On-going Evaluation Report on The Implementation of the...

Annex E

On-going Evaluation Report on The Im plementation of the

Operational Programme „Environment” for the period 01.01.2011-31.12.2011

(Contract № ДЗО-166/24.07.2012 )

November 2012

Prepared by:

Union „European Analysis and Evaluations” Sofia 1000, 10 Georgi Benkovski Str., fl. 3, ap. 6 phone: +359 2 9873252 fax: +359 2 9890410

Report on On-going evaluation of the implementation of Operational Programme „Environment” for the period 01.01.2011 – 31.12.2011 November 2012

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________1

Union „European Analyses and Evaluations”, Sofia 1000, 10 Georgi Benkovski Str., tel./fax: +359 2 9873252

The present report has been prepared by the expert team and collaborators of Union "European analyses and Evaluations" in its capacity of contractor of procurement Contract № ДЗО-166/24.07.2012. The contractor is responsible for the expressed opinions, conclusions and recommendations presented in this report. They reflect the expert team's viewpoint and they can not involve third parties, including the Assignor.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________2


ABBREVIATIONS

WSS Water Supply and Sewerage

GIS Geographic information system

CPE Directorate

Cohesion Policy for Environment Directorate within the Ministry of Environment and Waters

EUFE Directorate

EU Funds for Environment Directorate within the Ministry of Environment and Waters

GC Grant Contract

CO Assignor

EIB European Investment Bank

EC European Commission

ЕU European Union

ESF European Social Fund

ERDF European Regional Development Fund

UMIS Unified Management Information System for the EU structural instruments in Bulgaria

KE Key Expert

CSCP Committee for Selection and Coordination of Projects

MC Monitoring Committee

CP Communication Plan

CF Cohesion Fund

IB Intermediate Body

MoEW Ministry of Environment and Waters

CoM Council of Ministers

MF Ministry of Finance

NKE Non-Key Expert

NGO Non-government Organisation

NA National Assembly

NNPS National Nature Protection Service

NSRF National Strategic Reference Framework

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

OPE Operational Programme Environment 2007-2013

DCM Decree of the Council of Ministers

WWTP Waste-Water Treatment Plant

DWTP Drinking Water Treatment Plant

CoM Decision Council of Ministers Decision

CA Certifying Authority

SF Structural Funds

MO Managing Authority

FMC Financial Management and Control


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________3


INTRODUCTION The on-going evaluation report of the OPE has been prepared by the Consultant - CLOC Union "EUROPEAN ANALYSES AND EVALUATIONS", consisting of Sofia Consulting Group Ltd., Kommunalkredit Public Consulting GmbH and European Development Consultants Ltd. in their capacity of executor of public procurement with subject "Interim and on-going evaluations of Operational Programme "Environment" 2007-2013 and of the communication plan of the OPE and monitoring of the communication plan of OPE" under contract with the Ministry of Environment and Water with number Д-30-166/24.07.2012. The evaluation was carried out within the period August-October 2012 by a team of the following key and non-key experts and specialists:

List of experts and specialists in the Project Alexander Linke

Andey Goranov

Valentin Mitev

Vassil Petrov

Zlatina Karova

Rossen Yakimov

Siana Gocheva

Galya Mihova

Desislava Mincheva

Dimitar Jotov

Emilia Varadinova

Irena Ilieva

Lia Radanova

Maria Dikova

Nevena Ivanova

Nenko Ananiev

Nikolai Bojev

Petar Petrov

Plamen Penchev

Rabia Abdulah Sufi

Radostina Hristova

Snejana Kostadinova

Yavor Stoyanov

For the implementation of the presented tasks are used methods that comply with those initially predefined in the Terms of Reference and proposed by the Contractor in the Inception Report, as well as in accordance with the applicable EC guidelines and regulations for carrying out interim evaluations of the Operational programmes including Working Document №5 of the EC "Indicative guidelines on evaluation methods: Evaluation during the programming period". The following groups of methods for collecting and documenting of information were used methods for the preparation of the evaluation:

� Desk research; � Structured interviews; � Financial analysis.

METHODS FOR ANALYSIS OF THE COLLECTED DOCUMENTATION: EXPERT EVALUATION, QUALITATIVE AND QUANTATIVE ANALYSIS, COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS, FACTOR ANALYSIS.

For the preparation of the present report, the experts of the Consulant were provided with over 500 documents with informative, program, ascertaintive, analytical, evaluative and other nature from the Assignor's web page and directly from it. There were conducted a number of interviews and surveys upoon previously approved questionnaires on the basis of a sample of the procedures and GC. On this basis was conducted an analysis and were made conclusions and recommendations.

The Consultant expresses his gratitude to the Assignor and the beneficiaries for their support and participation in the evaluation activities within the short time of the assessment.

This summary sets out the main findings, conclusions and recommendations in brief as follows:


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________4


SUMMARY OF THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

OPE is in compliance with the national and European legislation and the strategic documents. In this sense, the programme is effectively targeted and relevant to the needs and priorities of the country and of the Bulgarian society. Improvements could be sought mainly towards its effective implementation - to a certain extent there's lack of certain concreteness, prioritisation and engagement of objectives with deadlines, especially with regard to the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. It is taken into account the need to improve the system of indicators and to perform a detailed analysis which to serve for development of proposals for improvement of the system. The lack of indicators for Priority Axis 4 is a significant deficiency in the programme development. In order to achieve more effective observation and monitoring of the current results and to undertake timely actions for improvement of the status and the results achieved, the MA has to develop indicators for Priority Axis 4.

In order to overcome the low utilisation rate of funds it is proceeded to direct negotiating of funds with direct beneficiaries, allowing the funds to be directed towards priority projects and to establish an ongoing dialogue during the preparation of project proposals. However, according to the MA the payments as of 31.12.2010 amounted to 73,70 million EUR or 4% of the total resources of the programme. The main reason for the low utilization of funds under the Operational Programme "Environment 2007-2013" during the evaluation period is the delays in the implementation of the public procurement of the projects and the conclusion of contracts with contractors caused by the complaints received from unsuccessful applicants and lack of good planning by the beneficiaries at the start of the selection procedures for outside contractors.

Findings and conclusions on OP “Environment” for the period 01.01.2011 – 31.12.2011:

Foremost have be noted the positive changes in the Managing Authority as the most important among them are:

• Improving the administrative capacity of the MA and the IB:

o There is a highly qualified and motivated team; o The staff turnover is reduced to a minimum at the end of the reporting period; o There were conducted a number of specialized training courses and exchange of experience

with leading managing authorities in the Member States. • Updating, enhancement and simplifying the management and control systems and Procedure

Manual of the MA and IB; • Significant increase in the percentage of the contracted amounts under the programme as

compared to the period 2007-2010; • Significant increase in the utilisation of funds under the programme as compared to the period

2007-2010; • Improvement of the communication with beneficiaries and conducting a significant number of

consultations with beneficiaries aiming at improving the quality of the elaborated project proposals and facilitating the beneficiaries in the process of their preparation, finalization and submission;

• Organisation of specialized trainings for beneficiaries by the MA and IB; • Publication of information on the website of the programme for the most common mistakes

made by beneficiaries in implementing and management of projects, including when conducting public procurement;


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________5


• Improvement of the efficiency of the control systems of the Managing Authority and the Intermediate Body at the inspections of the claimed for verification expenditures made by beneficiaries;

• Shortening the time for carrying out verification by the Intermediate Body and for the reimbursement of the beneficiaries' costs;

• Effective utilization of of the technical assistance under the programme; • The measures to promote the program activities and results have been significantly enhanced.

There are mechanisms for coordination and harmonization between the operational programmes, especially with Operational programme "Regional Development" at the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works plans for coordination between the two ministries of the plans and programmes on matters related to underground and ground infrastructure - lighting, WSS and etc., for optimizing the processes of selection, funding and implementation of projects under procedures that affect such infrastructure.

The Managing Authority and the Intermediate Body enjoy a serious capacity to manage and implement the programme after a number of improvements that took place as a result of identified weaknesses and omissions made during the initial period. It should be emphasized on the need to ensure the sustainability and maintaining of the administrative capacity and good practices of the MA and IB for the next programming period. It is necessary to consider the opportunities regarding the structural separation of the programme governance and its differentiation from the pure administrative work of the ministry. The work of the MA and IB would significantly improve and accelerate through the development and implementation of a modern system for information, communication, monitoring and reporting of projects, procedures and priority axes which would offer functionality that shall be useful in decision making and monitoring in addition to the opportunities offered by UMIS. The latter is essential, especially when combined with the development of the regional structures of the MoEW and their commitment with specific obligations in the process of evaluating and monitoring of the implementation OPE.

The system of indicators for measuring the progress of the implementation of the OPE needs a complete overview and clearly definition of the main criteria and indicators for achievements at the different levels: national strategy and priorities, operational programme, priority axes, procedures and project proposals. All priority axes should be encompassed with objectively measurable indicators. For priority axis 3 are especially necessary a review, diversification and introduction of a system of indicators for measuring the results and impact of the programme and as well as introduction of indicators for priority axis 4. Indicators should better be defined in a comprehensible by the general public language in order to facilitate the promotion of the achievements of the programme.

It is a good practice the MA to periodically analyze the current utilisation rate of funds under different priority axes and where conditions allow and if they can not prioritize low-risk and relatively easy to implement in the short term large projects, to perform redistribution of funds of priority axes with low utilisation to those with high utilisation.

Recommendations for the priority axes implementation:

Especially for priority axes "Improvement and development of the infrastructure for drinking and waste water" and "Improvement and development of infrastructure for waste treatment" the process of developing and evaluating of projects is extended significantly due to weaknesses in the design


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________6


and planning of projects. This calls for the establishment of mechanisms for providing technical assistance for project development at national level in order to ensure high standards and to reduce the time limits for preparing and evaluation of projects and the conclusion of GC.

Such an approach might be effective and for priority axis 3: "Preservation and restoration of the biodiversity". In addition to that, it is necessary to consider the financial instruments within the priority axis that will allow a grater involvement of civil organisations (NGOs) in the implementation of the programme - prioritizing partnerships with them and establishing individual procedures for them. This should be combined with concurrent measures for further building of their capacity as well as with the provision of adequate systems for monitoring and reporting.

In view of the specifics of the programme as well as the scope, budgets and national importance of a number of projects under priority axes 1 and 2 it is necessary to undertake measures to formalize the status of those projects that will help to tackle issues connected to the expropriation of land, providing of technical assistance and other resources for their realization. The main objective of priority axis 3 is ambitious and reasonable, but hard to measure. Specific and operational objectives bound to terms should be clearly defined. A clear and precisely expressed prioritisation of species and habitats, territories and areas subject to preservation and/or restoration is necessary. The selected indicators should be diversified and linked to the secondary targets in order to fully evaluate the progress on the implementation of the priority.

Recommendations for reducing the mistakes and irregularities in organizing public procurement procedures by beneficiaries:

• To be regularly updated on the website of the operational programme a list of the most common errors in the public procurement conduction and examples of best practices for conducted public procurement - for example in the determination of minimum requirements for the applicants, assessment methodologies, technical specifications and etc

• To be organized trainings for the beneficiaries, which to present best practices and to discuss the infringements found when conducting public procurement

Recommendations for reducing the mistakes and irregularities in project implementation and reporting:

• To electronize the documentation for current and future beneficiaries, the project documentation and the implementation of GC;

• To elaborate detailed instructions for conducting of external audit of the projects. To set minimum requirements for the external auditors and to clearly define the scope of their work. To lay down a requirement the external auditors, whose CVs are enclosed to the tender bid, to carry out on-site inspections at the the beneficiaries and their every day time-sheets to be approved by the project management team leader;

• All internal rules and procedures should be part of an integrated manual. The project management team should become familiar with the approved rules and regulations for conclusion of the GC;

• To be provided a separate archive for storing of the project document and to appoint an official responsible for the records. All documents from the archive to be transmitted and received with delivery and acceptance protocols;


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________7


• In the beneficiary's procedural manual to be created a separate chapter on registration, accounting and reporting irregularities;

• To be determined a lawyer responsible for the timely updating of the internal rules for public procurement procedures;

• To provide periodic specialized trainings for beneficiaries which to introduce updated information about the most common mistakes in the project management and implementation, the new cases of irregularities and examples of good practice;

• To be provided an additional remuneration for the employees of the municipality who participate in the project team;

• If the beneficiary does not have experts with the necessary qualifications and experience, he should hire external consultants;

• The beneficiary's employees should be acquainted with the requirements for registration, recording and reporting of irregularities;

• Before signing the specific contract, the text should be carefully reviewed and clean from any burdensome and not working schemes, regulating the obligations of the Assignor and the conditions for acceptance of the work of the performer. The project team ensures strict compliance with the terms of contracts;

• To be established clear rules for reporting the work of the project team; • To be introduced current monitoring of the contract enforcement and to be appointed an

expert committee to accept the work of the external contractors. In cases where the beneficiary does not have at his disposal the necessary experts who can assess the quality of the contractor's work, he should hire external experts;

• To be planned in advance all necessary actions to be undertaken in relation to the procedures for change of the statute of the agricultural land and to appoint officials responsible for starting and monitoring of the procedures;

