Retrospective and perspective view on the use of the European Social Fund for capacity building in Latvia

1. Retrospective and perspective view on the use of the European Social Fund for capacity building in Latvia Solvita Gulbe Head of European Union Structural Funds Department State Chancellery of the Republic of Latvia Sofia December 7, 2007

2. Structure of the presentation I Facts and figures II Capacity building activities within the EU funds’ programming period 2004-2006 III Case study IV Facts and figures V Capacity building activities within the EU funds’ programming period 2007-2013 VI Expectations, results to be achieved

3. EU funds’ programming period 2004-2006 Objectives • Development of competitiveness, facilitation of employment • Development of human resources • Development of infrastructure

4. EU funds’ programming period 2004-2006 Priorities • Fostering sustainable development • Fostering entrepreneurship and innovations • Fostering the development of human resources and employment • Promotion of Development of Rural Areas and Fisheries • Technical assistance

5. EU funds’ programming period 2004-2006 Priority: Fostering the development of human resources and employment • This priority comprises 21.2% of financing ( ESF and national co- financing) available during the 2004-2006 SF programming period. • This priority includes fostering employment, developing education and continuingeducation and reducing social exclusion. • Activities include re-qualification opportunitiesfor the employed, fostering the improvement of qualifications, developing activeemployment measures for the unemployed, providing training for starting out inbusiness and self-employment, providing subsidized staff positions and increasing thesupply of social rehabilitation programs. In the 2004-2006, the ESF is also focusingon developing entrepreneurship and self-employment, developing study programs inthe areas of science and technology, increasing opportunities for adult education andtraining, and developing professional development courses and modular programs.

6. EU funds’ programming period 2004-2006 Case study- National programme “Support for capacity building in institutions, responsible for implementation of employment market and gender equality policy, provision of information and increase of comprehension” • Institutions involved in the realization of projects: Public administration institutions Ministry of Welfare, Ministry of Education and Sciences, Ministry of Economy, State Employment Agency, Professional Career Education State Agency, State Labour Inspectorate Municipalities, Social partners and NGOs Employers’ Confederation of Latvia, Free Trade Union Confederation of Latvia, Latvian Association of Local and Regional Governments, NGOs, municipalities

7. EU funds’ programming period 2004-2006 Case study- Results of the national programme • Quality management systems • Human resources development plans • Development of training programmes • Trainings (project and financial management, communication skills, IT skills, foreign languages, a.o.) • Elaboration and implementation of Public Information Strategy • Elaboration and distribution of informative and methodological materials • Facilitation of social dialog • a.o.

8. EU funds’ programming period 2007-2013 Thematic axis (branches) 1. Development and efficient utilization ofhuman resources 2. Strengthening Competitiveness andprogress towards a knowledge-basedeconomy 3. Improvements in public services and infrastructure as a precondition for balanced national and territorial development

9. EU funds’ programming period 2007-2013 Operational programs • Human resources and employment - ESF • Entrepreneurship and innovations- ERDF • Infrastructure and services- ERDF and CF

10. EU funds’ programming period 2007-2013 Priority “Administrative capacity” within operational program “Human resources and employment” Financial allocation for administrative capacity- 9,51% of the ESF funding • 1. Measure “Better regulation policy” • 2. Measure “Strengthening the capacity of human resources” • 3. Measure “Administrative Capacity and Development Planning Capacity Building of Planning Regions and Local Governments”

11. EU funds’ programming period 2007-2013 Activities for implementation of priority “Administrative capacity” • Improvement of Policy Planning, Policy Implementation and Policy Impact Assessment • Conducting Policy Research • Reduction of Administrative Burden and Improvement of Public Service Quality • Development and Introduction of the Quality Management System • Improvement of Quality of Public Services at the National, Regional and Local Level • Development of Human Resources Planning and Management System in Public Administration • Administrative Capacity Building of Social Partners • Administrative Capacity Building of NGOs • Support to NGOs and Municipalities in Building their Capacities to Implement Measures financed by the Structural Funds • Experts’ involvement in the work of planning regions, towns and districts

12. EU funds’ programming period 2007-2013 ExpectationsAdministrative Capacity Building • Outputs • Number of supported direct public administration institutions – 256 or 100% (base value in 2004 – 6 or 2% of the total number of direct public administration institutions) • Number of supported non-governmental organisations – 200 or 2.6% of the total number of non-governmental organisations (base value in 2006 - 43 or 0.5%) • Establishment of regional structures of the Latvian Employers’ Confederation and the Free Trade Union Confederation – 10 (base value in 2004 - 0) • Percentage of public administration institutions and institutions funded from the state budget in which human resources planning and management IT systems are introduced – 100% (base value in 2004 – 20%)

13. EU funds’ programming period 2007-2013 ExpectationsAdministrative Capacity Building • Outputs • Studies and training on better regulation tools, policy planning and policy impact assessment methods provided, % of studies requested: 1) for employees in public administration – 80% (base value in 2006 – 70%); 2) for employees of local governments – 20% (base value in 2006 – 0%); 3) for social partners – 50% (base value in 2006 – 0%); 4) for representatives of non-governmental organisations – 40% (base value in 2006 – 0%) • Number of specialists involved in the planning regions, cities, towns and amalgamated municipalities – 581 (base value in 2004 – 0) • Updated existing medium-term development planning documents or development of new medium-term development planning documents in the planning regions or local governments (in cities, towns and amalgamated municipalities) (number) – 98

14. EU funds’ programming period 2007-2013 ExpectationsAdministrative Capacity Building • Results: • Governance Effectiveness increase– 1,000 (base value in 2006 – 0,7252) • Increasing of Regulatory Quality – 1,200 (base value in 2006 – 1,0584). • Increase by 25% in the number of public administration institutions in which the quality management system is introduced (base value in 2006 – 73 institutions) • Improvement of quality of development planning documents, binding regulations and decisions adopted by the planning regions, city councils or amalgamated municipalities (%) – 50% (base value in 2004 – 0) • An increase by 30% in number of collective agreements (base value in 2004 – 30%)

15. Expectations? To perform better.... • Data source: • World Bank Report “Governance Matters”, 2006.

16. Thank you for attentionInformation:http://fm.gov.lvhttp://mk.gov.lvhttp://raplm.gov.lvContacts:solvita.gulbe@mk.gov.lv Tel. + 371 7082930Brīvības boulevard 36, RīgaLV- 1520Latvia