european cohesion policy – european social fund monitoring and evaluation in 2014-2020
DESCRIPTION
European Cohesion Policy – European Social Fund Monitoring and Evaluation in 2014-2020. Effie Meletiou Impact Assessment and Evaluation DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Nicosia, 26 November 2013. Outline. Monitoring: highlights of regulatory requirements - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
European Cohesion Policy – European Social Fund
Monitoring and Evaluationin 2014-2020
Effie MeletiouImpact Assessment and Evaluation
DG Employment, Social Affairs and InclusionNicosia, 26 November 2013
Outline
1. Monitoring: highlights of regulatory requirements
2. Monitoring: regulatory requirements on indicators
3. Monitoring: programme specific indicators
4. Evaluation
Monitoring:Highlights of regulatory requirements
(with comments)
Monitoring committee (Art. 41)
• Set up within 3 months of adopting the OP
• Single MC can cover more than one programme
• MC draws up its own rules of procedure with reference to institutional, legal and financial framework of the MS concerned
4
Composition of MC(Art. 42)
• Decided by MS provided that it is composed of relevant MS authorities, IBs and partners referred to in Art. 5.
• Representatives of these partners shall be delegated through transparent processes.
• Each MC member may have a voting right
• The list of members shall be published 5
6
Functions of the MC (Art. 43)• MC shall meet at least once a year• Review implementation of OP(s)• Shall be informed of progress of achieving targets and
milestones in the performance framework and results of qualitative analyses
• Shall examine all issues affecting performance of the programme, including the conclusions of the performance review
• Shall be consulted on OP modifications and give opinion, if it considers it appropriate
• May make observations regarding OP implementation and evaluations, including actions related to reduction of admin burden on beneficiaries
Regional PolicyCohesion Policy
7
Functions of the MC (Art. 100)Shall examine:•Issues affecting performance•Implementation of evaluation plan and follow-up given to evaluation findings, •Implementation to communication plan, JAPs & financial instruments•Progress in fulfilling applicable ex ante conditionalities, where not fulfilled at the time of submission of OP or PAShall examine and approve:•Evaluation plan (covering one or several OPs) and any modification thereof •Communication plan•Modification of OP
Regional PolicyCohesion Policy
Important changes in Regulations, Implementing and Delegated Acts
• Enhanced focus on results
• Increased importance of monitoring and evaluation
• Even stronger need for clear intervention logic
• Close link with Europe 2020 strategy
Clear intervention logic
• Composed of the hierarchy of programme objectives, actions, expected outputs and results
• Important for all phases: programme design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation• E.g. choice of programme-specific indicators,
time-planning of evaluations
9
Clear intervention logic• Challenges and needs
• Country-specific recommendations• National Reform Programme• European semester analyses
• Consistent translation into thematic objectives and investment priorities
Funding priorities
Linkage to Europe 2020 StrategyLinkage to Europe 2020 Strategy
Programme theory – Intervention logic
Programme architecture
12
Thematic objectiveThematic objective Priority axisPriority axis
Investment priority 2
Investment priority 2
Investment priority 1
Investment priority 1
Specific objective
1
Specific objective
1
Specific objective
2
Specific objective
2
Specific objective
2
Specific objective
2
Specific objective
1
Specific objective
1
Programming (1)
1. Identification of development needs
2. Selection of thematic objectives and investment priorities as set out in the CPR and Fund-specific rules
3. Definition of at least one specific objective per investment priority to target the latter appropriately in the specific national or regional context
4. Definition of result indicators linked to specific objectives
Programme architecture
15
Thematic objectiveThematic objective Priority axisPriority axis
Investment priority 2
Investment priority 2
Investment priority 1
Investment priority 1
Specific objective
1
Specific objective
1
Specific objective
2
Specific objective
2
Specific objective
2
Specific objective
2
Specific objective
1
Specific objective
1
Art. 2 CPR - Definitions
"specific objective' means the aim to which an investment priority or Union priority contributes in a specific national or regional context through actions or measures undertaken within such a priority"
Specific objectives
16
Art. 17 CPR – ex ante conditionalities
'applicable ex ante conditionality' means a concrete and precisely pre-defined critical factor, which is a prerequisite for and has a direct and genuine link to, and direct impact on, the effective and efficient achievement of a specific objective for an investment priority or a Union priority
Importance of specific objectives
17
Art. 87(2)(b) CPR – Operational ProgrammeFor each priority axis: "the investment priorities and corresponding specific objectives""in order to strengthen the result-orientation of the programming, the expected results for the specific objectives, and the corresponding result indicators, with a baseline value and a target value, where appropriate quantified in accordance with the Fund-specific rules""a description of the type and examples of actions to be supported under each investment priority and their expected contribution to the specific objectives"
Importance of specific objectives
18
Annex II – performance framework
"Milestones are intermediate targets, directly linked to the achievement of the specific objective of a priority, where appropriate, expressing the intended progress towards the targets set for the end of the period"
Milestones and targets shall be "consistent with the nature and character of the specific objectives of the priority"
Importance of specific objectives
19
Art. 7 Equal opportunities"The Member States and the Commission shall ensure that equality between men and women and the integration of gender perspective are taken into account and promoted throughout the preparation and implementation of programmes, in relation to monitoring, reporting and evaluation."
