1 Brussels, 27 June 2008 The Evaluation of Structural Funds in Spain.

11

Brussels, 27 June 2008Brussels, 27 June 2008Brussels, 27 June 2008Brussels, 27 June 2008

The Evaluation The Evaluation of Structural of Structural

Funds in SpainFunds in Spain

The Evaluation The Evaluation of Structural of Structural

Funds in SpainFunds in Spain

22

Evolution of Structural Resources Evolution of Structural Resources Allocated to SpainAllocated to Spain

Million of Million of Euros 2004Euros 2004 86-8886-88 89-9389-93 94-9994-99 00-0600-06

07-13*07-13*

(estima(estimated)ted)

TotalTotal

Structural Structural FundsFunds 4,8224,822 18,7018,70

7741,08041,080 49,95949,959 28,29328,293 142,26142,26

88

Cohesion Cohesion FundFund 9,5749,574 12,32212,322 3,2503,250 25,32925,329

TotalTotal 4,8224,822 18,70718,707 50,65450,654 61,89061,890 31,54331,543 172,41172,4199

33

NSRF Strategic ReportsNSRF Strategic Reports To be carried out in 2009 and 2012, To be carried out in 2009 and 2012, By the AGE (General Administration of the State)By the AGE (General Administration of the State) Document on Common Elements to the Strategic Follow-Up Document on Common Elements to the Strategic Follow-Up

of the NSRF and the Evaluation of the ERDF, ESF and of the NSRF and the Evaluation of the ERDF, ESF and Cohesion Fund ProgrammesCohesion Fund Programmes

Evaluation of the Communications PlanEvaluation of the Communications Plan Included in the common elementsIncluded in the common elements To be attached as an annex to the evaluation made in 2010To be attached as an annex to the evaluation made in 2010

A separate report will be attached, if no assessment is A separate report will be attached, if no assessment is made made

A final evaluation is to be made in 2013A final evaluation is to be made in 2013

Common Elements to the Strategic Follow-Common Elements to the Strategic Follow-Up of the NSRF and the Evaluation of the Up of the NSRF and the Evaluation of the

ERDF, ESF and Cohesion Fund ProgrammesERDF, ESF and Cohesion Fund Programmes

44

Evaluation PlanEvaluation Plan The The organization of the evaluation system organization of the evaluation system in Spain must be in Spain must be

explained in detailexplained in detail Evaluation Consultation Committee, General Sub-directorate for Evaluation Consultation Committee, General Sub-directorate for

Evaluation, Evaluation Resources of the Autonomous Communities Evaluation, Evaluation Resources of the Autonomous Communities and Citiesand Cities

It is It is not not a a binding binding documentdocument This plan is not subject to the Commission’s approvalThis plan is not subject to the Commission’s approval It offers guidelines that may be modified throughout the periodIt offers guidelines that may be modified throughout the period

It is necessary to It is necessary to link operational Evaluations to Annual link operational Evaluations to Annual reportsreports

Define a Define a control and follow-up proceeding for the quality control and follow-up proceeding for the quality of the dataof the data

Periodical system of revisions to avoid “absurd” dataPeriodical system of revisions to avoid “absurd” data It should be stated whether or not evaluation-based It should be stated whether or not evaluation-based Training Training

will be conducted by Technical Assistancewill be conducted by Technical Assistance



55

Strategic Evaluations Strategic Evaluations (by the AGE):(by the AGE): In 2009 In 2009

Strategic thematic Strategic thematic evaluation evaluation regarding regarding R+D+i R+D+i of ERDF and ESF of ERDF and ESF OPsOPs R+D+i and Information Society; the ERDF convergence axis 2 R+D+i and Information Society; the ERDF convergence axis 2

is excluded from competitivenessis excluded from competitiveness Strategic Environmental EvaluationStrategic Environmental Evaluation of all ERDF and ESF OPs of all ERDF and ESF OPs

Item included in all Environmental ReportsItem included in all Environmental Reports Evaluation of the equal opportunities principle Evaluation of the equal opportunities principle from the from the

strategic point of viewstrategic point of view In Cohesion Fund, ERDF and ESF OPsIn Cohesion Fund, ERDF and ESF OPs

In 2012 In 2012 Strategic thematic Strategic thematic evaluation evaluation regarding regarding immigrationimmigration in ESF OPs in ESF OPs The common evaluation elements document shall contain The common evaluation elements document shall contain the the

contribution requirements to be met by the Autonomous contribution requirements to be met by the Autonomous Communities in relation to thematic evaluationsCommunities in relation to thematic evaluations



66

Operational Evaluation:Operational Evaluation: Two Two methodological guides methodological guides will be defined:will be defined:

One for ERDF and CF, and another one for ESF in order to be One for ERDF and CF, and another one for ESF in order to be able to carry out said evaluations quickly and according to the able to carry out said evaluations quickly and according to the characteristics of each Autonomous Communitycharacteristics of each Autonomous Community

These will be compiled in the annual reportThese will be compiled in the annual report Each authority will be responsible for evaluating the OP Each authority will be responsible for evaluating the OP

sections falling under its responsibilitysections falling under its responsibility Modifications implying the transfer of resources from one Modifications implying the transfer of resources from one

authority to another will be made jointly authority to another will be made jointly This only applies to ERDF and CF (and not to ESF)This only applies to ERDF and CF (and not to ESF)

Mandatory Mandatory at OP level, but not at NSRF levelat OP level, but not at NSRF level Whenever a modification of the OP is proposedWhenever a modification of the OP is proposed

A modification of the OP includes the transfer of financial A modification of the OP includes the transfer of financial amounts amongst OP axesamounts amongst OP axes

Whenever a Whenever a significant deviation significant deviation occurs in relation to occurs in relation to expected goalsexpected goals



77

Operational Evaluations Operational Evaluations will be will be mandatory mandatory when a when a significant deviation significant deviation is caused in relation to expected goals:is caused in relation to expected goals:

The termThe term “significant” “significant” means a means a change of mentality change of mentality in in relation to the evaluation system used in the period 2000-relation to the evaluation system used in the period 2000-20062006

The goal is that operational evaluations are used as a The goal is that operational evaluations are used as a management tool management tool for OPsfor OPs They should make it possible to detect potential execution They should make it possible to detect potential execution

problems as soon as possibleproblems as soon as possible It has been proposed to define a set of It has been proposed to define a set of Warning IndicatorsWarning Indicators

that may help detect irregularities in the OP, should they that may help detect irregularities in the OP, should they exceed a specific thresholdexceed a specific threshold If said indicators exceed a specific value, managers may think of If said indicators exceed a specific value, managers may think of

performing an Operational Evaluationperforming an Operational Evaluation The The decision lies on the managers;decision lies on the managers; The Commission will not The Commission will not

impose any criteriaimpose any criteria



88

Warning Indicators Warning Indicators must be a must be a subset of the subset of the Core IndicatorsCore Indicators that have already been that have already been defined by axis for each OPdefined by axis for each OP These can be financial or physicalThese can be financial or physical It is the duty of the managers and the It is the duty of the managers and the

persons responsible for the evaluation to persons responsible for the evaluation to define them. They need not be the same for define them. They need not be the same for all OPsall OPs

ProportionalityProportionality Proportionality shall be applied to the Proportionality shall be applied to the

extension and degree of detail of the extension and degree of detail of the analysisanalysis and the evaluation report and the evaluation report



1 Brussels, 27 June 2008 The Evaluation of Structural Funds in Spain.

Documents

Transcript of 1 Brussels, 27 June 2008 The Evaluation of Structural Funds in Spain.