Key takeaways
- Assessment is question by question. The grid breaks into sections and then into individual scored questions, published in each call's guidelines.
- Most of the score sits in how precisely you describe the project, the beneficiaries and the way you will run it.
- Maximum grant 15 000 EUR, and no more than 80 percent of eligible costs. The 20 percent co-financing is mandatory.
- Partnership: lead applicant plus at least two partners, from at least three different Western Balkans parties.
- Short projects, and a minimum score set per call, so read it in your own guidelines.
The Western Balkans Fund exists to finance regional cooperation between civil society and other non-profit actors across the six Western Balkans parties. Grants are small by EU standards and the competition is real, but the assessment is refreshingly transparent: the guidelines publish the entire evaluation grid, including the individual questions assessors answer. Very few applicants write with that grid open beside them, which is precisely the opportunity.
How applications are assessed
Applications that pass the administrative and eligibility check are scored against the grid published in that call's guidelines. The WBF grid is unusually granular: it breaks the assessment into sections and then into individual questions, each carrying its own points, so an assessor is answering a list of specific questions rather than forming a general impression.
The sections cover the same ground from call to call, even when the weights move:
- The partnership and whether its composition adds value and widens regional inclusion.
- The description of the project, meaning the challenges addressed, the objectives, the activities, the target groups and the cross-cutting issues.
- Relevance to the overall objective and the areas of intervention of that specific call.
- The implementation approach, including the team, the monitoring method and the risks.
- Sustainability and the potential for the idea to be replicated.
- Visibility and dissemination.
- Budget and cost-effectiveness, including how the co-financing is explained.
Grant ceiling, co-financing and duration
- Maximum grant 15 000 EUR. A request above the ceiling is an eligibility failure, not a negotiation.
- Maximum 80 percent of total eligible costs. The remaining 20 percent is mandatory co-financing from the applicant, so the arithmetic has to work before you write a word of narrative.
- Duration 3 to 10 months. Below or above that range the application is ineligible.
- Co-financing cannot be increased later. The grant percentage cannot be raised after the fact, so build the numbers correctly at application stage.
Note how the money rules feed directly back into the score. The budget section of the grid asks specifically how the co-financing will be used and in what form. A proposal that treats co-financing as a compliance box loses points in a section where the assessor is actively looking for a clear answer.
Eligibility and the partnership rule
WBF calls target civil society organisations and other non-state, non-profit entities, and the action described in the project must itself be non-profit. The regional partnership consists of the lead applicant and a minimum of two project partners from at least three different Western Balkans parties.
The administrative check that precedes scoring verifies concrete things, including that the duration falls between 3 and 10 months and that the requested contribution does not exceed 15 000 EUR. Applications failing those checks never reach the grid, which is why running an eligibility pass early matters more here than polishing the narrative.
There is a minimum score, and it moves
WBF sets a minimum score below which an application is not recommended for funding, and that figure is set per call along with the available envelope. It has not been the same in every round.
This is worth writing at the top of your working document, because it changes how you should spend your remaining time. Above the bar, extra polish competes for a place in the ranking. Below it, nothing else matters. The binding number is the one printed in the guidelines for the call you are applying to.
Where applicants lose points
- Regional impact asserted rather than shown. The grid asks how realistically regional impact is addressed. Three partners holding parallel national activities is not regional impact, and assessors know the difference.
- Target groups described as categories. "Young people and civil society" is not a target group. Numbers, locations and the constraints those people actually face are what earns the points.
- Novelty ignored. There is an explicit question about whether the idea is new or a continuation of donor-funded work. If your project builds on something previous, say what is different this time rather than hoping nobody asks.
- Monitoring left implicit. A named method, a frequency and a person responsible answers the question. "We will monitor progress regularly" does not.
- Risks copied from a template. Generic risks with generic mitigations are visible immediately, and risk analysis carries real weight in this grid.
- Visibility as an afterthought. It is the smallest section in the grid and among the easiest points in it, and a plan takes a paragraph.
How WBF compares with the other regional funds
| Fund | Typical grant | Partnership requirement | Scoring |
|---|---|---|---|
| Western Balkans Fund | Up to 15 000 EUR, max 80 percent of costs | Lead plus 2 partners, 3 different WB parties | Section by section grid, minimum score per call |
| RYCO | Tens of thousands of euro, set per call | At least 1 partner from another WB6 party | Expert quality assessment, then a strategic review |
| International Visegrad Fund | Averages up to about 30 000 EUR, Visegrad+ typically 25 000 to 35 000 | At least 3 V4 countries, or V4 plus Western Balkans partners for Visegrad+ | Relevance, Visegrad substance, quality and impact, budget and sustainability |
| CEI Cooperation Fund | Up to 15 000 EUR contribution | Partners from CEI Member States | Criteria scored on a short scale, with a minimum to be considered |
| Erasmus+ KA210 | Lump sums of 30 000 or 60 000 EUR | 2 organisations from 2 programme countries | Four award criteria with an overall minimum and a minimum in each |
If your consortium spans three Western Balkans parties and your budget is modest, WBF is usually the closest fit. If the project is youth focused with exchanges at its centre, RYCO fits better. If you can bring in V4 partners, Visegrad opens larger sums.
Checking your draft against your own call
Because the grid is a list of specific questions, this call rewards a mechanical check more than almost any other. Put every question from your call's grid in one column, write the page where you answer it in the next, and count how many rows are empty. Each empty row is points you have not lost yet.
The Evalora Engine does this from the call document itself. It reads your WBF guidelines, extracts the grid, the eligibility rules, the required annexes and the budget rules, then scores your draft against them criterion by criterion and ranks what to fix by the points at stake. Because the Engine keeps a compliance record separate from the quality score, it separates the two failures that matter here: a section that would simply score poorly, and a rule such as the grant ceiling or the partnership requirement that would remove the application before scoring begins.
Frequently asked questions
How does WBF evaluate proposals?
An eligibility check first, then scoring against the grid in that call's guidelines, broken into sections covering partnership, project description, relevance, implementation, sustainability, visibility and budget, each with its own scored questions.
What score do I need?
There is a minimum for a funding recommendation, set per call. Take it from your own call's guidelines, because it has not been the same in every round.
How large can the grant be?
Up to 15 000 EUR and no more than 80 percent of eligible costs, with the remaining 20 percent as mandatory co-financing.
How many partners do I need?
The lead applicant plus at least two partners, from at least three different Western Balkans parties.
How long can the project run?
Not less than 3 months and not more than 10 months.
Does co-financing have to be cash?
The grid asks you to explain how the co-financing will be used and in what form, so state the form explicitly and make sure it follows the eligibility rules for costs in your guidelines.
Source: Western Balkans Fund, Guidelines for Applicants, 5th Call for Project Proposals, and the Western Balkans Fund call announcements. Thresholds, envelopes and deadlines change between calls, so confirm every figure in the guidelines for your call.
Answer all twenty questions before the Evaluation Committee counts them
Upload the WBF guidelines and your draft. Evalora maps every section of the grid to your document and shows you the gaps.
Start Free Trial