1 / 14

Evaluation on the modernization of the Public Employment Service in Hungary 2004-2006

Evaluation on the modernization of the Public Employment Service in Hungary 2004-2006. Fekete Gergely National Development Agency Evaluation Division. Evaluation Network Meeting Brussels 2010. 14-15. october. Content. The program me Used methods Findings / Recommendations.

mcleank
Download Presentation

Evaluation on the modernization of the Public Employment Service in Hungary 2004-2006

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. Evaluation on the modernization of the Public Employment Service in Hungary 2004-2006 Fekete Gergely National Development Agency Evaluation Division Evaluation Network Meeting Brussels 2010. 14-15. october

  2. Content • The programme • Used methods • Findings / Recommendations

  3. Theprogramme Modernization of the Hungarian Public Employment Service (PES) ESF/ ERDF-like measures Very diverse measures Long-term programme NSRF measures – 103 M € HCSF measures – 34,5 M € Phare projects – 4,5 M € 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

  4. Public Employment Service in Hungary National Employment Office Regional Employment Office, Region 1 Regional Employment Office, Region 2 Regional Employment Office, Region 3 Labour Center Labour Center Labour Center Labour Center Labour Center Labour Center

  5. Programme components Service development, strategic planning Quality assurance Infrastructural development IT development Research

  6. What happened? How did it happen? Why did it happen? Can we do it better? Desk research Data analysis Interviews Case studies Questions / methods

  7. Rates of quitting ‘jobseeker’ status • Out of system without any information • Entering the active labour market • Training • Subsidiesed work • Other

  8. Effectiveness - Data analysis / DiD

  9. Raw data

  10. Results of the regressions (different specifications) ΔEFFit = τ+δΔpi+βΔXit+Δεit

  11. The estimated effect • The indicator used: ‘The possibility of entering the labour market’ • The possibility within the treated group grew by 1,05 pecentage points – 0,36 pcpoint by the measures • What does it mean? – monthly cca. 1500 people find work because of the modernization of the PES (out of 19.000) – positive significant effect

  12. How were the subjects of the case study selected? Possibility of entering the labour market Jobseekers without high-school graduation

  13. Findings / Recommendations In general the measures were effective and efficient. No problem with consistency and coherency Weaknesses in the strategic coordination Better coordination mechanisms between the MA and the involved ministries Some weaknesses in the management system More flexible rules in some areas / decreasing the administrative burdens The indicators used by the monitoring system cannot provide proper information about the performance of the sub-measures More differnetiated indicators are needed to make possible the evaluation of the different sub-measures

  14. Thank you for your attention!

More Related