1. 12 November 2010 The Eurostat LMP (Labour market policies) database Nirina Rabemiafara - Alphametrics

2. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 2/16 Background Started in 1998 following the launch of the EES. Objectives –information on national actions fighting against unemployment –consistent and comparable data Tools –EU network of national delegates –common methodology Dissemination –annual publication available online + SiF/DiF –detailed data available on NewCronos

3. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 3/16 “Public interventions in the labour market aimed at reaching its efficient functioning and correcting disequilibria and which can be distinguished from other general employment policy interventions in that they act selectively to favour particular groups in the labour market.” LMP coverage [1/3]

4. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 4/16 Geographical coverage –national –regional interventions implemented independently from the national authority reported as separate interventions Measurement –Unit: intervention –Period: calendar year (actual spending and participants) LMP coverage [2/3]

5. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 5/16 LMP coverage [3/3] Target groups –unemployed –employed at risk –inactive 3 types of interventions –LMP services –LMP measures –LMP supports

6. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 6/16 Descriptions of LMP interventions Aim Beneficiaries/participants Action/Instruments Financing/support Eligibility Legal basis

7. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 7/16 Services 1 - Labour market services 1.1 Client services 1.2 Other activities of the PES (mainly administrative costs) Measures 2 - Training 3 - Job rotation and job sharing 4 - Employment incentives 5 - Supported employment and rehabilitation 6 - Direct job creation 7 - Start-up incentives Supports 8 - Out-of-work income maintenance and support 9 - Early-retirement Classification of LMP interventions

8. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 8/16 Breakdown of LMP expenditure Transfers to individuals Transfers to employers Transfers to service providers - periodic cash - lump-sum - reimbursement - reduced soc. cont. - reduced taxes

9. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 9/16 Breakdown of LMP participants Stock Entrants (total, previous status) Exits (total, destination)

10. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 10/16 Indicators Based on LMP data –19.A2 Timely activation –19.A3 Activation of registered unemployed –19.A5 LMP expenditure –19.A6 LMP expenditure per person wanting to work –19.M2 Activation / Support –19.M4 Activation of long-term unemployed Others –19.M3 New Start / Prevention –19.A4 Follow-up of participants

11. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 11/16 ESF and the LMP [1/2] If a measure is financed by the ESF, this will appear as -a qualitative information in the db -a footnote in the publication

12. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 12/16 ESF and the LMP [2/2] > 80% of LMP measures in 2008: SK, EE, EL, LT, PT (50-60% in SI, MT, FI) Specific ESF programmes (ADAPT, EQUAL) or Specific national ESF-funded programmes No ESF support: BG, CZ, DK, LU, HU, RO, SE, UK –part of LMP measures –part of PES costs (UK JC+ ) –no ESF actions (DK) –ESF not covered (BG 2009,UK local, RO)

13. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 13/16 Problems to report ESF in LMP [1/2] Programming period (2000-06, 2007-13)  not easy to split expenditure by year Expenditure often allocated to an institution/objective  not easy to split data by intervention Projects dedicated to large groups of beneficiaries  not easy to identify data relating to LMP target groups Change in reporting procedures between 2 prog. periods  problems for LMP time-series

14. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 14/16 Problems to report ESF in LMP [2/2] Full coverage of expenditure supporting national projects but not local / regional ones. Many ESF projects are coordinated at regional level but implemented at local level –Lack of coordinated monitoring –No systematic standardised report on an annual basis  problems to access the information for LMP data providers

15. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 15/16 Conclusions For future ESF reporting: the existing classifications and definitions of the LMP methodology could be useful for the development of common indicators for the OP. For LMP: more regular and harmonised monitoring as well as detailed information about expenditure and participants would ensure a more complete coverage.

16. ESF Working Group – 12 November 2010 16/16 For detailed information: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/labour_ market/labour_market_policy  LMP methodology  Qualitative reports (intervention descriptions)  LMP publication 2008  Online database