MONITORING

ERASMUS – MUNDUS ALENA KURUCZOVA

NITRA, 16 AUGUST 2007 AGRICULTURAL PAYING AGENCY

CONTENTCONTENT

1. Role of APA

2. Monitoring, Monitoring system, Logic of intervention, Indicators

3. Case study

4. Monitoring in APA, practical examples

APAAPA

Entry to EU – CAP The only agency in Slovakia providing supports to the

sectors of agriculture, forestry and fisheries Currently implemented programmes and measures:

EAGGF Guarantee EAGGF GuidanceFIFG

National supports – Decree of Minister yearly – paid out approx. 17 billion SKK (425 million

€)

SOP A-RDSOP A-RD

Objective 1

RDPRDP

Objective 2

Implementation of the SOP A-RD and RDP Implementation of the SOP A-RD and RDP NUTS II level NUTS II level

BASIC LEGISLATIONBASIC LEGISLATION Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 laying down general

provisions on the Structural Funds Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 on rural development

financing from EAGGF Council Regulation (EC) No 1263/1999 on financial

instrument for fisheries guidance (FIFG) Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on support for rural

development by the European Agricultural fund for rural development (2007-2013)– Sectoral Operational Programme –“Agriculture and rural development“– Rural Development Plan 2004-2006– Methodological Working Paper 3 –Indicators for Monitoring and

Evaluation (EC)

MONITORINGMONITORING

MONITORINGMONITORING

involves the collection, analysis, communication and use of information about the project’s progress,

should highlight strengths and weaknesses in project implementation and enable responsible personnel to deal with problems, improve performance, build on successes and adapt to changing circumstances.

MONITORING SYSTEMMONITORING SYSTEM

Monitoring systems and procedures should provide the mechanism by which relevant information is provided to the right people at the right time to help them make informed decisions

PRINCIPLE OF GOOD PRACTICEPRINCIPLE OF GOOD PRACTICE(Monitoring system)(Monitoring system)

Keep the users of information clearly in mind Build on local information systems and sources Collect only the minimum amount of information

required Triangulate There must be a plan against which performance can

be assessed Before project/programme implementation

MONITORING IN A PROJECT MONITORING IN A PROJECT CYCLECYCLE

Aid Delivery methods: Volume1:Project Cycle management. Brussels: Guidelines. March 2004

1. PROGRAMMING

2. IDENTIFICATION

5. IMPLEMENTATION

6. EVALUATION

3.FORMULATION

4. FINANCING

SLOVAK EXAMPLESLOVAK EXAMPLE

YEAR SAPARD SOP 2004-2006 RDP 2007-2013

2003-2004 Implementation, Mid-term evaluation

Programming, Identification, Formulation, Financing,Implementation

2005 Implementation -monitoring

Implementation

2006 Implementation -monitoring

Implementation -monitoring

Programming, Identification, Formulation, Financing, Ex-ante evaluation

2007 Monitoring, Ex-post evaluation

Implementation -monitoring

(Implementation)

2008 Monitoring Implementation -monitoring

Implementation –monitoring, on going evaluation

LOGIC OF THE INTERVENTIONLOGIC OF THE INTERVENTION

1. Setting of objectives Operational objectives Specific objectives Global objectives

2. Financial allocation

Bottom - up or top-down

INTERVENTION LOGIC OF A INTERVENTION LOGIC OF A PROGRAMMEPROGRAMME

 

Impacts

Results

Outputs

Programme

operations Inputs

Operational objectives

Specific

objectives

Global objectives

Programme objectives

INDICATORINDICATOR

Specific

Measurable

Available/Achievable

Relevant

Time

INPUT INDICATORSINPUT INDICATORS

Budget allocated to each level of the

assistance Eligible costs in SKK, EUR

of which: co-financing of EU co-financing of state budget

of which: eligible costs in individual regions, on priorities, measures, programme

ALLOW FINANCIAL MONITORING

OUTPUT INDICATORSOUTPUT INDICATORS

Activities, measured in physical units

No of supported firms Ths. Liters of pasteurised milk Kilometers of newly built roads No of built stables No of participants in training

RESULT INDICATORSRESULT INDICATORS

Direct and immediate effect brought by a programme.They provide information on changes .