• To be prepared written action plans with stipulated all authorities, with which it is necessary to coordinate the projects and at what stage of planning what and where is needed to be agreed, lists of all necessary documents and permits to be issued, when and at what point it is necessary to be issued, the authority that issues them, what is necessary for their issuance, etc.;

• To be exercised control to the contract for the construction supervision by the Assignor. To be required in the technical specification a minimum number of people dealing with the project document;

• With the consultant's help the beneficiary to review the investment projects before the announcement of the procedure for the construction works for any inaccuracies and/or errors, or necessary change of their scope. The construction supervision should observe strictly the Spatial Planning Act. The construction supervision to be monitored whether it performs its duties. To taken into account the restrictions of the PPA regarding changes in already concluded contracts;

• To exercise control by the Contractor and/or Consultant on the implementation of the construction works. The tender procedure to require the submission of a detailed implementation timetable. To be imposed predefined in the contract sanctions in case of violation of the internal deadlines, not only of the final deadline, predefined in the contract;

• The contract to provide the imposition of sanctions and/or termination of the contract for not providing the resources needed by the contractor;

• Duly and timely to be drawn up documents for the time, manner of determining, causes and nature of the occurred unforeseen problem and its solution. To prepare a detailed bill of quantities with analysis prices for every additional construction works, including the required expertise from the construction supervision;


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________8


• To be carried out current monitoring by the Assignor of the performance of the author's supervision;

• To be exercised control by the Supervisory and the Assignor for compliance with the provided by the designer technology. To be taken into account the restrictions of the PPA regarding changes in already concluded contracts;

• To be exercised control by the Supervisory and the Assignor for respect of the project including the offered materials for performance. To be taken into account the restrictions of the PPA regarding changes in already concluded contracts.

Recommendations for overcoming the problems and obstacles during the implementation of funded projects:

• To develop detailed guidelines and instructions from the MA for good implementation of the funded projects with examples of best practices and presenting the most common mistakes made by the beneficiaries. The guidelines and instructions should be periodically updated with the new errors found during the process of management verification and beneficiaries should be currently informed for the latest updates.

• To be provided consultations to beneficiaries by the MA and/or the IB in the event of cases and problems during the implementation of projects. To maintain a list on the website of the programme with the different beneficiaries’ cases and problems and ways for their effective solution. To inform beneficiaries about the existence of this list.

• To organize training courses for the beneficiaries for good project management, which include all stages of preparation, execution, reporting, storage and archiving of the project documents.

• To update the financial management and control systems according to the guidelines, directions and instructions of the Managing Authority.

• To establish, maintain and develop the beneficiaries' administrative capacity to manage and control investment projects.

• To be defined in the technical specification and the draft contracts for the project management by external consultants clear, precise and detailed requirements to the consultant's team and the activities that it must provide to the Contractor.

• To reduce the time limits for verification of the beneficiary's requests for payments. • To open an opportunity to submit documents electronically at application, approval,

implementation and project reporting stages. • To preserve, maintain and develop the administrative capacity and the accumulated know-

how and best practices of the MA and IB.

Recommendations for minimizing the mistakes committed by the beneficiaries:

• Beneficiaries to conduct active consultations with the MA in the process of project preparation.

• To be defined detailed requirements for the project preparation and the basic tasks which the Assignor should set for the contractor under the public procurement.

• To comply the technical specifications/assignments in the documentation for conducting the procedure for selection of consultant/designer with the requirements of OPE.

• To use data from the NSI when determining the present population and perspective for the project period.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________9


• When performing a procedure for selection of a contractor should be set requirements that guarantee the consultant's experience rather than the consultant to be chosen upon the lowest price criterion.

• The Contractor to assist the consultant/designer when researching and collecting information for the industry in the settlement.

• The Contractor has to provide the performer on time with the whole available information. • To define in details in the terms of reference the specific tasks of the performer. To examine

the infiltrated waters and to explore the generated quantities in the PEP. • To claim and collect accurate data from the operating enterprise on the status of the existing

water supply networks. • The consultant/designer to explore all enterprises that generate waste water. • The beneficiary has to prepare a general feasibility study for the water supply and sewerage

system (part of which is the treatment plant). • To clearly define the functions of each member of the management team of the project. To

identify the tasks thatrequire external assistance. To comply the management of the project with the beneficiary's management and control systems and the guidelines and instructions of the MA.

• The consultant/beneficiary should be fully aware of and to observe the applicable methodology used for preparation of CBA for projects under axes 1 and 2 of OPE.

Recommendations for the next programming period:

In order to effectively supervise and monitor the current results and to undertake timely actions to improve the the status and the results achieved, the Managing Authority should develop indicators for priority axis 4 of the programme. Such indicators might be, for example, "Number of trainings provided per employee", "Percentage of financing of expenditures of the Managing Authority and the Intermediate Body under the technical assistance of the programme", "Level of satisfaction of employees through the provided trainings", "Number of trainings of beneficiaries", "Percentage of staff turnover at the MA and IB ", development and introduction of an on-line application system, monitoring and reporting of the projects, etc..

The performance indicators for axis 3 should be supplemented in order to cover and report the specificity and diversity of projects under this priority axis. To develop indicators for priority axis 4.

Recommendations on the Communication plan: During the remaining time of the current programming period could be prioritized regional explanatory campaigns binding the objectives and general priorities of the programme with the implementation and completion of projects of regional and national importance locally. Campaigns could be prioritized according to the nature of projects and seasons. For example: in the summer will be more effective campaigns in municipalities along the beachand in the winter - in areas with ski centers. The communication plan for the next programming period should specifically support the beneficiaries concerning the:

• good practices for project management; • national and European requirements for their implementation; • specific instructions and guidelines of the managing authority;


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________10


• preparation high quality project proposals.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________11


CONCLUSIONS, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMUNICATION PLAN

The on-going evaluation of the OPE Communication plan shows that for the period 01.01.2011-31.12.2011 the communication measures mainly aimed at providing a formal information on the programme progress, the financed activities, the finished construction sites, the amount of the granted and reimbursed funds etc. Respondents among the participants in CP events who are relatively well informed about OPE indicate in free text messages very concrete and practical issues, on which further information is needed:

• Acceptable changes in the financial management and reporting to the IB and MA of OPE;

• Avoiding common mistakes in project management;

• Presence of experts responsible for the projects implementation on next information events; • Seminars with more information about the entire realization of the contracts;

• Challenges in the management of construction works;

• Preliminary information on financing programmes and projects by regions for all beneficiaries.