Equal opportunities
20
Programming (2)
5. Only after the development needs, objectives and the result sought have been clarified, should one consider the types of actions to be supported, choosing (a mix of actions) which best achieves the objectives defined
6. Output indicators should be logically linked to and reflect the types of actions planned. Outputs generated by actions should also contribute logically towards the results that one aims to achieve.
Programming (3)
7. Completing the drafting of the intervention logic
8. Reflection and adjustment of intervention logic
9. Testing the intervention logic – ex ante evaluation
10. Reflection and adjustment of intervention logic
General remarks on indicators• Common and where relevant programme-specific
• Financial, output and result
• No impact indicators (difference with 2007-2013)
• Reported annually and electronically by MA as structured data as part of the AIR, broken down by investment priority
• Reported as annual data, not cumulatively (difference with 2007-2013)
• Relate to partially or fully implemented operations (definition in Art. 2 draft CPR)
24
General remarks on indicators• Recommendation: monitoring data entered into
system throughout the year by beneficiaries/ bodies in charge of entering monitoring data
• Clear name, unequivocal and easy to understand definition, measurement unit (provided for common indicators)
25
The system must record and store data on individual participants in a way that permits the managing authorities to perform the tasks related to monitoring and evaluation in conformity with the requirements set out in Art. 49 and Annex XX CPR and Articles 5 and 15(iv)(4) and (6), Annex I and II of the ESF RegulationTasks include:
1. undertake impact evaluations2. Be able to contact participants after they have left
the support3. draw a representative sample of participants
Monitoring information system
26
Micro-data• CPR (Art. 114(2)(d)) sets out a legal obligation for the
managing authorities to establish a system that records and stores individual participant data in computerised form
• Micro-data of participants should be collected and stored
• Micro-data are observation data collected on an individual object, i.e. a participation record
• Observation data (characteristics and results) collected by indicators
• Micro data allow MS to create output/result statistics and to match different observation data
• May be complemented by unique personal identifiers
27
The data processing arrangements must be in line with the provisions of Data protection Directive 95/46, in particular Articles 7 and 8 thereof.
Indicators require the collection of two categories of data on individuals:•Personal data – indicator marked with *•Personal sensitive data – indicator marked with **
Data protection
28
Increased importance of monitoring - Delegated and Implementation Acts
29
1. Model for the OP (IA)
2. Performance framework: arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining milestones and targets and for assessing the attainment of the milestones and targets (IA)
3. Performance framework: financial corrections criteria (DA)
4. Data to be recorded and stored in computerised form (DA)
5. Model for the annual and final implementation report (IA)
6. Model for the progress report (IA)
1. Model for the Operational Programme (IA)
30
• Performance framework for the priority axis• Broken down by Fund
• Broken down by category of region
• Key implementation steps, financial indicators, output indicators and where appropriate result indicators
• Indicators are set at IP level, but the indicators for the performance framework have to be aggregated Indicators and implementation steps must be representative for the priority axis
• Milestones for 2018 and targets for 2023
2. Performance framework (IA): arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining milestones and targets and for assessing their attainment
31
Main elements of the Implementing Act:1.Arrangements for documentation of the establishment of milestones and targets
2.Basic requirements for different types of indicators
3.Arrangements for determining milestones and targets
4.Arrangements for the verification of the attainment of milestones and targets
2. Performance framework (IA): arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining milestones and targets and for assessing their attainment
2.1. Arrangements for documentation of the establishment of milestones and targets
32
• Methodologies and criteria to select indicators for PF ensuring milestones and targets comply with criteria of Annex II, § 3 CPR
• Use of data/evidence and calculation method to estimate the value of milestones and targets
• Rationale for the selection of output indicators, including explanation on share of the financial allocation represented by the operations which will produce the outputs + method to calculate the share -must represent more than 50% of financial allocation to the priority
• Info on how methodology to ensure consistency in the PF has been applied in accordance with the provisions of the Partnership Agreement
• Rational of selection of result indicators and key implementation steps
2. Performance framework (IA): arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining milestones and targets and for assessing their attainment
2.2. Requirements for indicators and key implementation steps
33
• Milestones and targets to be set at level of the priority
• In case of multi-fund/multi-category of regions priority axes: breakdown by Fund and by category of region
• For financial indicators: M&T refer to total amount of eligible expenditure entered into accounting system of certifying authority…
• For ESF output indicators M&T refer to achieved value for fully or partially implemented operations
• Key implementation steps refer to an important stage in delivery of a priority, with verified completion, and expressed as number or percentage.