Increase of production of pasteurized milk in % Increase of production capacity in % % of trainees successfully completing the course

(men/women) Decrease of transport costs

IMPACT INDICATORSIMPACT INDICATORS

Consequences of the programme beyond the immediate effects on its direct beneficiaries.Global or specific

No of safeguarded and created jobs a year after the project realisation (specific impact)

No of nights sold per year in assisted accommodation –after year

Increase of GDP/per capita in the region (global impact)

Decrease of unemployment

Example: Possible indicators for a Example: Possible indicators for a major infrastructure project major infrastructure project (road (road

construction) construction)

Description Indicators

Specific impact

Global

Increased safety

Increase in socio-economic activity

Decrease of accident rate by 15 %

Increase of regional GDP per capita by 5%

Result Reduce journey time and transport costs

Time saving in 20 min. Cost savings by 15%

Output Construction of road 10 km of constructed road

   Zdroj: Working Paper 3.

Example -Intervention logicExample -Intervention logic Overall Objective

To increase labour productivity and the competitiveness of agricultural holdings while maintaining environmental protection

Specific Objectives

To reduce production costs and improve working conditions, To increase the competitiveness of agricultural production, To introduce new environmentally-friendly technologies, To increase the level of hygiene conditions and animal welfare.

Operational Objectives (Indicative Activities)

Construction, reconstruction and modernization of buildings/facilities Acquisition and installation of new and reconstruction/modernization

of existing technical and technological equipment Construction, reconstruction and modernization of fruit orchards and

small fruit, asparagus and medicinal plants plantations; Reconstruction and modernization of vineyards; Strengthening of the agriculture in rural areas and creating

supplementary income sources Output:

Total number of projects in measure Number of projects according to the main type of holding production Number of projects according to the type of the investment Number of projects for environmentally-friendly investment Number of projects where the owner or co-owner is a woman Number of projects of young farmers Number of projects according to the legal forms Number of projects according to the place of realization Number of projects according to the type of less-favoured area

Result: Result of the operations for the accounting period in assisted

holdings (ths. SKK) Total income (ths. SKK)

Impact: Average number of employees (number of persons) Number of created jobs - permanent (number of jobs) Number of created jobs – seasonal (number of jobs) Labour productivity counted from the added value per 1 employee

(ths. SKK)

MONITORING & EVALUATIONMONITORING & EVALUATION

INPUT OUTPUT RESULT IMPACT

MONITORING EVALUATION

MONITORING & EVALUATIONMONITORING & EVALUATION

INPUT OUTPUT RESULT IMPACT

MONITORING EVALUATION

MONITORING AND EVALUATION MONITORING AND EVALUATION SummarySummary

WHO?WHO? Internal management responsibility

WHEN?WHEN? Continuous

WHY?WHY? Check progress, take remedial action, update plans

LINK TOLINK TO:input, output, result

WHO?WHO? Usually incorporates external inputs

WHEN?WHEN? Periodic WHY?WHY? Learn broad

lessons applicable to other programmes/projects and as an input to policy review

LINK TOLINK TO: result, impact

RESPONSIBILITY FOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR MONITORINGMONITORING

Managing authority and Monitoring Committee with the help of physical and financial indicators

Team workTeam work

MONITORING IN APAMONITORING IN APA

Agreement on Delegation of competencies between MA and APA

Responsibility – Monitoring division of APA

ORGANISATION CHARTORGANISATION CHART

Monitoring Division Director: 1

SOP and RDP Department Head of Department: 1 Officers: 4

Support of IS Department Head of Department: 1 Officers: 4

MAIN ACTIVITIES OF MDMAIN ACTIVITIES OF MD

Monitoring of projects, measures, programmes

Statistic, Reporting Indicators

DATA SOURCEDATA SOURCE

Application forms Monitoring reports List of :

– Approved projects– Rejected projects

Additional information from beneficiaries Information from authorisation division and

paying section

MONITORING OF PROJECTS –MONITORING OF PROJECTS –MONITORING REPORTSMONITORING REPORTS

SAPARD– Reports every 6 months – 5 years after finishig the project (Statement of Finances

& Declaration of taxes)

SOP &RDP- Reports yearly - Last report after 1 year of the finishing the project

RDP 2007-2013- Reports after the finishing of a project

MAIN REPORTSMAIN REPORTS

Standard monthly reports“: List of submitted, approved, rejected, finished, projects and payments Summary table of the commitments and payments Evaluation of calls for submission of applications

Reports for on-going and annual reports about implementation of SOP a RDP:

SOP – tables according to the requirements of MA CSF RDP - tables according to the requirements of MA (Rural Development Dep.)