Summarized results of a Sociological survey conducted

Union "European Analyses and Evaluations" conducted a national sociological survey in order to assess the effectiveness and performance of the communication plan for promoting and increasing the public awareness of the objectives and the activities completed under the Programme. The purpose of the survey is to examine the level of awareness of the range on issues related to OPE, the impact attitudes and preferred communication channels and tools. The survey is representative for the adult population and a quota sample of 1006 individuals is implemented through interviews through the face-to-face method. Control of the interviews and logical check of the completed questionnaires was performed. The sociological study aims to explore the level of awareness of the general public as a result of the taken information and publicity measures by the end of 2011. The general public is Target Group 1 (TG1) of the CP of OPE. The specific objective of the CP for this target group is:

- „Raising the awareness among the general public and promoting a greater understanding of the scope, objectives and results of OPE and SCF in Bulgaria”

The expected results of the CP implemention regarding this target group are: - Increased awareness about OPE and the activities funded under it - their successful

implementation and their contribution to improving the quality of life in the country; - Increased awareness about the role of the EU, and particularly of the ERDF and CF and their

contribution to the development of Bulgaria; - Increased confidence in the EU financial instruments.

The planned information and publicity measures of the CP concerning the general public include campaigns and publications in print and electronic media as well as print and audio-visual materials.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________12


These measures are connected to the respective indicators for assessing the implementation of the CP of OPE. The survey questionnaire includes indicators related to measuring the implementation of the abovementioned objectives. As a result of the survey could be made the following findings and conclusions: � In general the environmental issues attract public interest:

- Almost 80% of the respondents identify themselves as interested to a different extent in the condition and protection of the environment and nearly 1/3 are categorical and clearly indicate that they’re definitely interested in this issue. Purposeful conscious interest in environmental issues however, show not more than 11% - respondents indicating both that are interested in the environmental situation and that they purposefully seek information about it. For the rest of the respondents the condition and protection of the environment is rather a part of the background on their everyday agenda. This corresponds to the the average score that respondents give to their own awareness regarding the environmental situation and the activities to improve and protect it - 3.10 out of 6.

- The data indicated in the previous paragraph outlines also some quantitative restrictions in achieving the objectives of the CP - apparently the maximal range that can perceive, receive and/or provide feedback on the specialized environmental information is maximum between 70 to 80% of the target group since the rest are completely uninterested in the issue, perhaps not only in this. In other words, a complete coverage of TG 1 means coverage of approximately maximum 2/3 of the total range (the adult population in the country in the case).

- Amid the continuing effects of the economic crisis, the respondents evaluate the condition of all listed five areas of life in the country as average or poor - the economy, social security, public policy, environment, culture and education.

- The improvement of the economic situation and the increase in the living standards definitely stand out as the most important priority logically associated with the above. It wouldn’t be realistic in this situation to expect the protection of the environment to be defined as higher priority than the economic and social problems, but the fact that it ranks in order of importance before the improvement of the quality of education and culture shows that environmental issues are perceived as an important part of the aspects of life in the country. This view is apparently based on the already realized connection between the environmental situation and the health of people and thus it is not underestimated when prioritising the tasks before the government.

� The vision of the general public for the key environmental issues at national and local level is associated primarily with waste, but also with water and general environmental pollution and nature. In this respect it coincides to a large extent with the first two priority axes of OPE:

- According to the respondents the country as a whole has more serious environmental problems than individual settlements. The main environmental problems at national level are related to waste (the quantities deposited in landfills and the pollution of the landscape) and the quantity and quality of water, while biodiversity is perceived as a less serious problem.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________13


The view on environmental issues within the settlement is similar. It should be noted that the public considers the status of the air and soil as a more serious problem than the status of biodiversity at national and local level. Logically, over ½ of the respondents are interested and want more information about waste and waters while 1/3 are interested in the biodiversity issue.

- In spontaneous disclosures as major problem at both national and local level primarily stand out the waste problems as well as the general environmental pollution and the air pollution. It should be noted that the sensitivity towards air pollution existed as steady trend since 2010 when compared with other surveys on the subject.

� Generally, the EU funds are already a recognizable instrument for financial support of the development in various fields. At the level of specific funds, the EAFRD and ERDF funds are the most recognizable and memorized while the rest of the funds, their specific areas of intervention, whether they are structural, etc. are a relatively more difficult matter for the general public:

- 80% of respondents indicate that they heard about the European fund as a whole. Among the specific funds most recognizable and memorized are the EAFRD and the ERDF;

- In spontaneous disclosures the agricultural fund (30.3%) and the fund for regional development (19.3%) are the most frequently mentioned, while the agricultural fund analogies monitor pollution associated with the Fund "Agriculture" (Figure 4); the two agricultural funds (EAGF and EAFRD) are also rather perceived as one and are indistinguishable for the general public.

Nearly 1/3 of the respondents are not able to spontaneously name any specific fund; nonexistent names of European funds are mentioned that are not distinguished from the operational programmes as well as specialized funds that are not European. � The level of positive impact that the access to EU funding has on the development of the five listed aspects of life in the country is defined a low or medium. The areas in which the respondents see the most significant positive impact of European funding are economy and environment - average scores 2.4 and 2.5, where "1" - a high level of influence, and "4" - no affect. � Despite the difficulties in verbalizing the names of various EU funds, the respondents have a quite accurate idea of which of the European funds finance environment protection. The results split almost equally between the EAFRD and ERDF – with nearly 40% for each. The stating of the EAFRD is true by itself, though the OPE is not financed from it, and it is logical in view of the completed and current campaigns with ecological orientation under various measures of the PSRS. The recognition of the ERDF as a financing tool for activities related to environmental protection by such share of respondents can be defined by itself as a success, given the fact that its name does not suggest such an orientation. The Cohesion Fund is both less known and more difficult to be recognized as a source of funding for environmental protection. � OP "Environment" is among the three most famous operational programmes to the public, which seems to be a lasting trend in comparison with data from the 2010 survey.

- the respondents most often heard about RDP (72.2%), OP "Regional Development" (62.8%), OP "Environment" (62.4%) and OP "Human Resources Development" (57.9% ) as the other programs are heard by less than 50%. A small increase is observed in comparison with 2010, when 56.5% of the respondents indicate that they heard about OPE, but that is rather


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________14


statistically insignificant and can not confirm an increased range, but in any case there is a group, which is familiar with the programme, with a stable share of between 50% -60%. OPE is the second programme for which the respondents most often think of spontaneously.

