Workshop on Strategic Programming, Monitoring and evaluation

WORKSHOP

ON

STRATEGIC PROGRAMMING, MONITORING AND EVALUATION

FOCUSING ON PERFORMANCE AND RESULTS Madrid, 22 February 2013

Ines Hartwig DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion

1

Performance orientation • Link to Europe 2020 is essential • Intervention logic to address challenges identified in country specific recommendations and NRP

→ Drafting the strategy shall not start from a blank sheet of paper but shall be based on previous analytical work in the context of Europe 2020 2

Indicators • They are key to monitoring • Financial, output and result – no impact indicators • Indicators need a definition • The Regulation establishes a legal obligation on the Member State to process micro data

3

Common ESF indicators • Capture outputs, immediate and longer-term results • OPs shall always report against all common indicators

4

Common ESF output indicators People

Entities

- unemployed, incl. LTU*

number of projects fully or partially implemented by social partners or non-governmental organisations

-

LTU*

inactive*

inactive, not in education/training*

employed, incl. self-employed*

- below 25 years* - above 54 years*

number of projects targeting publ. administrations or publ. services

- with ISCED 1 or ISCED 2* - with ISCED 3 or ISCED 4* - with ISCED 5 to 8*

number of micro, small and mediumsized enterprises supported

- migrants, people with a foreign background, minorities (incl. marginalised communities such as Roma)** - disabled** - other disadvantaged**

5

Common ESF result indicators Inactive newly engaged in job searching upon leaving In education/training upon leaving Gaining a qualification upon leaving In employment upon leaving

In employment 6 months Only for a after leaving

sample of In self-employment 6 participants. months after leaving Only in With an reported improved labour market situation 6 2019 and 2023 months after leaving

6

Programme-specific indicators • In addition to common indicators • Result indicators linked to the supported participant or entity YES: participants aged 20 or younger starting an apprenticeship NO: share of young people aged 20 or younger in apprenticeship 7

Baseline and targets • Baselines for result indicators • Cumulative target values for 2022 • Targets are quantified for common indicators (in absolute numbers or shares/rates) and quantified or qualitative for programme-specific result indicators

8

Example for baselines, indicators, targets for early school leaving • Baselines:

• national/regional early school leaving rate, or: • Early school leaving rate at the X% or X worst performing schools in the region/MS

• Indicators: • Output: no of schools supported • Result: no. of early school leavers at supported schools

• Result Target: • early school leaving rate at supported schools, or: • Reduction of early school leaving rate at supported schools by X% (in comparison to before support) 9

ESF Result indicators Indicator

PS RI with quantitative target e.g. Participants aged 16-24 in education or training upon leaving PS RI without target

Meas urem ent Unit

Comm Basel on ine output Value indicat or

Meas. Basel Unit for ine Baseline Year & Target

Target Value (2022)

e.g. Participants in employment upon leaving

Freque ncy of reporti ng

No.

NA

60%

%

2014

80%

Monito 1/year ring

No.

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Monito 1/year ring

No.

Below 25 years

50%

%

2014

55%

Monito 1/year ring

e.g. Participants aged 16-24 starting an apprenticeship CRI with target

Source of Data

10

Annual Implementation reports (AIR) • The first AIR in 2016, covering 2014 and 2015 • Simplified reports in 2016, 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 • Reports of a more strategic nature in 2017, 2019 & 2023 • All data needs to be provided in order for a report to be admissible 11

Guidance documents • • • •

ESF Guidance on monitoring and evaluation ERDF/CF Guidance on monitoring and evaluation Guidance on ex ante evaluation (ERDF, ESF, CF) Guidance on counterfactual impact evaluations – to be published in December 2012 • Technical paper on ESF programme-specific indicators

12

Performance framework

13

Performance Framework (1) • Set at priority axis level, per fund and per category of region, but consistency of the performance framework across programmes and funds • Uses key implementation steps, financial, output and – where appropriate - result indicators • Milestones for 2018, targets for 2022 • Milestones & Targets use a subset of the indicators (except for implementation steps) • Indicators must be representative of the priority axis

14

Performance Framework (2) • Milestones: • For 2016 and 2018 for indicators which are a subset of those in the OP

• Targets for 2022 • Milestones and Targets: • • • •

financial indicators (2016, 2018, 2022) key implementation steps (2016) output indicators (2016, 2018, 2022) result indicators (2018, 2022)

• Milestones and targets report actual achievements but can be changed if justified 15

Performance Reserve and Review • 5% of resources not allocated to programmes • No competition between MS – reserve per Fund, Member State and category of region • Allocated following the review in 2019 • Allocation to priority axes where milestones have been achieved – based on Member State proposal

16

MFF Agreement Performance Framework All Member States shall establish a national performance reserve for the Investment for growth and jobs goal of cohesion policy, as well as for EAFRD and EMFF, consisting of 7% of their total allocation

17