Progress report for Fishery requirement from DG FISH (annual)

„Brussels monitoring tables“ Common indicator tables for monitoring rural development programming (DG

AGRI) – annual For SOP and RDP

Unexpected, irregular and immediately needed reports

Practical example - Collection of indicatorsPractical example - Collection of indicators MMeasure easure Investment in agricultural holdingsInvestment in agricultural holdings

Planned value of indicators Planned value of indicators Part of application form Part of application form

Real value of indicators Real value of indicators Monitoring report from beneficiary Monitoring report from beneficiary

Type Name Unit Periodicity of monitor.

2003 2004 2005 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Gross economic result Ths. SKK yearlyTotal income Ths. SKK yearly

Average number of employees No. yearly

Number of created jobs - permanent No. yearlyNumber of created jobs - seasonal No. yearlyLabour productivity counted from the added value Ths. SKK yearly

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

EXPECTED VALUES OF INDICATORS - MEASURE 1.1 - INVESTMENTS IN AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS

Impact

Result

Physical outputs: State planned physical outputs, which you expect in the year after realization of investment (e. g. purchase dairy facility for 500 dairy cattle, 2 transports vehicles, 1 high - lift, 3 transporters, reconstruction of 1 building, purchase PC...)

Output

VALUE BEFORE THE REALIZATION OF

PROJECTEXPECTED (PLANNED) VALUESMEASURABLE INDICATOR

Practical example of indicators – Practical example of indicators – Supplementary Supplementary monitoring datamonitoring data (Common indicator table for monitoring (Common indicator table for monitoring rural development programming) I.rural development programming) I.

1. MAIN PRODUCTION Please class your farm in one of following category according to the main type of production which is most shared in turnover of your farm.

Field crops Catle-rearing and fattening Horticulture Pigs

Vineyards Poultry

Fruit cultivation Other types of livestock-farming

Mixed production and other vegetable production Other

Dairying

Part of applications form Different for each measure

2. TYPE OF INVESTMENT Which is main type of your investment? Please choose only one of following category:

Buildings for Cattle Plant and mobile equipment

Pighouses Facilities for manufacture and direct sale of farm products

Other livestock building Facilities for the diversification of activities on the holding

Other farm buildings Other

Greenhouses and related equipment

Practical example of indicators – Practical example of indicators – Supplementary Supplementary monitoring datamonitoring data (Common indicator table for monitoring (Common indicator table for monitoring rural development programming) II.rural development programming) II.

3. AGE OF APPLICANT Is applicant under 40 years of age on the day of submission of application? yes no

4. GREEN INVESTMENTS Is main aim of your investment protecting and enhancing the enviroment as well as livestock hygiene and animal welfare? yes no

If yes, how many % of total eleigible costs of project are green investments? .............%

5. SECTORS In which sector will be your investment directed? Cattle Cereals

Pigs Oils plants

Sheeps Feedingstuffs

Goats Fruits

Poultry Vegetables

Rabbits Potatoes Horses Vineyards

Bees Herbs

Other animal production Protein seeds Other vegetable production Sugar beet

INFORMATION / REPORTS FOR:INFORMATION / REPORTS FOR:

Management of APA EC Beneficiaries &Public Managing authority Ministry of finance, Office of Governement Others on request

INFORMATION SYSTEMSINFORMATION SYSTEMS

SAPARD – „ISAS“accounting systemSOP – „ITMS“, centraly prepared by the

MA CSFRDP 2004-2006 – „IS PLUS“

REASON FOR ITMSREASON FOR ITMS

System implementation: - entry condition for SR to EU, - providing full support for whole process of management of

structural founds and cohesion fund;- securing of consistence and transparency of whole process

System preparation: MA CSF - Ministry of Construction and Regional Development in cooperation with the Ministry of Finance of SR

System provision – public international tender – winner: SIEMENS BUSINESS SERVICES

System development from 28.11.2003

DESCRIPTION OF ITMSDESCRIPTION OF ITMS

ITMS comprises the following processes:

1. Programming process: registration, evaluation and selection of project proposal, contracting

2. Monitoring process: monitoring of financial and progress indicators, reporting

3. Financial management process: applications for payment, certification

SYSTEM USERSSYSTEM USERS

COMMUNITY SUPPORT FRAMEWORK (CSF)

Operational programmes

SOP Agriculture and rural developmentSOP Industry and ServiceSOP Human ResourcesOP Basic Infrastructure

Joint Programme Documents

JPD Objective2JPD Objective 3JPD EQUALJPD INTERREG III A, B, C

Cohesion Fund

System users: Managing Authority, Intermediate body under managing authority,

Paying Authority, Paying Unit, Controls,...