� OP "Environment" has started to be recognized as the operational programme which to greatest extent supports environmental protection activities through providing EU funding (18.3% of the respondents spontaneously indicated it as such); � The awareness about OPE does not remain at a common level of recognition. A significant share of respondents is observed who have more specific knowledge about the sources of funding, beneficiaries, supported projects:

- Nearly 10% of the respondents spontaneously identify the ERDF as a funding source of OPE and another 3.2% - the Cohesion Fund. Other 18.1% do not indicate specific funds, but aware that the OPE is funded by European and national funds.

- 30.4% give correct answers to the question what activities are financed under OPE. 66.8% report they do not know and 2.4% give an incorrect answer;

- 23.3% give correct answers to the question who can apply under the OPE. 68.4% state that they do not know and 8.3% give wrong answers;

- Almost 1/10 of the respondents identify projects funded under OPE in their settlements, and nearly 7% - projects funded under OPE elsewhere in the country.

� Generally, there are more optimistic expectations for the successful implementation and impact of OPE:

- 52% believe that the programme will achieve its objectives, 16% still can not answer and 1/3 are pessimistic;

- The expected positive changes and benefits are mostly for Bulgaria as a whole (61%) and for the respondents’ municipality (52%), which can be defined as a fully adequate view, given the type of investments under the current measures. One third of the respondents expect direct positive change in their quality of life.

� 59% of all respondents and nearly 70% of those who have heard about the OPE clearly indicate that the available at the moment information about the programme is rather poor according to their needs and interests. The respondents who have heard about the OPE give an average score on their own awareness of the programme - 3.38 out of 6. An average score out of six (3.04) is also given for activities carried out to inform the public about various aspects of the implementation of OPE - objectives, funding sources, calls for projects, completed projects and etc. � The most national electronic media (radio and television) are the used, most effective so far and the most preferred communication channels for information about the OPE:

- 61% of the respondents who have heard of the OPE indicate that they learned about it from national radio/TV. The majority - almost 70%, can not remember exactly when it happened, but among the rest, the largest number specify the period 2010-2011 (18.9% of those who have heard about the OPE);

- The national radio/TV are the most frequently mentioned sources of information and for 2011 - 82.5% of those who have heard about the OPE received information about it in 2011 exactly


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________15


from these sources. The next most frequently mentioned communication channel - the national newspapers, are indicated by 36.7% of the respondents who have heard about the OPE;

- 84.7% of all respondents specify the national electronic media as the preferred source of information. The next most frequently pointed out sources - the national newspapers, and the Internet, are indicated respectively by 38.6 and 38.2% of the respondents.

The above shows that the indicators for evaluation of the CP implementation, associated with a number of video spots/broadcastings on the radio/TV, are selected in accordance with the attitudes of the audience since they are the main communication channels and tools - both actual and preferred. � It should be noted that OPE is not only heard of, but also talked about - about 1/3 of those who have heard of OPE, received some information about the programme from friends/acquaintances, which means that there is information exchange and informal channels. � Internet in general is the third most widely used communication channel (29.8% of those who have heard about OPE) and the third most frequently mentioned preferred source of information by the entire range. It is appropriate to encourage the activation of the presence of information about OPE on the Internet not only through the website of the OPE and the MoEW, but through the web publications in different media, common and specialized news sites and etc. � The respondents are most commonly interested in information on the results of the implementation of OPE - specific projects in or near their settlements (53.4%), successfully completed projects (40.7%) and absorption (33.7%) as a whole. Logically, in view of the most serious environmental problems in the country and the settlement described above, over ½ are interested and want more information about waste and water, while only 1/3 of the respondents are interested in the biodiversity issue. � The comparison between the actual channels from which the respondents received information about OPE in 2011 and the mentioned as the most preferred information channels and sources suggests that the transmission of information should continue to intensify through national and local electronic media and the Internet in general (more than 10% difference between the actual and preferred sources of information). � More than half of the respondents consider that the available information about OPE is rather insufficient. For the purposes of continuing informing below is presented in-depth profile of this part of TG 1 of the CP of OPE, conditionally called "broad" subgroup (about 60% of all respondents).

The broad subgroup has the following key features:

- Higher basic awareness (more often heard of OPE); - Slightly higher status than the whole range (education and income); - The territorial positioning according to type of settlement is very close to that of the whole

range - no peculiarities emerge as the capital is slightly more strongly represented; - The preferred channels for information coincide with the preferred by the whole range

channels - national electronic and print media, and the Internet.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________16


� In addition to that is defined another more "narrow" subgroup (about 18% of all respondents) of persons who meet the following criteria:

- Define themselves as people who definitely are interested in the status and protection of the environment and

- However, they determine the available information about OPE rather insufficient.

This "narrow" subgroup as part of the large target group of the general public is considered important because it includes people who by definition are interested in issues related to the OPE - including professionally engaged with this issue people. Generally speaking, they might be expected to make active response of the fact that they consider the available informationinsufficient. The submission of information to them on the one hand will generate greater satisfaction from the information activities of OPE as a whole, and on the other - they themselves have the potential to generate greater awareness through communication and use of their personal and professional circles. Their continuing dissatisfaction could also lead to increased dissatisfaction within the target group as a whole. The broad subgroup has the following key features:

- Significantly higher basic awareness – they more frequently heard about OPE (almost 80%) and are more aware of the sources of funding, beneficiaries;

- The work of a much larger proportion among them is direct or indirect related to environment and its preservation;

- The group has a higher social status - relatively more educated, higher incomes, more frequent use of the Internet;

- The territorial positioning and according to type of settlement does not differ dramatically from that of the whole rangebut still clearly emerges a large core in Sofia, Plovdiv and some regional centers (such as Gabrovo), and less representation of villages as a whole;

- The preferred channels of information coincide with those preferred by the whole range - national electronic and print media and the Internet, but there seems to be a very clear and explicit orientation towards the Internet, lack of brochures/flyers and a desire to obtain information through informal channels (friends/acquaintances), which corresponds to their greater interest and the presence of a group of officially engaged with the environment people among them.