• Result indicators used where appropriate, closely linked to interventions
2. Performance framework (IA): arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining milestones and targets and for assessing their attainment
2.4. Arrangements for verification of the attainment of milestones and targets
34
• To be assessed at priority axis level
• In case of multi-fund/multi-category of regions priority axes: assessment by Fund and by category of region
• Achievement of milestone/target: all indicators of the performance framework of the priority axis have attained at least 85% of milestone (2018) or target (2023) value
• Serious failure to achieve M&T:• Max 2 indicators/priority axis: any of the output or financial indicators
failed to attain at least 65% of the milestone/target value• More than 2 indicators/priority: at least 2 of the output or financial
indicators failed to attain at least 65% of the milestone/target value
3. Performance framework (DA): financial corrections criteria
35
Conditions for applying financial corrections at end of programming period on basis of final implementation report: i.Serious failure to achieve targets liked to financial indicators or output indicators
• Max 2 indicators/priority: any of the indicators failed to attain at least 65% of target value
• More than 2 indicators/priority: at least 2 of the indicators failed to attain at least 65% of target value
•Serious failure is due to clearly identified implementation weakness•Commission previously communicated to MA the clearly identified implementation weakness •MS failed to take necessary corrective action•No socio-economic or environmental factors, no significant changes in the economic or environmental conditions in a MS…seriously affecting implementation of priorities concerned
36
EC reporting (Art. 46bis)• Reporting by the EC and debate on the ESI Funds• Three types of report: summary report and
strategic reports and annual progress reports• Summary report:
• Summary report based on AIRs, including summary of evaluations
• Starting in 2016, to Council, EP, ECOSOC, CdR
• Strategic report: • In 2017 and 2019, based on progress reports
• Annual Progress Reports:• Starting in 2018, every two years • To spring summit, ESI Funds contribution to Europe 2020
Regional PolicyCohesion Policy
37
Implementation reports - timeline
April 2015 YEI report (Annex I and II indicators for YEI funding) (Art. 15(iv)(3) ESF Reg.)
May 2016 light AIR (Art. 44(1) and (2) CPR), Annex I and II indicators, special reporting on YEI evaluation findings, Art. 15(iv)(4) ESF Reg.
June 2017 strategic AIR (Art. 44(3) and 101 CPR), Annex I (including data on homeless and rural area) and Annex II ESF Reg.
May 2018 light AIR, Annex I and II
June 2019 Strategic AIR (Art. 44(4) and 101 CPR), Annex I, including longer-term indicators, special reporting on YEI evaluation findings (Art. 15(iv)(4) ESF Reg.)
May 2020-2023
Light AIR, Annex I and II
December 2024
Final report, including longer-term indicators of Annex I, special reporting on YEI evaluation findings (Art. 15(iv)(4) ESF Reg.)
