Mid-Term Evaluation of the Border, Midland and Western Regional Operational Programme

Central Expenditure Evaluation Unit Department of Finance - Nov 2010Msc. Economic Policy Studies,EC8011, 2 December 2011

Kate O’Reilly Student No. 10263809Maria Murray Student No 10260626

2

Introduction

• Evaluation question• Key Steps• Methodology used• Evaluation conclusions &

recommendations• Overall opinion

Border, Midland and Western Region

3

What is the BMW regional OP

• To ensure projects co-financed by the EU are properly implemented

• Promotes regional policy and research initiatives.

4

Evaluation Objective

• To improve quality effectiveness.

• To provide an independent analysis of progress under the BMW regional OP.

• To make appropriate recommendations for programme adjustments.

5

OverviewThese objectives are to be achieved by focusing and concentrating

resources on three broad priority areas, as follows:

• Priority 1 - Innovation, ICT and the Knowledge Economy;

• Priority 2 - Environment and Risk Prevention;

• Priority 3 - Urban Development and Secondary Transport Networks.

6

Key Steps

• Review of External Developments

• Continued relevance of programme objectives

• Effectiveness progress to date

• Programme management and efficiency

• Indicators

• Conclusions/Recommendations

7

Methodology

• Data Gathering– WP A-Review of progress and constraints.– WP B- Assessment of reporting of

Horizontal principles and indicators.– WP C- OP management and monitoring,

indicators selection criteria.

* desk and non-desk based research– WP D- Review of external developments

*exclusively desk based.

8

Methodology

• Analysis– WP E contribution to Lisbon and

Gothenburg goals and N/S coop– WP F continued validity relevance,

likelihood of meeting physical and financial obj.

*draws on data gathered and reviewed

• Reporting

9

Progress Reports

Financial Progress

• Priority 1

– 45% of the allocation spent

– confident allocated expenditure will be used

• Priority 2

– 25% of the allocation spent

– Lowest percentage spend of the priorities

– Potential to spend 80% of allocation, dependent on the Ocean Energy test project

• Priority 3-

– 90% of the allocation spent

– Certain to achieve and exceed expenditure.

10

Progress ReportNon-Financial Progress

Contribution to North/South co-operation

“…..to facilitate where possible greater co-operation between communities, institutions and enterprises on both parts of the island”

Progress supported by –

1. Micro-Enterprise- Innovation and entrepreneurship-.

– CEBs, Trade links; Peace II(EU) etc

2. PRTLI

– 16 new all island projects, 5 of which are BMW related

11

Progress Report

3. Sustainable energy

– Sustainable energy working group

– Community projects – Newry & Dundalk

– All island Annual Energy Awards

4. The gateway and hub fund

– 3 regeneration projects (Donegal, Cavan, Monaghan, Sligo & Louth)

– 1 infrastructure project (Cavan Eastern Access route)

– 1 arts & cultural project (Sligo)

12

Progress Report

13

Project Management

Alignment with EU goals

Priority 1Innovation, ICT & Knowledge Economy

-Good overall Mgt-Complex Admin Structure

- Performing well

Priority 2Environment & Risk prevention

-Good Monitoring - Lack of progress in some areas

-Underperforming

Priority 3Urban Development

-Good Mgt- Good working relationships

- Good progress

Conclusions

Performance Indicators

• Too high level to capture the complexity of the given priorities

• Sub-theme priorities require clearer explanation

Horizontal Principles

• high-level, the objective of the HP not captured

• Lack of understanding of report expectations

• Monitoring & Administration is positive

14

Recommendations

Performance Indicators

• PI should be expanded for Priority 2 in order to capture the complexity its objective

Horizontal Principles

• Clearer specification of Horizontal Principles

• PI’s for HPs need to be developed

15

Recommendations

Re-allocation of funding

• Reduce allocation to Priority 2 by €15M (€75M to €60m)

• Reduce Priority 4 (Technical assistance) by €0.5 (€4.5m to €4m)

• Increase allocation to Priority 1 by €5m (€200m to €205m)

• Increase allocation to Priority 3 by €10.5m ( €178m to €188.5)

16

Overall Opinion

• Detailed evaluation

• Balanced evaluation

• Constructive evidence based suggestions.

17