they have been amended.
• Failing to check the de minimis aid limit in SUDOP before planning the financing structure.
• Not monitoring the call schedule and starting work only after the call has been announced.
• Assuming that the call deadline will be extended.
• Providing data without indicating the source and date of access, which makes it impossible for the assessor to verify them.