Monitoring:Regulatory requirements on
INDICATORS
List of common ESF and YEI indicators
• Structure of Annex I and II
• Annex I - common ESF indicators• (1) Common output indicators on participants• (2) Common output indicators on entities• (3) Common immediate result indicators• (4) Common longer-term result indicators
• Annex II - Youth Employment Initiative indicators• (1) Immediate result indicators• (2) Longer-term result indicators
Annex ICommon indicators
40
Employment status1.unemployed, including long-term unemployed*2.long-term unemployed*3.inactive*4.inactive, not in education or training*5.employed, including self-employed*
Output indicators on people
41
Age 1.below 25 years*2.above 54 years*3.participants above 54 years who are unemployed, including long-term unemployed, or inactive not in education or training *
Education1.with primary (ISCED 1) or lower secondary education (ISCED 2)*2.with upper secondary (ISCED 3) or post-secondary education (ISCED 4)*3.with tertiary education (ISCED 5 to 8)*
Output indicators on people
42
Participants above 54 years who are unemployed, including long-term unemployed, or inactive not in
education or training
43
Above 54 yearsAbove
54 years
Disadvantaged participants
1.participants who live in jobless households*2.participants who live in jobless households with dependent children*3.participants who live in a single adult household with dependent children*4.migrants, people with a foreign background, minorities (including marginalised communities such as the Roma)**5.disabled**6.other disadvantaged**
Output indicators on people
44
Participants who live in jobless households*
45
All household members either unemployed or inactive
Household – housekeeping/social unit:• having common arrangements; • sharing household expenses or daily needs; • in a shared common residence. -> one person living alone / group of people, not necessarily related -> living at the same address Excluded: - Households composed solely of students.- Collective / institutional households (hospitals, old people’s homes, residential homes, prisons, military barracks, religious institutions, boarding houses and workers’ hostels, etc.)
Participants who live in jobless households with dependent children *
46
Subindicator of Participants who live in jobless households*
Dependent children -all children under 17 years of age and -persons between 17-24 years of age who are economically dependent on their parents
-> Participant can be any household member (parent, dependent child, other household member)
Participants who live in a single adult household with dependent children*
47
NO subindicator to "jobless household", but
same definitions regarding
-household -dependent children
Disadvantaged participants
7.homeless or affected by housing exclusion*8.from rural areas*
The data on participants under the above two indicators are to be provided in the AIR as specified in Article 44(3) of Regulation (EU) No [...] CPR (i.e. in 2017). They are to be collected based on a representative sample of participants within each investment priority.
Data for participants about rural areas are to be collected at LAU 2 (local administrative unit, former NUTS 5).
Output indicators on people
48
Data to be submitted in June 2017
Homeless or affected by housing exclusion
49
National definitionorETHOS (European Typology of Homelessness and Housing Exclusion) definition – classification of four living circumstances :1. Rooflessness (living rough / emergency accommodation),2. Houselessness (in accommodation for the homeless, in women's shelters, in accommodation for immigrants, people due to be released from institutions and people receiving long-term support due to homelessness),3. Insecure accommodation (insecure tenancies, under threat of eviction or violence), 4. Inadequate housing (unfit housing, non-conventional dwellings)-> Reference "Confronting Homelessness in the European Union"
From rural areas
50
• Rural areas are to be understood as thinly populated areas according to the Degree of urbanisation (DEGURBA category 3) classification.
• Thinly-populated areas means that more than 50 % of the population lives in rural grid cells.
• The data shall be collected at the Local Administrative Unit level of LAU 2 (local administration/communes).The DE-GURBA category 3 shall be established according to http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ramon/miscellaneous/index.cfm?TargetUrl=DSP_DEGURBA header "for reference year 2012".
From rural areas
51
52
1. number of projects fully or partially implemented by social partners or non-governmental organisations
2. number of projects dedicated to sustainable participation and progress of women in employment;
3. number of projects targeting public administrations or public services at national, regional or local level
4. number of supported micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (including cooperative enterprises, enterprises of the social economy)
Output indicators on entities
53
Number of projects dedicated at sustainable participation and progress of women in
employment
54
Project with the aim of increasing the sustainable participation and progress of women in employment, thus combating the feminisation of poverty, reducing gender-based segregationand combating gender stereotypes in the labour market and in education and training, promoting reconciliation of work and personal life for all and equal sharing of care responsibilities between men and women.
