15
1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007-2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007- 2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation (2007-2013) Lessons learned and Future (post 2014) Any Other Business and Conclusions Content of the presentation 1

1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

1

• Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007-2013)

• Closure & Reporting (2004-2006)• Systems and Simplification (2007-2013

and post 2013) • Monitoring & Evaluation (2007-2013)• Lessons learned and Future (post 2014) • Any Other Business and Conclusions

Content of the presentation

1

Page 2: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

2

3. Systems and simplification (programming period 2007-2013 and

post 2013)

3.1. Simplification of EU funds implementation system

2

Page 3: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

3

Flat-rate for indirect costs in ESF projects

• 6 MS (BG, CZ, LT, PL, RO, SI) already use flat-rate for indirect costs in ESF projects

• 6 MS (CY, EE, HU, LV, MT, SK) plan to use flat-rate for indirect costs in ESF projects (methodology isn’t approved yet)

3

Page 4: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

4

• 7 MS (CY, CZ, EE, LT, LV, PL, SI) plan to use flat-rate for indirect costs in ERDF projects

• None of the above MS have the methodology for calculation of the ERDF flat–rate

Flat-rate for indirect costs in ERDF projects

4

Page 5: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

5

Lump sums (simplification; methodology)

• 8 MS (CY, CZ, EE, HU, LT, LV, PL, SK) plan to use lump sums as the tool for simplification

• None of the above MS have methodology for

lump sums

• BG, MT, RO, SI do not plan to use lump sums as the tool for simplification

5

Page 6: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

6

Unit costs (simplification; methodology)

• CY, CZ, EE, HU, LT, LV, PL, SI, SK plan to use unit costs as the tool for simplification

• None of the MS has methodology for unit costs

• BG, MT, RO do not plan to use unit costs as the tool for simplification

6

Page 7: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

7

Simplification in national/regional EU funds

management system (I)

I Project selection and evaluation

7

LV, RO

All except CZ

PL

BG, CY, CZ, EE, HU, LV, RO, SI, SKBG, CY, CZ, LT,

LV, RO, SK

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Provideconsultations onfilling out project

applications

Introduceminimalistic

application formsand less

attachments

Opts for shorterlist of criteria

Enforce shortertime for project

assessment

Move to first come- first served

approach

Page 8: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

8

II Project implementation

Simplification in national/regional EU funds

management system (II)

8

All except RO All except EE

RO

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Perform/plan to perform thesimplification in risk-based

controls

Perform/plan to perform thesimplification in monitoring

system and standartization of thereporting forms

Uses simplified publicprocurement for private

beneficiaries 

Page 9: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

9

Simplification in national/regional EU funds management system (III)

III Payments

11 MS (except MT) make advance payments available for beneficiaries Advance payments to public sector (including municipalities and NGO’s)(BG, CY, CZ, EE, HU, LT, LV, PL, RO, SK, SI) Advance payments to private beneficiaries (BG, CY, CZ, EE, HU, LT, LV, PL, RO) Some MS pay or plan to pay advance payments to the contractors

9

Page 10: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

10

3. Systems and simplification

(programming period 2007-2013

and post 2013)

3.2. The role of the MAs in the implementation system

10

Page 11: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

11

Verifications carried out by MAs

• In 6 MS (CZ, EE, LT, LV, PL) verifications are delegated to IBs (MA and CA not directly involved)

• In other 6 MS – BG, HU, MT, RO, SI, SK – mixed verifications

• In 6 MS (BG, CY, MT, RO, SI, SK) declarations of expenditure are verified by MAs

11

Page 12: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

12

Methods of double financing management

2 (LV, SI)

1 (CZ)

4 (CY, HU, MT, RO)

5 (BG, EE, LT, PL, SK)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

IT system withinformation on major

sources of publicfunding

Stamping paymentclaims

Through on the spotchecks

Targeted (risk-based)approach

12

Page 13: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

13

Specific guidelines for

monitoring revenue generated projects

• No specific guidelines for monitoring revenue generated projects in 7 MS (BG, CZ, MT, LT, RO, SI, SK)

• In CY, EE, HU, LV, PL there are specific guidelines used or being elaborated (contents calculation methods of funding gap, explanation what is considered as a revenue, rules concerning monitoring and reporting of revenues)

13

Page 14: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

14

Number of employees of all working for EU funds

financed from TA

BG All 800 employees in the CCU, OP MAs, IBs, CA and AA receive bonuses from TA  

CY Not known yet, currently proposals are being submitted  

EE 330 

HU 1000 

LT Approx. 723

LV 558 

MT 20% 

PL

The total number working in MAs and IBs is 7519, including technical staff, finances services and legal assistance. From those 6838 employees is financed from technical assistance: 5652 in the framework of technical assistance priority axis in operational programmes and 1186 from TA OP  

SI Approx. one third  

SK Approx. 1450  

14

Page 15: 1 Progress and Crisis (2004-2006 and 2007- 2013) Closure & Reporting (2004-2006) Systems and Simplification (2007-2013 and post 2013) Monitoring & Evaluation

15

TA financing (%) planned in 2009

1

0

50

10

0

75

10

55

45

70

30

80

40

15

5 4

10

2

15

3

20

10

5 1 4

10

10

10

10

2 2

15

3

10

3

10

10 2

0

5 10

25

15

30

5 5

35

5

25

25

4

10

5 10

35

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Staff 10 50 100 75 10 55 45 70 30 80 40

Research 15 5 4 10 2 15 3

Audit and controls 20 10 5 1 4 10 10

Evaluations 10 10 2 2 15 3 10 3 10

Publicity 10 20 5 10 25 15 30 5 5

Other 35 5 25 25 4 10 5 10 35

BG CY CZ EE HU LV MT PL RO SI SK

15