IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ora/journl/v1y2013i2p372-381.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proposal Of A Common Scoring System For Selection Of Eu Funded Projects Developed By Romanian Companies

Author

Listed:
  • Droj Laurentiu

    (University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics)

Abstract

Since the start of the European Union Structural Funding Programs 2007-2013, especially those focused on financing investments proposed by private companies, a big change seems to be taken place. Large numbers of companies have applied for grants within these programs and especially for funding under the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). But after the initial enthusiasm and initial success reported by both the Management Authorities and private beneficiaries big issues have aroused regarding lack of financial resources for co-financing to support investments or expenditures in the initial stages funding the project. Under this context the banking sector was called for support and was expected to be heavily involved in ensuring external financing. This was not as initially predicted. A big concern came from the fact that the projects, even if achieved excellent scores on the technical evaluation from the management authorities, had huge problems in receiving even basic approval from the banking system. Since it seems that most of these inconsistencies are derived from the evaluation phase of projects this study tries to focus on establishing an equilibrium between banking analysis indicators and the scoring system used by the European Union management authorities. Identifying common criteria used for selection of good sustainable projects to be funded within European Structural Funds constitutes a big challenge for the management authorities and for the banking institutions as well. The applicants must realize financing application based on a set of indicated criteria. In order to achieve financing, these entities learned to modulate their financial indicators and their business plans according to the requirements. But a large number of already approved projects by the ERDF managing authorities found themselves in impossibility to comply with banking standards as well. Correlation of both European Union and banking system criteria, especially the Cost and Benefit Analysis Indicators with the banking financial indicators could be a great solution to current challenges: making the projects proposed for financing bankable, also, and thereby increase the absorption capacity of the beneficiaries. To solve this problem the current study proposed the creation of a mixed scoring assessment system containing 15 indicators for which were established various evaluation values. The main goal of the system was to fulfil both the evaluation criteria of European Union management authorities and the creditworthiness criteria used by the banking sector. In the final stage of this paper the assessment system was tested over a number of 50 Romanian companies, which were selected for European financing.

Suggested Citation

  • Droj Laurentiu, 2013. "Proposal Of A Common Scoring System For Selection Of Eu Funded Projects Developed By Romanian Companies," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 372-381, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ora:journl:v:1:y:2013:i:2:p:372-381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://anale.steconomiceuoradea.ro/volume/2013/n2/035.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    financial analysis; Cost Benefit Analysis; European funding; selection system; bankability; European projects;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • G30 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - General
    • G32 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Financing Policy; Financial Risk and Risk Management; Capital and Ownership Structure; Value of Firms; Goodwill
    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • G17 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Financial Forecasting and Simulation
    • G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Micro Finance Institutions; Mortgages

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ora:journl:v:1:y:2013:i:2:p:372-381. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catalin ZMOLE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feoraro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.