STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION

EU-Regional Policyand Cohesion 1

Structural Funds and Accession

SPP BUILDING IMPLEMENTATION CAPACITY

Training seminar on evaluation Prague 26-27 February 2004

A VIEW FROM THE COMMISSION ON EVALUATION

IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC

Pascal Boijmans

European CommissionDG Regional Policy



STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION

• Experience with ex-ante evaluation in the Czech Republic

- strong points- points that need further attention

• Building up evaluation capacity in the Czech Republic

- evaluation plan- organisation- financing

• Evaluation vs. Monitoring

• Conclusions and recommendations

• Sources of information



EXPERIENCE EX-ANTE EVALUATION IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC

• NDP: Berman Group, Charles University, Faculty of Science

• OP Industry & Enterprise: VSE, March Consulting, IFO Institute

• OP HRD: National Observatory for Employment and Training

• OP RDMFA: Institute for Economic and Environmental Policy, University of Economics (VSE)

• OP Environment: Cityplan

• OP Transport: DHV CR

• OP Tourism: Europroject, Redeco

• JROP: VSE

• Prague Obj. 2: DHV CR

• Prague: Obj. 3: National Observatory for Employment and Training




• genuine efforts to follow EU guidelines: working paper no 2 on ex ante evaluation

- lessons from the past- socio-economic analysis- choice of strategy and priorities: internal and

external coherence- quantification of objectives- expected socio-economic impact and allocation of

resources- implementation arrangements

• separate Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs) for each programme

• involvement universities and research institutes




• standard Terms of Reference

• restricted tender or direct agreement

• guarantee of independence evaluator

- internal or external evaluator?

• financing

- ex ante evaluations 2004-06: national budget

• interactive process with programming exercise




• Case study: ex-ante evaluation NDP by Berman Group

- consortium of Czech and foreign experts

- involvement Dept. of Social Geography and Regional Development, Faculty of Science, Charles University

- interactive exercise with programming: large influence on final NDP

- concise report with clear recommendations

- input for negotiation mandate EC



BUILDING UP OF EVALUATION CAPACITY IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC

• COMMITMENT IN CHAPTER 21 FOR THE CZECH REPUBLIC:

• Binding rules will be set up for the evaluation of programmes and projects

• a permanent evaluation body will be created within each Managing Authority ate the level of OPs

• MRD will be responsible for the overall coordination of separate evaluation units




• TEXT IN COMMUNITY SUPPORT FRAMEWORK STATES:

• A part of the budget under heading TA will be reserved to develop the evaluation capacity for 2004-2006 programmes and for future 2007-2013 programmes.

• Examples of areas to be covered are macro-economic assessment, reliability of indicator system and horizontal priorities

• A specific evaluation unit in Ministry for Regional Development is in charge of coordination




• DEVELOPMENT OF AN EVALUATION PLAN

• Evaluation is a learning instrument

• Differentiation in approach between CSF and OPs

• CSF:- horizontal issues and priorities- Lisbon strategy- macro-economic assessment (HERMIN model)- reliability monitoring and indicator system- preparation for period 2007-2013

• OPs:- ex-ante next period 2007-2013- sectoral issues

• Coordination role for MRD: exchange of information

• Focus on limited number of evaluations




• ORGANISATIONAL ASPECTS

• Specific evaluation unit in MRD

• Interministerial working group

• Strengthen evaluation capacity within national authorities

• Development of tools how to use and spread added value of evaluations

• Discussion of outcome evaluations in Monitoring Committees: trigger for in depth discussions




• FINANCING

• Technical Assistance: rule no. 11 of Reg. 1145/2003 (not capped)

• separate heading in TA-plan

• Eligible expenditure:

- external expertise

- additional staffing (capped)

- training

- workshops, seminars, study visits



EVALUATION VS. MONITORING• different activities, but clearly depending on each-other

• importance of well functioning and reliable monitoring system is a precondition for good evaluation

- MSSF: Central, Benefit, Monit- VIOLA- and other systems

• training of staff on input of data

• limited number of high quality and representative indicators

- baseline- target- source of information

• Guidelines EC on indicators for new Member States



CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONSPart I

• Development of standard Terms of Reference for all evaluations

• EC: preference for restricted tenders

• Ex-ante evaluation: parallel and interactive process with programming exercise

• Continue involvement of universities and research institutes

• Evaluation reports: concise and clear recommendations



CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONSPart II

• Evaluation plan: focus on limited number of evaluations

• Differentiation in evaluation approach between CSF and OPs

• Develop tools how to use best the added value and results of evaluations

• Develop evaluation expertise within national authorities

• Assure reliability of monitoring systems as basis for evaluation tasks



INFORMATION SOURCES

• Evaluation Section of Inforegio website:

• http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/evaluation_en.htm

• Commission working documents

• Evaluations undertaken for the Commission

• The new Evaluation GUIDE (forthcoming)

STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION

Documents

Transcript of STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION