Evaluation of Measures Targeting Social Inclusion ( SROP Priority 5 )

1. Evaluation of Measures Targeting Social Inclusion (SROP Priority 5) Nóra Teller Hétfa Research Institute - Metropolitan Research Institute 30 April 2013

2. Structure of the presentation • Subject and aim of the evaluation • Main conclusions • Strategic relevance of SROP 5 • Results of the interventions: • Results of the assessment of measures • Institutional issues • Examination of selected aspects of EQUAL and HRDOP measures • Methodology and networks • Individual level effects • Summary and recommendations

3. The subject of the evaluation: the SROP 5 and some previous measures • 5.1 Developing the human capacities of the most disadvantaged territories • 5.2 Investment in our future: child and youth programmes • 5.3 Improvement in access of increasingly disadvantaged groups to social services, in order to promote their integration into the labour market • 5.4 Development of the social care system, improvement in access to services • 5.5 Development of local communities and the civil society • 5.6 Enhancing social cohesion through crime prevention and reintegrationprogrammes Apartfromthis: results of methods and partnershipswhichcan be linked toselected EQUAL and HRDOP developments, effectsonindividualstrategies

4. Aim of the evaluation • The aim of the evaluation: to formulate recommendations for the preparation of the 2014-2020 programming period • Based on the assessment of strategic relevance • Based on the project-level analysis of SROP 5 measures • Based on the analysis of the framework for the next programming period • Based on previous measures for the improvement of employability

5. The SROP 5 – basic data Grants • No. of applications The resources in SROP Priority 5 were HUF 137 billion for the whole period, the grants awarded so far are 68% of this amount (as of October 3, 2012) Graphs: data for 7th March 2013 www.nfu.hu

6. Strategic relevance - summary • The targeted indicator values are achievable. • There are a few discrepancies between the realisation of the expected target values and the dimensions of social inclusion. • The SROP 5 measures are only relevant to a smaller part of the NTFS goals. • The SROP 5 reaches nearly 125 000 people, so it can manage part of the problem, other OPs and policies are also necessary, e.g. for the handling of the social exclusion dimension and for the fulfillment of the EU 2020 goals. • The harmony of the development strategies and the current policy goals can be broken, which is caused by the frequent changes in sectoral policies.

7. Results: Target groups – real, yet hardly quantifiable results • Three large groups: • The relatively skilled, and only temporally unemployed – developments which result in additional social capital, marketable knowledge and, conclusively, new workplaces • The older generation – the programmescannot make a significant change, yet they help to grab hold temporarily • Where there is absolutely no demand for the low skilled, the programmes can only strengthen parts of skills, yet these remain usually without tangible results because of the frequent failure of the continuation and interdependence of the measures

8. Results: Territorial targeting • The developments have largely reached the least developed micro-regions • Regarding the target groups the „skimming off” principle largely prevails • The creation of competition often overwrites the demands based on the real needs • The projects hardly reach the peripheries Share of those receiving the benefits, age group below 18 years, % Nr. of applications Winners Losers Not disadvantaged, Temporarily disadvantaged, Disadvanategd Least advantaged Least advantagedwith complexprogramme Nr. of implemented projects

9. Results: importance of institutional capacities • The ability to adapt is lager in case of those institutions who handle more funds simultaneously, and „expand” their capacities • The institutions have learned to adapt to the funds and the expectations • The implementation of complex projects often require skilled experts with very specific knowledge, who are hardly, or even not at all available locally • The grant writers’ market’s project generating and implementing role requires further examination

10. Results: Innovations and methodological developments • Organisational „innovations”: partnerships, representation of policy objectives, designing of innovations, support of members • Methodological innovations: e.g. combination of social and employment services, re-inclusion of homeless people, drug prevention programmes • The „quasi-key” projects of SROP 5 which have been giving methodological support, are important, however because of the lack of clarity of competencies they can/could only have a partial impact on local professional contents • However: there is some success, e.g. „Child Chance”: complex service management on the peripheries , with expert support, follow up and monitoring

11. Selected measures of EQUAL and HRDOP- methodology, networks, target group members • The employment services and service providing organisations went through significant improvement • Certain programmes(e.g. EQUAL, SROP 1.4.3, 2.6.1) stronglysupported exchange of experiences and standardisation • On the basis of life-path interviews and reports of implementing organisations: • Parts of the target groups can only be directed to subsidised employment or public employment schemes • Due to limited inclusion capacity of public employment schemes, uncertain accessibilty, and special traits of the organisation this can only mean a solution for a few people, even on the short term • but there should be employment forms organised in ways similar to the market!

12. General conclusions (1) • Since the design of the OP, the problems have become more serious as a result of the crisis • These effects cannot be mitigated only by the tools of development policy; there is a need for harmonisation ofpublic policies that foster mechanisms of social inclusion • There is a large level of uncertainty because of policy reforms and the change of financial frameworks • Due competition based allocation of funding, developments often cannot reach those territories, municipalities, and groups which are most affected by the social problem which should be handled

13. General conclusions (2) • Developments targeting inclusion combating poverty were only partly successful – „skimming off” • From the project perspective there should be a shift towards programme perspective • There is a need for programmes with greater funding intensity, complex methodology, based on multiple actors and embeddedness, tailored to the local needs – beyond improvement of local capacities, improvement of access to quality basic and special services • There are promising measures in the current SROP 5: the development of special services, development of complex micro-regional services, and methodological innovations – the precedents of these were also present partly in the EQUAL-HRDOP, where the capacities of the NGOs had been strengthened as well.

14. Our recommendations • „Skimming problem”: strengthening of targeting, problem-centered measures • Strengthening of institutional capacities, diversification, and the utilisation of funds along complex needs • Fine-tuning of thematic measures, revision of measuring results • Embedding of public services and developments, making them predictable • For the next programming period: recommendations for the planning of the OP – with hindsight to a more effective targeting of the tightened budget - are as follows: • Within deep poverty: targeted support for combating child-poverty and the inclusion of the Roma • Fund allocation based on territorial development • Improving access to public services • Employability and employment (with the new economic development and innovation OP) • Capacity building of institutions (and municipalities)

15. Thankyouforyourattention! Hétfa Research Institute H-1051 Budapest Október 6. utca 19. www.hetfa.hu