EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 1 Structural Funds Evaluation A VIEW FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION Anna Burylo, DG Regional Policy, Evaluation Unit

EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 2 1.Evaluation of Structural Funds ( ) 2.Evaluation Capacity Building 3. Programming and the Evaluation Life Cycle 4. Ex Ante Evaluation 5.Mid Term Evaluation 6.Ex Post Evaluation 7.Ongoing Evaluation PRESENTATION

EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 3 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) EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL FUNDS ( )

EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 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

EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 5 Evaluation Life Cycle Program- ming Period EA MT EA EP MT EA EP PROGRAMMING AND EVALUATION LIFE CYCLE Key: EA: ex ante, MT: mid-term, EP: ex post EP ongoing evaluation

EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 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

EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 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 period

EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 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 , mid term evaluation will become ongoing evaluation

EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 9 The Mid Term Evaluation Update oFor current Member States - an update – not full review of strategy, themes, etc. oNew Member States to be involved also oFocus on Outputs, Results, Impacts oOpportunity to include some evaluation questions on issues arising in the programme, if necessary oPreparation for ex ante evaluation 2006 and ex post evaluation 2009 Draft working paper for discussion in June

EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 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)

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

EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 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

EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 13 Ongoing Evaluation – the Evaluation Plan  Current thinking – to replace mid term evaluation in  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 , one or two evaluations each year, focused on systems issues, themes or measures  2005 – start ex ante evaluation process