ESF Regulation, Art. 7, Promotion of equality between men and women
1. inactive participants engaged in job searching upon leaving*
2. participants in education/training upon leaving*3. participants gaining a qualification upon
leaving*4. participants in employment, including self-
employment, upon leaving*5. disadvantaged participants engaged in job
searching, education/ training, gaining a qualification, or in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving**
Immediate result indicators
55
Immediate result indicators
Disadvantaged are:
•participants who live in jobless households*•participants who live in jobless households with dependent children*•participants who live in a single adult household with dependent children*•migrants, people with a foreign background, minorities (including marginalised communities such as the Roma)**•disabled**•other disadvantaged**•homeless or housing exclusion•rural area
Disadvantaged participants in job searching, in education/training, gaining a qualification
or in employment upon leaving
57
Different logic than other immediate result indicators
-All disadvantaged groups to be reported together
-All immediate results to be reported together
1. participants in employment, including self-employment, 6 months after leaving*
2. participants with an improved labour market situation 6 months after leaving*
3. participants above 54 years in employment, including self-employment, 6 months after leaving*
4. disadvantaged participants in employment, including self-employment, 6 months after leaving**
These data are to be provided in the annual implementation reports as specified in Article 44(4) of Regulation (EU) No [CPR] (i.e. 2019 & 2023). They are to be collected based on a representative sample of participants within each investment priority.
Longer-term result indicators
58
59
60
Participants in employment, including self-employment,
-6 months after leaving
61
Including self-employment
No separate reporting of self-employed 6 months after leaving
An output indicator as reference is needed.
OP/AIR templates and SFC2014 will give a drop-down menue. Only those combinations will be possible.
Targets for common result indicators
62
Annex IIYEI indicators
63
1. Reported annually, including the longer-term result indicators
2. Reported in addition to the common indicators above
3. First report on YEI implementation due in April 2015, i.e. one year earlier than for the rest of the ESF
64
1.unemployed participants who complete the YEI supported intervention*
2. unemployed participants who receive an offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship or traineeship upon leaving*
3. unemployed participants who are in education/training, gaining a qualification, or in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving*
YEI immediate result indicators (I)
65
4.long-term unemployed participants who complete the YEI supported intervention*
5. long-term unemployed participants who receive an offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship or traineeship upon leaving*
6. long-term unemployed participants who are in education/training, gaining a qualification, or in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving*
YEI immediate result indicators (II)
66
7.inactive participants not in education or training who complete the YEI supported intervention*
8. inactive participants not in education or training who receive an offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship or traineeship upon leaving*
9. inactive participants not in education or training who are in education/training, gaining a qualification, or in employment upon leaving*
YEI immediate result indicators (III)
67
3 target groups
x
3 immediate results
=
9 immediate result indicators
YEI immediate result indicators
68
YEI immediate result indicators
69
Completion of intervention
Attendance according to schedule until the last day/last session of scheduled end.
-> No recording as immediate result if irregular attendance/ drop out.
YEI immediate result indicators
70
Offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship or traineeship upon leaving
Voluntary conditional promise, Indication of offeror's willingness to enter into agreement under specific terms with the participant Acceptance result in binding agreement with legal commitment of both parties
YEI immediate result indicators
71
Continued education
Enrolment in
- formal education or
- training programmes leading to recognised vocational qualification.
YEI immediate result indicators
72
Apprenticeship -Training contract or formal agreement (occupation, duration, skills to be acquired, wage or allowance etc.) -Directly or via the education institution -Normally part of formal education and training at upper secondary level (ISCED 3) -Duration on average 3 years-Successful completion leads to nationally recognised qualification
YEI immediate result indicators
73
Traineeships •Limited period of work practice spent at business, public bodies or non-profit institutions •Last a few weeks to a few months•Usually not considered to constitute employment contracts
1. participants in continued education, training programmes leading to a qualification, an apprenticeship or a traineeship 6 months after leaving*
2. participants in employment, including self-employment, 6 months after leaving*
3. participants in self-employment 6 months after leaving*
The data for longer-term result indicators are to be collected based on a representative sample of participants within each investment priority.
YEI longer-term result indicators
74
Priority axes covering more than one category of region
Can be justified where where identical objectives and actions are pursued across all regions
Re-percussions:• Co-financing rate and financial management by priority
axis and by category of region• Breakdown of performance framework and output
indicators (and in case of ESF, also result indicators)by category of region
76
Baselines and targets• Baselines for result indicators with a target
• Cumulative target values for 2023 (for output and result indicators), if n+3 rule adopted
• Targets are quantified for all output indicators (absolute numbers) and common result indicators (absolute numbers or shares/rates) and quantified or qualitative for programme-specific result indicators
• Consult background papers for ESF target setting http://ec.europa.eu/esf/main.jsp?catId=67&langId=en&newsId=8174
Targets for common result indicators- example
• Investment priority: • “Equality between men and women and
reconciliation between work and private life”
• Specific objective: • Increase participation of low skilled inactive or
unemployed people with care responsibilities in the labour market
Targets for common result indicators should be set in function of the data reported for common output indicators. 77
Result target is often expressed in % The % requires a reference value, i.e. the relevant output data.
