html5-img
1 / 13

Structural Funds Evaluation A VIEW FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Structural Funds Evaluation A VIEW FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION. Anna Burylo , DG Regional Policy, Evaluation Unit. PRESENTATION. 1. Evaluation of Structural Funds (2000-2006) 2. Evaluation Capacity Building 3. Programming and the Evaluation Life Cycle 4. Ex Ante Evaluation

rory
Télécharger la présentation

Structural Funds Evaluation A VIEW FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Structural Funds EvaluationA VIEW FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION Anna Burylo, DG Regional Policy, Evaluation Unit

  2. PRESENTATION 1. Evaluation of Structural Funds (2000-2006) 2. Evaluation Capacity Building 3. Programming and the Evaluation Life Cycle 4. Ex Ante Evaluation • Mid Term Evaluation • Ex Post Evaluation 7. Ongoing Evaluation

  3. EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL FUNDS (2000-2006) Set out in Regulation 1260/1999 on General Provisions on the Structural Funds: • Ex Ante Evaluation (Art. 41) • Mid Term Evaluation (Art. 42) • Ex Post Evaluation (Art. 43) Also important: • Quantification (Art. 36) • Cost Benefit Analysis - Major Projects (Art. 26) • Performance Reserve (Art. 44)

  4. EVALUATION CAPACITY BUILDING • Objective – the capacity to produce high quality evaluations for learning (how to achieve greater impact) and accountability (what have we achieved with public money) • Evaluation as a management tool • Linkage to the monitoring system • Challenges • Having a mandate and an Evaluation Plan – clarity of role • Appropriate numbers of qualified staff • Institutionalising evaluation

  5. PROGRAMMING AND EVALUATION LIFE CYCLE Evaluation Life Cycle ongoing evaluation EP EAMTEAEPMTEAEP Program- ming Period 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 Key: EA: ex ante, MT: mid-term, EP: ex post

  6. EX ANTE EVALUATION – ROLE & AIMS • Serves as a basis for preparing Plans and Programmes • Provides the rationale for the intervention and financial allocations across priorities • Evaluates anticipated socio-economic results and impacts • Assesses the quality of implementation, monitoring and evaluation arrangements

  7. EX ANTE EVALUATION - ORGANISATION • Responsibility of those preparing Plans and Programmes • Should be an interactive process • Working Paper of the Commission (No. 2) – to be updated for 2007-2013 period

  8. MID TERM EVALUATION - ROLE AND AIMS • To improve the quality and relevance of programming through • examination of any changes in the programme environment and programme performance to date, and • making any necessary changes required to maximise the impact of the programme • For 2007-2013, mid term evaluation will become ongoing evaluation

  9. The Mid Term Evaluation Update - 2005 • For current Member States - an update – not full review of strategy, themes, etc. • New Member States to be involved also • Focus on Outputs, Results, Impacts • Opportunity to include some evaluation questions on issues arising in the programme, if necessary • Preparation for ex ante evaluation 2006 and ex post evaluation 2009Draft working paper for discussion in June

  10. EX POST EVALUATION – ROLE & AIMS To establish: • Effectiveness, efficiency and impact in relation to economic and social cohesion • Factors contributing to the success or failure of implementation and the achievements and results, including sustainability (1999 Regulation – for ex post to be carried out by end 2009)

  11. EX POST EVALUATION - CHALLENGES FOR CURRENT PERIOD • To be complete by end of 2009 – but expenditure continues to end 2008. • Evaluations across 25 very diverse Member States • How to involve the Member States • One contract per Objective? (not required in the regulation)

  12. EX POST EVALUATION – CURRENT THINKING • Link update of Mid Term Evaluation to requirements of Ex Post • Work with Member States from 2005 onwards • Split contracts into thematic areas Draft working paper for discussion later in 2004

  13. Ongoing Evaluation – the Evaluation Plan • Current thinking – to replace mid term evaluation in 2007-2013 • Evaluation Plan – to be agreed by Monitoring Committee and be adapted to needs – reviewed each year • Plan should include organisation (who is responsible), resources (human + financial) and draft list of evaluation projects • For 2004-2006, one or two evaluations each year, focused on systems issues, themes or measures • 2005 – start ex ante evaluation process

More Related