400 likes | 407 Views
Explore principles for programming & financial management, emphasizing decentralized policies, partnership arrangements, and sound financial management. Learn about monitoring, evaluation, and reporting procedures to ensure effective implementation.
E N D
Mr. Kjell PETERSON • Director, • West Sweden Office • 20 June 2000
Mr. Thierry DAMAN • Head of Information and Communications Unit, • DG Regional Policy • European Commission • 20 June 2000
Mr. Brian GRAY Director of Finance, DG Regional Policy European Commission 20 June 2000
Mr. Luis BORIS • Deputy Head of Unit, Finance, • DG Regional Policy • European Commission • 20 June 2000
Mr. Joergen GREN STIG • Coordination of Evaluation, • DG Regional Policy • European Commission • 20 June 2000
Principles for Programming and Financial Management • further decentralisation • reporting procedures • monitoring procedures • partnership • subsidiarity • sound financial management
Partnership arrangements (1)A more decentralised cohesion policy • Within the Member States: • a wider definition of the partnerships: • * regional and local authorities and other competent authorities • * economic and social partners • * other competent bodies including NGOs, environmental sector etc. • active involvement of partners in all stages of programming
Partnership arrangements (2)A more decentralised cohesion policy • Between the Commission and the Member States • a clear definition of responsibilities with 3 key players • * the Commission • * the programme Management Authority • * the Monitoring Committee
Programming: who does what? (1) • Commission: • determines eligible regions and indicative financial allocations • establishes programme guidance • adopts (modifies) programmes only at the level of strategic priorities • monitoring at strategic level • approves large-scale projects (>EURO 50 million)
Programming: who does what? (2) • Member State - Management Authority: • prepares plans • prepares and adopts the programming complement • sub-delegates responsibilities as necessary - global grants • selects projects • prepares annual report • implements the mid-term evaluation • ensures that information and publicity rules are adhered to
Programming: who does what? (3) • Member State - Monitoring Committee • agrees on programming complement • lays down project selection criteria • monitors programme implementation: • proposes programme changes to Management Authority • agrees on proposals to change programming complement • approves mid-term evaluation • agrees annual report
Monitoring arrangementsA more transparent implementation • Key annual encounters: • Commission and Management Authority for management questions • Commission and control authorities for control questions • Monitoring of targets for quantified indicators • Mid-term review of implementation • Improved information and publicity system
Programming: 4 main steps • 1. Programme guidance issued by the Commission • 2. Development plans submitted by Member States after consultation with partners • 3. Adoption of strategy by the Commission: • quantified strategic targets • priorities • funding allocations • 4. Detailed programming of measures by Management Authority and Monitoring Committees
Planning and programming timetable • Plans and programmes to cover 7 years (except transition areas) • Plans submitted by Member States within 4 months of list of eligible regions concluded • Commission decision within 5 months of receiving plans: CSF or SPD • Commission decision within 5 months of receiving proposed OPs • Member States to submit Programme Complement within 3 months of approval of SPD or OP
Enhancing cost-effectiveness • additionality • monitoring • evaluation • financial management • financial control • performance reserve
Sound financial management • Article 274 of Treaty • Article 2 Financial regulation • adequacy of sytems • prompt exchange of all necessary information
Accounting Data • Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 • transparent financial flows • data necessary to fulfil the management, monitoring and evaluation requirements • data necessary for the pursuit and correction of irregularities and infringements
Financial Information • Financial Plans • Payments • separate accounting systems • or adequate accounting code • computer files • communicated electronically
Monitoring Information • quantified targets • stage of physical implementation • assessment of the impact of the operation
Common Format for data • Provide audit trail required by National and Community audit bodies as per Reg 2064/97 • detailed information • common methodology for recording and encoding data • common methodology for electronic exchange of information • common rules for Commission access to project information
Provision of Information to the Commission • aggregate financial data sent 3 times per year • justify payment claims • aggregate data on progress of measures • performance indicators • detailed data to be held by MS authorities • for evaluation, audit, management reviews
Responsibilities of Managing Authorities • Article 34, General Reg. 1260/1999 • gathering reliable information • ensuring proper accounts • operations are correct • Community Rules compliance • eg state aids, environment, equality of treatment...