Conclusuions and recommendations for concrete measures for improvement of the current Communication plan

As a result of the conducted national sociological survey could be made the following conclusions and recommendations for improving the current Communication plan: � In general, environmental issues attract the public interest, as subgroups are clearly separated according to their level of interest, which groups are presented in the first part with their quantitative and qualitative characteristics. The vision of the general public for the key environmental issues at national and local level is associated primarily with waste, but also with water and general environmental pollution and nature. � In this sense, the first two priorities of the programme - waste and water - fully match the public vision for the main environmental problems at national and local level. According to public


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________17


opinion, however, air and soil are a more serious problem than the status of biodiversity. Regardless whether this perception corresponds or not to the real situation in both cases should 1) more actively introduce the public with the problems of biodiversity, potential connections with climate, and 2) take into account these public priorities - air and soil - in case of change of the current measures of the program and the next planning period. It should be specifically noted that the restructuring of part of the funds to measures for renewal of the mobile park of the public transport in cities with the most polluted air in order to improve the situation, is a step in the right direction which should be maximally promoted. � Generally, the EU funds are already a recognizable instrument for financial support of the development in various fields. At the level of specific funds, the EAFRD and ERDF funds are the most recognizable and memorized. Despite the difficulties in verbalizing the names of various EU funds, it should also be stated that the respondents have a quite accurate idea of which of the European funds finance environment protection, as they include and the EAFRD. The recognition of the ERDF as a financing tool for activities related to environmental protection can be defined by itself as a success, given the fact that its name does not suggest such an orientation. The Cohesion Fund is both less known and more difficult to be recognized as a source of funding for environmental protection. � OP "Environment" is among the three most famous operational programmes to the public, which seems to have been a trend since 2010. It can be said that there is little increase in this range in 2011, but in general from now on the enlargement of the range will be a very slow process, given the identified quantity limits of public groups interested in environment. The actual efforts should be directed towards deepening and diversification of the information directed to the above identified and described subgroups rather than towards increasing of the share of people who have heard about OPE or about any European fund. � The programme has started to be recognized as the operational programme which to greatest extent supports environmental protection activities through providing EU funding.

� The awareness about OPE does not remain at a common level of recognition. A significant share of respondents is observed who have more specific knowledge about the sources of funding, beneficiaries, supported projects.

� Generally, there are more optimistic expectations for the successful implementation and impact of OPE, which rather suggests confidence in the overall process of providing financial assistance from the EU.

� It is necessary to strengthen and intensify the activities for informing the general public for the upcoming period, refocused to the subgroups identified since a significant share of respondents assess the information about the programme which they currently have at their disposal according to their needs and interests as rather insufficient; respondents give an average score under the six-point scale both on their own awareness of the programme and on the activities carried out to inform the public about the various aspects of the OPE implementation - objectives, funding sources, calls for projects, completed projects and etc.

� The water and waste issues raise greater interest (Axis 1 and Axis 2 of the Programme) rather than biodiversity. This fact, however, is due not so much to underestimation of the problems related to biodiversity but to the fact that it is an environmental component that is not present in everyday life, unlike the big waste, poor and/or lack of water and dirty air, and thus the biodoversity problems remain visible for a small group of experts and people with specialized knowledge. In this sense, its prioritisation within this programming period by no means could be questioned on the basis of the public perception. The conclusion is that are needed more efforts for structuring of the information and communication process. � The most frequently mentioned desired highlights of the information content are directed to the program results - specific projects near different settlements, successful projects, absorbed funds.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________18


The recommendations given by the respondents by themselves in free form on the informing on the Programme are related to an overall increase in the information volume and transparency in its implementation. � The most used, the most effective so far and the most preferred communication channels for information about OPE are the national electronic media (radio and television). This refers both to the target group as a whole and to the the defined subgroups whose purposeful informing seems to be important to the overall success of the CP. It can be concluded that 1) the indicators for evaluation of the CP implementation, associated with a number of video spots/broadcastings on the radio/TV, are selected in accordance with the attitudes of the audience and 2) the use of this communication channel is effective and should be continued. In the light of the upper point, when developing the content of the information transmitted in the video spots/broadcasts a greater emphasis can be placed on the already approved projects and projects under implementation rather than on the programme as a whole. � Internet in general is the third most widely used communication channel, a preferred source of information by the whole range, and a widely preferred source specified by target subgroups. It is appropriate to encourage the activation of the presence of information about OPE on the Internet not only through the website to the MoEW and the OPE, but through the web publicationsin different media , common and specialized news sites and etc. � Especially in the narrower target subgroup a desire for informing through brochures and leaflets is clearly outlined but has not been met yet. It is appropriate to consider the possibility of printing a certain number brochures that provide information on topics about which has been stated interest – objectively, brochures are a very suitable information form for specific projects and disbursed funds. However, the number and method of printing (e.g. recycled paper) should be carefully specified in order to preserve the ecological spirit and to avoid reverse, negative effect among people who strongly define themselves as interested in the status and protection of the environment.

Thus, on the basis of the responses of the respondents and the dynamics in the implementation of the OPE 2007-2013 by 2011, as well as the planning of the next programming period, it can be assumed that the general public sufficiently there is general information about OPE and has supported the development of public awareness and understanding of the importance of the quality of life of people in our society. Against this background, in the next stage of the implementation of the communication plan of the OPE it is advisable to consider greater diversification of the target groups, messages and channels for information.

For example, the implementation of the partnership principle, as stipulated in Article 31 of the directive on waste management, requires major improvements in the current system for accessing information of citizens and civil society organisations. This requires greater transparency and more public participation in the process of drafting national strategies, programmes and plans, as well as in the process of selecting the projects and their implementation.

In order to achieve this, it is necessary to create an informed public opinion in terms of integrated management systems for water and waste, as it is clearly promoting the objectives and the capacity of individuals and communities to participate in the implementation of these policies and objectives on the basis of good practices from EU countries.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________19


Recommendations for the Communication plan for the next programming period

Recommendations: A special attention should be paid to beneficiaries in the Communication plan for the next programming period regarding the best practices for project management, the compliance with the national and EU legislation in the implementation of projects, the specific instructions and guidelines of the MA, the preparation of quality proposals. This could be achieved by organizing seminars, press conferences, media events, presentations and etc. and would help to reduce mistakes and omissions committed by beneficiaries in the management and execution of contracts under the OPE. A more explicit commitment of the objectives and priorities of the MEW in the context of the implementation of the OPE and in the perspective of the updated priorities, objectives and measurment indicators, which are set in the plans for the next programming period to the operational program and MEW are necessary. This is necessary for the "water" and "waste" sectors, but largely applies for the conservation and restoration of biodiversity. Especially it is necessary, the objectives and indicators to be presented in the messages to the general public, and also for the part of the specialized audiences plenty of clear, simple and exoteric language, without having to give much details and without having to explain further. With such an approach will contribute to the creation of a more active supportive environment for the implementation of the programme, will provide public support and create better condition for the realization of the horizontal principles of the community in the implementation of the programme in Bulgaria. Along with this will reduce opportunities and reasons for erroneous interpretations and will avoid the nurture of perverse incentives in the formulation, application and implementation of the projects. In order to improve the quality of life of the population in the country, the operational programme is funding activities aimed at protecting and improving the status of water, improving waste management and soil protection, conservation of biodiversity and nature protection. The types of activities for which the funding is provided by OPE, reflect both the national environmental protection policy and the policies and legislation of the European Union.By OPE is financing the construction and reconstruction of water supply and sewage networks, sewage treatment facilities for drinking and waste waters, regional waste management systems, the closure/reclamation of municipal landfills, and plans for the management of the national and natural parks and reserves, etc. For the period until 2011 is not provided enough clear information in understandable language for the general audience about relationship between operations financed under OPE activities and policies relating to the environment of the Ministry of environment and water. And indirect implementation of the objectives of the program is achieved by changing the public consent and attitudes to the environment.It is necessary to work towards a change in the thinking of the population that is most easily can be done through explanations and short and clear messages. An appropriate example of such a message is that by saving water, through its "anti-pollution" reducing the quantities of water for purification and environmental pressures. Or the explanation for the harmfulness of waste generated indirectly reduce the quantities of waste through separation/recovery. Realization of smooth transition to transition to the integrated management of the water of the basin principle and integrated waste management for ensuring a healthy and favorable environment for the population and for more sparingly and effective use of water resources and the use of resources by the recycling of waste and achieve a "recycling society" requires a more ambitious objectives in the planning and implementation of information and communication activities to understand and support the citizens targeting the huge resources in these areas, and to participate in the achievement of the goals that our society and the MEW will set.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________20


CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. RECOMMENDATIONS AT PRIORITY AXES LEVEL

Recommendation 1 There’s an extended process of projects elaboration and evaluating concerning priority axes 1 and 2 due to weaknesses in the project design and planning. This makes it necessary to create mechanisms to provide technical assistance for developing projects at national level. The technical assistence aims at ensuring high standards and shortening the project preparation and evaluation terms as well as those for the conclusion of grant award contract.

Recommendation 2 The same approach for introduction of technical assistance might be used for priority axis 3. Moreover, it is necessary to consider financial instruments financial instruments within the priority axis, which to allow wider involvement of civil society structures (NGO) – prioritising partnerships with them, establishment of separate procedures for them.

Recommendation 3 It is taken into account the necessary to undertake measures to formalise the status of projects under priority axes 1 and 2 in order to facilitate the resolution of issues related to the expropriation of land, the provision of technical assistance and other resources for their realization.

Recommendation 4 Specific sub targets and operational objectives should be more clearly defined and bound to the terms. There is a need of a clearly and precisely defined prioritization of species and habitats, areas and zones, subject to conservation and/or restoration. The selected indicators should be diversified and bound to the sub targets in order to enable the evaluation of the full extent of progress on the priority implementation.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MINIMIZING THE MISTAKES COMMITED BY THE BENEFICIARIES

Recommendation 1 Beneficiaries to conduct active consultations with the MA in the process of project preparation. Recommendation 2 To be defined detailed requirements for the project preparation and the basic tasks which the Assignor should set for the contractor under the public procurement. Recommendation 3 To comply the technical specifications/assignments in the documentation for conducting the procedure for selection of consultant/designer with the requirements of OPE.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________21


Recommendation 4 To use data from the NSI when determining the present population and perspective for the project period. Recomendation 5 When performing a procedure for selection of a contractor should be set requirements that guarantee the consultant's experience rather than the consultant to be chosen upon the lowest price criterion. Recomendation 6 The Contractor to assist the consultant/designer when researching and collecting information for the industry in the settlement. Recomendation 7 To define in details in the terms of reference the specific tasks of the performer. To examine the infiltrated waters and to explore the generated quantities in the PEP. Recomendation 8 To claim and collect accurate data from the operating enterprise on the status of the existing water supply networks. Recomendation 9 The consultant/designer to explore all enterprises that generate waste water. Recomendation 10 The beneficiary has to prepare a general feasibility study for the water supply and sewerage system ( part of which is the treatment plant). Recomendation 11 To clearly define the functions of each member of the management team of the project. To identify the tasks that require external assistance. To comply the management of the project with the beneficiary's management and control systems and the guidelines and instructions of the MA. Recomendation 12 The consultant/beneficiary should be fully aware of and to observe the applicable methodology used for preparation of CBA for projects under axes 1 and 2 of OPE.

3. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OVERCOMING OF DIFFICULTIES AND PROBLEMS IN THE EXECUTION OF GC

Recommendation 1 To develop detailed guidelines and instructions from the MA for good implementation of the funded projects with examples of best practices and presenting the most common mistakes committed by the beneficiaries. The guidelines and instructions should be periodically updated with the new errors detected in the process of management verification and beneficiaries should be currently informed about the latest updates. Recommendation 2 To be provided consultations to beneficiaries by the MA and/or the IB in the event of cases and problems during the implementation of projects. To maintain a list on the website of the programme


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________22


with the different beneficiaries’ cases and problems and ways for their effective solution. To inform beneficiaries about the existence of this list Recommendation 3 To organize training courses for the beneficiaries for good project management, which includes all stages of preparation, execution, reporting, storage and archiving of the project documentation. Recommendation 4 To update the financial management and control systems according to the guidelines, directions and instructions of the Managing Authority. Recommendation 5 To establish, maintain and develop the beneficiaries' administrative capacity to manage and control investment projects. Recommendation 6 To be defined in the technical specification and the draft contracts for the project management by external consultants clear, precise and detailed requirements to the consultant's team and the activities that it must provide to the Assignor. Recommendation 7 To reduce the time limits for verification of the beneficiary's requests for payments. Recommendation 8 To give an opportunity to submit documents electronically at application, approval, implementation and project reporting stages. Recommendation 9

• To preserve, maintain and develop the administrative capacity and the accumulated know-how and best practices of the Managing authority and Intermediate body.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REDUCTION OF ERRORS AND IRREGULARITIES IN ORGANIZING PUBLIC PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES BY BENEFICIARIES

Recommendation 1 To be regularly updated on the website of the operational programme a list of the most common errors in the public procurement conduction and to publicate examples of best practices for conducted public procurement - for example in the determination of minimum requirements for the applicants, assessment methodologies, technical specifications and etc. Recommendation 2 o be organized trainings for the beneficiaries, which to present best practices and to discuss the infringements found when conducting public procurement.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________23


5. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REDUCING THE ERRORS AND IRREGULARITIES IN PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND REPORTING