Modules of ITMS

System administration User tools Administration tools Program structures Applicants / Beneficiaries Projects Monitoring Financial operation Internal audit Control

Change password: Handbook:

Practical examples -SOPPractical examples -SOP

Total of which from EUCattle 117 1 303 293 701 231 456 153Pigs 29 405 435 206 562 141 902Sheep 22 156 212 85 669 54 674Poultry 31 464 659 234 272 162 631Rabbits 14 131 911 65 955 46 169Horses 1 22 244 11 122 7 785Kozy 1 4 507 2 704 1 577Bees 4 2 807 1 512 983Other anim al production 1 26 248 13 124 9 187Cereal 463 4 060 949 2 196 306 1 421 332Oil seeds 19 126 439 71 535 44 254Forage crops 89 712 061 403 600 249 222Fruit 24 284 064 143 928 99 422Vegetable 34 456 613 232 258 159 815Potatoe 14 101 374 54 075 35 481Vineyard 19 159 831 82 473 55 941Medicinal plants 4 45 303 23 298 15 856Legum inous plans t 1 2 202 1 101 771Sugar beet sectors 8 53 317 26 804 18 661Other Plant production 18 138 148 76 187 48 352

Total 913 8 657 616 4 633 716 3 030 166

Sector of the projectNo of approved

projectsTotal eligible costs

in ths. SkPublic eligible costs in ths. Sk

Approved projects as at 30 June 2007 in Measure - Investments in Agricultural Holdings

Practical example – young farmersPractical example – young farmers

Totalof which from

EU

Young farmers 10 70 376 38 707 24 632

Farmes in LFA 362 2 751 220 1 650 732 962 927

Young farmers in LFA

24 175 111 113 822 61 289

Others (not young farmers, not working in LFA)

517 5 660 909 2 830 455 1 981 318

CELKOM 913 8 657 617 4 633 716 3 030 166

Type No of

approved projects

Total eligible costs in ths.

Sk

Public eligible costs in ths. Sk

Approved projects as at 30 June 2007 in Measure 1.1 - Investments in Agricultural Holdings according young farmers and farmers in LFA

Approved public eligible costs in %

Young farmers in LFA2%

Farmes in LFA36%

Young farmers1%

Others (not young farmers, not w orking

in LFA)61%

Practical example – regional Practical example – regional structure, number of projectsstructure, number of projects

219

251

385

226

311

204

257

348

353

156

232

108

174

212

211

131

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Nu

mb

er o

f p

roje

cts

No of approved projects according regions as at 30 June 2007

SOP R-DP

RDP 2004-2006

Practical example – regional Practical example – regional structure, eligible costsstructure, eligible costs

36 920

31 684

54 982

33 861

43 617

26 342

9 576

58 760 73 526

30 268

26 362

19 620

24 825

37 278

35 580

14 975

0

10 000

20 000

30 000

40 000

50 000

60 000

70 000

80 000

90 000

100 000

Elig

ible

co

sts

in E

UR

Approved projects according regions - Eligible costs in ths. EUR

Program SOP P-RV

Program PRV

APPROVED PROJECTS APPROVED PROJECTS SOP & R-DPSOP & R-DP

ZILINAZILINA

TRENCINTRENCIN

TRNAVATRNAVA

62 10362 103

BRATISLAVABRATISLAVA68 604 ths.EUR68 604 ths.EUR

NITRANITRA

BANSKABANSKA

BYSTRICABYSTRICA

PRESOVPRESOV

KOSICEKOSICE

342342//50 55550 555 509509//103 794103 794

340340//45 98245 982

386386

470470

605605//68 33668 336

611611//88 84388 843

515515//69 95969 959

ThThank you for your attention !ank you for your attention !

alenaalena..kuruczovakuruczova@@apaapa..sksk0915 762 1930915 762 193

Agricultural Paying Agency, Agricultural Paying Agency, Bratislava, SlovakiaBratislava, Slovakia