1 / 12

V4 Expert Group Result Orientation Challenges 2014-2020

V4 Expert Group Result Orientation Challenges 2014-2020. 16 – 17 June 2014 Budapest. Preparation of the 2014-2020 . May 2013 – Concept of a uniform methodological environment (UME) approved by Government

garan
Download Presentation

V4 Expert Group Result Orientation Challenges 2014-2020

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. V4 Expert GroupResult Orientation Challenges2014-2020 16 – 17 June 2014 Budapest

  2. Preparationofthe 2014-2020 May 2013 – Concept of a uniform methodological environment (UME) approved by Government • UME definesthe basic principles, approach and specifiestheareasofmethodolgicalenvironment • UME reflects: • EC legislation and new requirements (result orientation, performance framework, monitoring data etc.) • Experience of period 2007-2013 • UMEObjectives: • Standardization of procedures and processes • Effective use of resources • Simplification

  3. Settingofindicators The Methodologicalguidance for the settingof indicators as a part of UME - approved by the Government in August 2013 • Defines binding rules including the requirement for theory of change • All MAs shallto set the model of intervention logic for each specific objective • Specifies methods of the design of indicators and their definitions Theaim: - to avoid theduplicity ofindicatorsand to ensure uniform monitoring - to setthemethodologically appropriate indicators • Outcome: National Sourcebook of Indicators

  4. RelationofTheoryofchange and theindicators Problem  causes  change sought  activities • Context indicators result indicators output indicators Conditions, external factors, other measures

  5. Interventionlogic– keysteps • Whatisthecurrentsituation in thegivenproblem area? • Whatindicatorswillwe use to monitor changesoccurring in the area? • Whatisthemainproblem in the area, wewant to face and whatisitscausation? • Whichparticular cause/causes are wegoing to influence? • Whatchangewhichwilllead to eliminationoftheproblem do weseek to achieve? • Whatmeasures/activiteswillwe support to reachthechange?

  6. Interventionlogic– keysteps • What are othermeasuresbeyondtheprogrammeorevenbeyondthe ESIF which are neccesarry to implement to reachthechange? • Underwhatconditions, whichhave to befulfilled, willthemeasures/activiteslead to thechange? • Whatindicatorswillwe use to monitor whetherthemeasures/activities are realizedsuccessfully (output indicators)? • Whatindicatorswillwe use to monitor whetherweachievedthechange (outcomeindicators)? • What are other (external) factorswhichmay influence (positivelyornegatively) achievingthechange? • When and howwillweassesswhetherwe are successfull in reachingthechange and eliminationoftheproblem (evalutaionsystem)?

  7. Differentapproaches by ESF and ERDF • The split between ESF and ERDF approaches to the concept of result indicators - considerable problems in definitions of indicators. • ForprogrammesundertheERDF, CF and ETC isrequired to monitor changes in the whole area which is influenced by the intervention, on contrary forprogrammesunderthe ESF isrequired to monitor only changes at the supported population. • DR Regio directs their comments to the definition of context / statistical indicators that are distant from the interventions and their values are affected by a lot of external factors. • Statistical indicators cover the development of trends and their use is not completely coherent to the results based approach. • Itcausestheincrease pressure on the carryingouttheevaluations.

  8. Establishing of milestones/goals Ourmilestones/goals are established on thebasisof: • Financialallocation • Needsanalysis • Experience of period 2007-2013 2014 - Guidance on monitoring of ESI Fund (approved by the Government) specifies the requirements for monitoring and evaluation of PF: • Specification of milestones for the year 2016 - only for national purpose • Specification of control limits for milestones and goals(minimal and critical)

  9. Monitoring themilestones/goals • The NCA will carry out regular (quarterly) monitoring of status and progress of fullfilment of milestones as a part of risk management • In case of non-fulfilment the control limits – the MAs shall justified it and implemented the adequate measures (revision, increasingtheabsorptioncapacity, simplificationoftherulesetc.). • The NCA will inform annually the Government.

  10. Link ofprogrammes to PartnershipAgreement Tool to clarifythelogic and links → matrix of PA logic Thematicobjective ↔ PA Strategicobjective ↔ PA Funding priority ↔ Identifiedproblem ↔ Developmentneed ↔ EU2020 target ↔ CSR ↔ NRP ↔ PositionPaper ↔ Programme ↔ Fund ↔ Priority axis ↔ Investment priority ↔ Specificobjective ↔ Indicators

  11. Matrix ofPartnershipAgreementlogic Programmes, funds, priority axes, specificobjectives Identifiedproblem, developmentneed Investment priority Thematicobjective

  12. Thankyouforyourattention. • www.mmr.cz • www.strukturalni-fondy.cz

More Related