1 / 13

Operational Programmes 2014-2020 Selected Impressions from Negotiations

This article explores the involvement of evaluation units in improving specific objectives and result indicators in operational programmes for the 2014-2020 Cohesion Policy. It highlights challenges faced and lessons learned in defining result indicators and their baselines. The article also discusses the tension between result orientation and the need for clear objectives in utilizing public funding effectively. Insights from pilot analysis on intervention logic and the use of common indicators are presented, along with reflections on issues such as the appropriateness of certain indicators for performance frameworks. The article concludes with a discussion on the value and effectiveness of ex-ante evaluations in the programming period.

fishback
Download Presentation

Operational Programmes 2014-2020 Selected Impressions from Negotiations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Operational Programmes 2014-2020Selected Impressions from Negotiations Cohesion Policy

  2. Intervention logic, specific objectives, result indicators - 1 • Major involvement of evaluation unit in improving specific objectives and result indicators. • Definition of result indicators and their baselines met the expectation to facilitate the definition of objectives. • Clearer picture of intended changes – see slide on pilot analysis. • All programmes found the task challenging.

  3. Intervention logic, specific objectives, result indicators - 2 • Substantial number of action plans on baselines for result indicators • (ERDF / CF, cut-off 12 January 2015). • 4706 result indicators • Of which • 686 with baseline issues (action plan, "zero baseline") – includes draft programmes!

  4. Intervention logic, specific objectives, result indicators - 3Tension between • Result orientation • Objectives are needed to make best use of public funding • Further discussion needed! • Integrated urban development, CLLD • The design of a participative process will lead to objectives.

  5. Analysis of intervention logic – test by evaluation unit • Analysis of : - qualityofinterventionlogic in supportofchangesought - qualityofobjectivessetting - useofcommonindicators & categoriesofintervention Whattrends/patternsemergeacross MS & regions Pilot foradopted OPs will beconducted on - ThematicObjective 2 - ICTs - ThematicObjective 4 - low-carboneconomy Cohesion Policy

  6. Common output indicators The concept works. Teething problems … but no major problems. Issues for reflection Some indicators describe beneficiaries or input, not outputs. E.g. CI 37, population in areas with urban strategies. Not appropriate for performance frameworks! Avoid crowding out of programme-specific indicators by common indicators, e.g. in enterprise support. Cohesion Policy

  7. Common indicators 2014-2020 • P.M. • Common ERDF/CF indicators agreed over last 3 years • Obligatory to use and set targets when relevant • Not obligatory to use all (or only) common indicators in Performace framework • Targets set in systematically in adopted OPs • CO 01-02-03-04 = Enterprises supported • CO 01-07-08 = Enterprises/start ups/ jobs created in enterprises suported

  8. N° Enterprises supported – REGIO adopted Ops (@ 9/1/2015)

  9. TOTAL : 9 000 enterprises GRANTS3 000 FIs: 3 000 Advice: 3 000

  10. TOTAL : 8 000 enterprises Grants only:2 000 FIs: 3 000 Grants & advice: 1 000 Advice only): 2 000

  11. Total Enterprises / Startups / No Jobs created in Enterprises supported

  12. Ex ante evaluations – some question marks • Are ex ante evaluations still justified given the emphasis of impact evaluations during the programming period? • Did ex ante evaluations deliver value for money? • Was result orientation understood? • Were evaluators critical enough? • Were findings used by programmers? • Governance (responsibility) optimal?

  13. Ex ante evaluations – some question marks (2) • REGIO Evaluation Unit to write reflection paper • based on sample of evaluations • using expert reviews • draft before summer • consultation with the network

More Related