CI Result: Participants gaining a qualification upon leaving
Targets: 50% gaining a qualification upon leaving WRONG!50% of whom? Of all participants? No!
50% of the low skilled participants (ISCED 1 and 2) gaining a qualification upon leaving
78
CI Result: Participants in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving
Targets
50% in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving WRONG!50% of whom? Of all participants? No!
50% of the unemployed in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving
40% of the inactive in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving 79
Monitoring:Programme specific indicators
Principles for sound indicators
• Integrated set of indicators consisting of CI and programme-specific indicators• With a limited set of targets. Not all indicators need
a target. But the most important ones do.
• Indicators should cover the main scope of a priority (i.e. target group, type of activity etc.)• Targets should also cover large parts of a priority
• Indicators should be simple - sophisticated data require evaluation
81
Programme-specific indicators – recommendation
• Use common indicators and their definitions when establishing programme-specific indicators – decrease of administrative burden
82
Programme-specific longer-term result indicators
• Possibility to monitor longer-term results over a longer time span than 6 months after leaving
If the same population/sample as for longer-term result indicators is covered – information on sustainability of results
83
Enhanced monitoring of results
• With access to database with micro-data on employment status, enhanced monitoring could be envisaged:• Employment / unemployment spell of participants
can be monitored in a prolonged period of time after leaving project
85
Common longer-term result indicator
Programme-specific longer-term result indicators
Time series with employment results of participants
Number of months after participants left project
Participants in employment x months after leaving, N=1000
about 500 never worked
After 6 months: about 1000 never worked
People that never fell back into unemployment
Example from Belgium (Flanders)
Source: presentation "Impact evaluation of PES action for the unemployed in Flanders" by Benedict Wauters (ESF Agency Flanders) and Steven Groenez (KU Leuven HIVA) given at ESF Evaluation Partnership 13-6-2013
Programme-specific result indicators• Need to be logically linked to outputs (directly
supported participants or entities)
• Global effects on a target group are to be assessed through evaluations
• Data comes from monitoring or surveys, or from existing databases building on micro-data
=> Avoid indicators based on general statistics, such as (increase of) employment rate in a region (by x%)
87
YES: participants aged 20 or younger starting an apprenticeshipNO: share of young people aged 20 or younger in apprenticeship
Three approaches to set programme-specific indicators
1) By combining different common ESF indicators
2) By combining common ESF indicators with programme specific characteristics/ features
3) By setting new indicators focusing solely on programme specific characteristics/ features
88
89
1) By combining different one-dimensional common ESF indicators
Advantage: Data have to be collected anyway. Less administrative burden linked to data collectionNB: Some common ESF indicators are based on such combination
• Participants above 54 years who are unemployed, including long-term unemployed, or inactive not in education or training*
• Disadvantaged participants engaged in job searching, education/ training, gaining a qualification, or in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving**
• Participants above 54 years in employment, including self-employment, 6 months after leaving*
• Disadvantaged participants in employment, including self-employment, 6 months after leaving**
Common output indicator:Participants above 54 years who are unemployed, including long-term unemployed, or inactive not in
education or training*
Unemployed, including long-
term unemployed
Inactive, not in education or
training
Above 54 years
Common longer-term result indicator:Disadvantaged participants in employment, including
self-employment, 6 months after leaving**
Other disadvanta
gedDisabled
Migrants, people with a foreign background,
minorities (incl. marginalised
communities such as the Roma)
Participants in employment, including
self-employment, 6 months after leaving
92
Programme Output Indicator: Young low skilled inactive participants
With primary or lower
secondary education
Below 25 years
Inactive, not in education or training
Programme Immediate Result indicator: high skilled unemployed in employment upon leaving
With tertiary education
Unemployed, including long-term
unemployed
Participants in
employment upon leaving
Programme Immediate Result indicator: low skilled older workers gaining a qualification
upon leaving
94
With primary or lower
secondary education
Above 54 years
Employed, including
self-employed
Participants gaining a
qualification upon leaving
2) By combining common ESF indicators with programme specific characteristics/ features
Advantage: indicators can take into account specific aspects of the programme.