The Managing Authority checks and authorises claims • all final beneficiaries and promoters are fully informed of the rules • ensure their application when tenders are published • applied when contracts awarded • applied when claims on Community co-finance
One programme, one Managing Authority • one per CSF/CCA • one per SPD/DOCUP • one per Programme • but not for global grants
The Annual Implementation Report • financial implementation of assistance for each measure • expenditure, payments received • progress in relation to targets • relevant changes in socio-economic conditions • steps on effectiveness • monitoring, finance, evaluation, management, use of technical assistance etc • steps on compatibility with Community policies
Adjusting a programme • 1. Managing Authority • modify programme complement • 2. Commission • in agreement with MS • Decisions taken at PMC • Can change priority targets • Mid-term evaluation • Allocation of performance reserve
Responsibilitiesof Paying Authorities • See Doc.REGIO/0051/2000 • Certify the claim sent to the Commission • Ensure only eligible expenditure is charged to EU co-finance
Compliance with Community Rules • Assurance from Managing Authority that a clearly designated department has verified the respect of: • procurement rules • eligibility rules • information and publicity requirements • environment, equality of treatment etc • separate accounts, or account codes, on computer file
The Member State and the Paying Authority • The Paying Authority must have a clear mandate from the National Authorities, with explicit instructions on how to: • obtain assurances from the Managing Authority • compile the claim on Community co-finance from the accounting records • Must be competent to undertake checks.
2a 2b Payment and expenditure sequence COMMISSION ADVANCE PAYING AUTHORITY € CLAIM REFUND CHECK NATIONAL BUDGET MANAGING AUTHORITY CHECK CLAIM FINAL BENEFICIARY € € RECIPIENT
Other responsibilities of the Paying Authority • Keep a record of recovery orders • repay recoveries (and interest) to the Commission • ensure final beneficiary is paid as soon as possible • make available to the Commission the detailed (computer) records on payments to final beneficiaries • supply expenditure forecasts to the Commission
Division of duties • between the Paying and Managing Authorities • within each authority • Separation of responsibilities for: • checking claims • paying aids • compiling claim on Community funds • certifying claim on Community funds • internal audit or equivalent procedures
MANAGING AUTHORITY PAYING AUTHORITY Delegation of Responsibilities COMMISSION Clear definition of responsibility under Reg. 1260/99 Audit of information and systems MEMBER STATE INTERMEDIATE BODIES Information on payment, control systems and checks done FINAL BENEFICIARY
Financial ManagementCombining simplification and efficiency • automatic annual commitments • automatic de-commitment of unused resources • payment on account of 7% on the adoption of the programme • new system of reimbursements against expenditure incurred • final payment of 5% at closure of programme • flat-rate indexation of 2% built into budget with review for 2004-2006
Financial ControlA clearer division of responsibilities • Member States responsible for: • efficient systems for financial control • prevention of irregularities • correction of irregularities • ensuring compliance with Community law • Commission responsible for: • checks on efficiency of financial control systems • consequences: possible suspension or cancellation of payments • organisation of annual meetings
Financial Control: role of Member State • Giving the Commission assurance through…. • Managing and Paying authorities • Internal Audit departments or equivalent • Independent Auditors • assess validity of payment request • keep all supporting documents for 3 years • comprehensive and readily available
Financial Control: role of Commission • To verify effectiveness of the control systems…. • carry out on-the-spot checks, or request that MS do it • examination of checks • finnacial impact of irregularities • corrective measures • changes to management and control systems
Financial Control: Financial corrections • 1. MS should correct financial irregularities • Re-use released funds • 2. If MS fails to do this, or Commission unhappy with management and control systems: • impose financial corrections on MS • 3. Amount of any correction will correspond to principle of proportionality and risk to Funds
The performance reserveA new tool to encourage improved performance • 4% of national resources allocated before 31.3.2004 • assessment of programme performance based on: • realisation of aims decided ex-ante • the quality of the programme management • the absorption of EU resources and their leverage effect • choice of indicators by Member State, based on proposals by Commission • Member State proposes successful programmes • allocation of Funds by the Commission
Evaluation: a tool for better programming • ex-ante evaluation submitted by Member State with plans; new emphasis on • employment situation • environmental impact • equality between men and women • mid-term evaluation implemented by Managing authority using an independent expert: consequences for reprogramming • ex-post evaluation implemented by European Commission by 2009