Recommendation1 To electronize the documentation for current and future beneficiaries, the project documentation and the implementation of GC; Recommendation 2 To elaborate detailed instructions for conducting of external audit of the projects. To set minimum requirements for the external auditors and to clearly define the scope of their work. To lay down a requirement the external auditors, whose CVs are enclosed to the tender bid, to carry out on-site inspections at the the beneficiaries and their every day time-sheets to be approved by the project management team leader; Recommendation 3 All internal rules and procedures should be part of an integrated manual. The project management team should become familiar with the approved rules and regulations for conclusion of the GC; Recommendation 4 To be provided a separate archive for storing of the project document and to appoint an official responsible for the records. All documents from the archive to be transmitted and received with delivery and acceptance protocols; Recommendation 5 In the beneficiary's procedural manual to be created a separate chapter on registration, accounting and reporting irregularities; Recommendation 6 To be determined a lawyer responsible for the timely updating of the internal rules for public procurement procedures; Recommendation 7 To provide periodic specialized trainings for beneficiaries which to introduce updated information about the most common mistakes in the project management and implementation, the new cases of irregularities and examples of good practice; Recommendation 8 To be provided an additional remuneration for the employees of the municipalities who participate in the project team; Recommendation 9 If the beneficiary does not have experts with the necessary qualifications and experience, he should hire external consultants;


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________24


Recommendation 10 The beneficiary's employees should be acquainted with the requirements for registration, recording and reporting of irregularities; Recommendation 11 Before signing the specific contract, the text should be carefully reviewed and clean from any burdensome and not working schemes, regulating the obligations of the Assignor and the conditions for acceptance of the work of the performer. The project team ensures strict compliance with the terms of contracts; Recommendation 12 To be established clear rules for reporting the work of the project team; Recommendation 13 To be introduced current monitoring of the contract enforcement and to be appointed an expert committee to accept the work of the external contractors. In cases where the beneficiary does not have at his disposal the necessary experts who can assess the quality of the contractor's work, he should hire external experts; Recommendation 14 To be planned in advance all necessary actions to be undertaken in relation to the procedures for change of the statute of the agricultural land and to appoint officials responsible for starting and monitoring of the procedures; Recommendation 15 To be prepared written action plans with stipulated all authorities, with which it is necessary to coordinate the projects and at what stage of planning what and where is needed to be agreed, lists of all necessary documents and permits to be issued, when and at what point it is necessary to be issued, the authority that issues them, what is necessary for their issuance, etc.; Recommendation 16 To be exercised control to the contract for the construction supervision by the Assignor. To be required in the technical specification a minimum number of people dealing with the project document; Recommendation 17 With the consultant's help the beneficiary to review the investment projects before the announcement of the procedure for the construction works for any inaccuracies and/or errors, or necessary change of their scope. The construction supervision should observe strictly the LSP. The construction supervision to be monitored whether it performs its duties. To taken into account the restrictions of the PPA regarding changes in already concluded contracts; Recommendation 18


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________25


To exercise control by the Contractor and/or Consultant on the implementation of the construction works. The tender procedure to require the submission of a detailed implementation timetable. To be imposed predefined in the contract sanctions in case of violation of the internal deadlines, not only of the final deadline, predefined in the contract; Recommendation 19 The contract to provide the imposition of sanctions and/or termination of the contract for not providing the resources needed by the contractor; Recommendation 20 Duly and timely to be drawn up documents for the time, manner of determining, causes and nature of the occurred unforeseen problem and its solution. To prepare a detailed bill of quantities with analysis prices for every additional construction works, including the required expertise from the construction supervision; Recommendation 21 To be carried out current monitoring by the Assignor of the performance of the author's supervision; Recommendation 22 To be exercised control by the Supervisory and the Assignor for compliance with the provided by the designer technology. To be taken into account the restrictions of the PPA regarding changes in already concluded contracts; Recommendation 23 To be exercised control by the Supervisory and the Assignor for respect of the project including the offered materials for performance. To be taken into account the restrictions of the PPA regarding changes in already concluded contracts.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________26


6. CONCLUSIONS Mechanisms for coordination and consultation between the operational programmes are implemented for the period considered, especially with the Operational Programme "Regional Development" in the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works in order to coordinate the plans between the two ministries and the programmes on issues related to underground and ground infrastructure - lighting, WSS, etc., in order to optimize the selection, funding and implementation of projects under the procedures that affect such infrastructure. The Managing Authority and the Intermediate Body have stable capacity in place for programme management and implementation, following a number of improvements that address the weaknesses and omissions identified during the initial period. It should be emphasized that there is a need of ensuring sustainability and preservation of the achieved administrative capacity and good practices at the MA and the IB for the next programming period, too. The opportunities should be considered regarding the structural differentiation of the programme management and its separation from the purely administrative operations of the Ministry.

The work of the MA and the IB can be substantially improved through development and introduction of a modern system for information, communication, monitoring and reporting of projects, procedures and priority axes that offers functionality that facilitates management decision-making and monitoring, in addition to the capabilities offered by the UMIS. Significant results might be achieved when combining this information system with the development of regional structures of the Ministry with the purpose of involving them in specific commitments in the process of evaluation and monitoring of the implementation of the OPE. The system of indicators to measure the progress of OPE implementation needs thorough review and clear definition of the main indicators and output criteria at the different levels. There’s a necessary the indicator to comply not only with the achievement of the objectives, but to be defined in a clear and understandable language.

The practice of the MA to perform regular analysis of the on-going absorption of the funds under the individual priority axes is of great importance for the timely allocation of funds from the priority axes with lower absorption rate to the ones with higher absorption rate.

Above all should be noted the positive changes in the MA and IB, the most important of which are: Conclusion 1 Improvement of the administrative capacity of the MA and IB and maintaining the highly qualified and motivated team through reduced to a minimum staff turnover during the period considered and conducting of numerous of specialized trainings and exchange of experience with leading professional bodies of the member states Conclusion 2 There is present data for updating, improvement and simplifying of the management and control systems and the Procedure Manual of the MA and IB. Conclusion 3 Significant increase in the percentage of contracted amounts and in their absorption rate under the programme as compared to the period 2007 – 2010.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________27


Conclusion 4 There’s an improved communication with beneficiaries and conduct of a significant number of consultations with beneficiaries aiming to improve the quality of the elaborated project proposals and facilitating beneficiaries in the process of their preparation, finalization and submission.

Conclusion 5 The increased number of specialized trainings for beneficiaries provided by the MA and IB is of great importance. Conclusion 6 Information about the most common mistakes committed by beneficiaries in the project implementation and management, including in conducting the public procurement procedures, is published on the website of the programme in order to overcome repetitive beneficiaries’ errors. Conclusion 7 An improvement in the efficiency of the control systems of the MA and IB was registered in checks of the expenditures declared for verification by the beneficiaries. Conclusion 8 The terms for carrying out verifications by the IB and for reimbursement of the beneficiaries’ resources are shortened. Conclusion 9 An efficient use of the technical assistance under the programme is observed for 2011. Conclusion 10 The measures for promotion of the programme activities and results achieved are significantly improved.

On-going Evaluation Report on The Implementation of the...

Documents

Transcript of On-going Evaluation Report on The Implementation of the...