95
Output indicator: NEETS
96
Participants between 16
and 24 years
Unemployed, including long-term
unemployed
Inactive, not in education or training
97
Output indicator:Disadvantaged pupils
Migrant and minorities
Pupils below 16 years
Disabled
Other disadvantage
d
Output indicator: Young high-skilled participants
establishing a start-up upon leaving
98
Start-ups
Below 25 years
With tertiary education
Participants in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving
or
Result indicator:Disadvantaged pupils in education or
training upon leaving
99
Migrant and minorities
Pupils below 16 years
Disabled
Other disadvantage
d
In education or training
upon leaving
Result indicator: NEETs in education or training upon leaving
100
Participants between 16 and 24 years
Participants in education/
training upon leaving
Inactive, not in education or training
Unemployed, including long-term
unemployed
3) By setting new indicators focusing solely on programme specific characteristics/ features
101
102
Participants in pre-school age
Participants in obligatory
schooling age
Participants between 16 and 24 years
Participants below 25 years
Programme specific indicators
This example shows possible subdivision of a common indicator into programme-specific indicators.
Steps in designing programme-specific indicators
1. 'Deconstruct' the programme with view to the following categories:1. Target groups (people & entities)2. Type of planned activities 3. Themes4. Projects5. Type of expected results
2. Prioritise the content of each category in order to then identify indicators on the most important aspects
3. Develop indicators e.g. by combining characteristics/ features from the various categories
4. Review intervention logic to ensure that the most important aspects are covered by indicators
103
Example
• Investment priority: • “Equality between men and women and
reconciliation between work and private life”
• Specific objective: • Increase participation of low skilled inactive or
unemployed people with care responsibilities in the labour market
104
Target groups Type of activity Expected type of results
Support for child care/care for dependent persons
Training
Self-/Employment
Qualification
105
Inactive not in education or training /unemployed/ LTU with care responsibilities with ISCED below 3
Common output I with target
Programme-specific output indicators
CI results with targets
Programme-specific result indicators
•With ISCED 1 or 2
• Participants in employment, including self-employment, 6 months after leaving
106
• Participants gaining a qualification upon leaving
• Inactive not in education or training with care responsibilities with ISCED below 3
• Unemployed with care responsibilities with ISCED below 3
• LTU with care responsibilities with ISCED below 3
• Low skilled (below ISCED 3) inactive or unemployed participants in employment who received support in their care responsibilities
• Participants in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving
Inactive not in education or training with care responsibilities with ISCED below 3
107
With ISCED 1 or 2 Below ISCED
1
Inactive, not in education or training
With care responisibiliti
ties
UnemployedLTU
Unemployedwith care responsibilities with ISCED below 3LTUwith care responsibilities with ISCED below 3
Gaining a qualification
Participants in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving
Evaluation
What is hopefully going on right now
110
Intervention logic
Indicators
Ex-ante evaluation
On-going evaluation
Ex-post evaluationImp
lem
enta
tion
Monit
ori
ng
Programme design
Interactive process
Iterative process
The ex-ante should check for a clear intervention logic
• Challenges and needs
• Country-specific recommendations• National Reform Programme• European semester analyses
• Consistent translation into thematic objectives and investment priorities
Funding priorities
Linkage to Europe 2020 StrategyLinkage to Europe 2020 Strategy
The ex-ante should check for a clear intervention logic
• Specific objectives (SO)• Precise definition (of change)
- Should be more specific than the investment priority about target groups, problem area or structure, procedures, institutions, etc. it seeks to change
- Should logically link to the proposed actions
• Measurement (result indicators)
• Types of actions• The most appropriate interventions to achieve SO (the
right "action mix"?)
• The choice based on an analysis of problems
• Measurement of their outputs (output indicators)
The ex-ante should check for a clear intervention logic
• Clarifies the intervention logic• Demonstrates causal links between:
Types of actions -> outputs -> intended results / specific objective
Description of how planned actions will contribute to specific objectives is often lacking in first OP drafts reviewed.
• Helps identifying for which results/outputs, not captured by common indicators, programme-specific indicators should be established
Result indicators
Result indicators
Output indicators
Output indicators
The ex-ante checks for relevant and clear indicators
Ex-ante evaluators should consult carefully draft guidance on ESF Monitoring and Evaluation 2014-2020 and assess:•Relevance
• Result indicators should capture a change in the situation of supported participants or entities
•Clarity• Indicators should have a clear title and an
unequivocal and easy to understand definition
Indicators with realistic targets and identified data sources
Ex-ante evaluators should also assess:•Target values – are they realistic?
• Consult background papers for ESF target setting http://ec.europa.eu/esf/main.jsp?catId=67&langId=en&newsId=8174
•Data collection• Will data be collected and reported on time?• Have necessary arrangements been put in place
to collect and store micro-data of participants?• Are existing databases used as data sources?(NB: reduction of admin. burden for beneficiaries)• Are procedures in place to ensure quality of data?
Evaluation during the programming period
117
Evaluation during the programming period (Art. 49)
• MA shall ensure that evaluations are carried out to assess effectiveness, efficiency and impact and that they are subject to appropriate follow-up
• Evaluation plan covering one or several OPs drawn up by MA or MS
• EC may carry out evaluations at its own initiative.
Regional PolicyCohesion Policy
118
Evaluation Plan (Art. 104)
• Evaluation plan to be submitted to the MC no later than a year after the adoption of the programme(s)
• By December 2021 MA shall submit to EC a report summarising evaluation findings and main outputs and results of programme, providing comments on the reported information
Regional PolicyCohesion Policy
Two evaluations required: 1. completed by end 20152. completed by end 2018
Scope: assess effectiveness, efficiency and impact
Be aware of scope of reporting requirement!
YEI Evaluation Art. 15(iv)(6) ESF Reg.
119
The report in 2016, 2019 and 2024 "shall set out and assess the quality of employment offers received by YEI participants, including the disadvantaged, those from marginalized communities and those leaving education without qualifications. The Report shall set out and assess their progress in continuing education, finding sustainable and decent jobs, or moving into apprenticeship or quality traineeship.
YEI Reporting Art. 15(iv)(4) ESF Reg.
120
Art. 104(2) CPR"By 31 December 2022, managing authorities shall submit to the Commission, for each programme, a report summarising the findings of evaluations carried out during the programming period and the main outputs and results of the programme, providing comments on the reported information."
Summary report
121
122
Ex-post evaluation (Art. 50 + 104)
• The EC shall carry out the ex post evaluations in close cooperation with MS and MA
• Examine effectiveness and efficiency of ESI Funds and their contribution to Europe 2020 strategy, taking account of the EU targets
• By 31 December 2024 and for each ESI Fund, EC shall prepare a synthesis report outlining the main conclusions of ex-post evaluations
Regional PolicyCohesion Policy
123
Contents of evaluation plan
• Subject• Purpose (reasoning/use), scope, specific objectives• Key evaluation questions• Data sources and key methods• Timing (link to "reasoning")• Budget• Partnership• Audience• Dissemination strategy
Regional PolicyCohesion Policy
Impact evaluation:Expert assistance at your disposal
•
• CENTRE FOR RESEARCH ON IMPACT EVALUATION - CRIE
http://crie.jrc.ec.europa.eu
CRIE: What is it?
• Centre for Research on Impact Evaluation Joint DG EMPL-DG JRC initiative
• Established in June 2013
• Support to MS and DG EMPL • to set up necessary arrangements for carrying out
• Counterfactual Impact Evaluations (CIE) • of ESF funded interventions
126
WP2 CRIE support to MS
• CRIE supports MS to set up the necessary arrangements for carrying out Counterfactual Impact Evaluations (CIE) of DG EMPL funded interventions by:
• WP2A Organizing training workshops on impact evaluation methods
• WP2B Providing tailor-made advice on methodological and data issues that arise when designing, implementing and evaluating an initiative
• WP2C Provide support to MS for arranging CIEs (preparation and implementation phase)
127
WP2A Are training workshops needed?• Specific ESF guidance on CIE now exists: EC DG EMPL (2012), • “Design and commissioning of counterfactual • impact evaluations - A guide for ESF • Managing authorities”
Other • books and handbooks • on CIE are now available
128
WP2A Value added of trainingworkshop
•WP2A1. Problem-based learning methodology
•WP2A2. Exemplar CIEs are used to illustrate the issues and challenges
•WP2A3. Customized: Participants can propose examples of CIEs (they are working on or in the process of commissioning) for discussion at the workshop
129
Thank you for your attention!
130