Indicators of Public Administration Capacity Building for ESF monitoring

Administrative Capacity Building Thematic Objective 11 "enhancing institutional capacity of public authorities and stakeholders and efficient public administration" only covered by 1 CI output indicator -number of projects targeting public administrations or public services at national, regional or local level -no result indicators Aim  guidance on specific indicators for typical TO11 activities

General issues Unit of reference Public admin capacity building aimed - Primarily at institutions (systems and structures) - but also assistance to staff of institutions 2 types of reference unit - Entities - formal structures with specific functions and resources for their fulfilment - Individuals – holders of public office or staff of these entities

Components of administrative capacity "model" indicators => ID generic components of ACB (a) Focus on individuals Skills and competences: (who) through development of skills at all levels within public authorities (b) Focus on entities Processes: (how, in terms of rules, procedures, tools, working methods etc.) Organisation/structure: (how, structure and organisation of departments, functions etc.) Resources: (what, mainly covering informational and technical resources, HR strategies, etc.)

Standard approach to ESF monitoring indicators simple, easy to measure & reliable closely linked to actions supported (direct effects) Existing guidance: Output indicators: what directly produced/supplied through implementation of operation Result indicators: expected effects on participants or entities brought about by operation -capture a (+ve) state/situation change (e.g. for participants, nos. moving into employment, gaining a qualification, entering training…), not performance/impact type measures => deal with public admin by indicators which focus on state/capacity change of admin bodies

Focus on capacity rather than effectiveness/ performance indicators in ESF monitoring Performance/impact indicators (time, cost, productivity…) not consistent with general ESF indicator logic suffer time delays to observe performance change results may not be sufficiently close to ESF funded operation: influenced by other non-ESF activities + economic situation may be hard to aggregate can improve performance, but no guarantee sustainable  should be assessed via an evaluation

State change indicators of improvement Simple measures of: how systems have changed/improved scale effect of changes - no. of new systems implemented - no./share of services covered by new tool/systems - no. of entities fully implementing and using new system qualitative level of change (different levels of state change) - e.g. e-services (info retrieval only, allowing transactions on line, etc.)

Generic formulation for result indicators Countof systems/tools/processes/new working methods No. of systems/tools/processes/new working methods implemented as a consequence of the supported projects No./share of services in a given functional area which have been created/improved/made more accessible At staff level No. staff trained to certain standard/acquiring certain skills /qualifications

Generic formulation for result indicators (cont) At entity level No. of (entities) which implemented (new/upgraded) system/tool/process /working methods to improve (specific activity) –No. of (entities) receiving support which gained a recognised quality standard –No. of (entities) receiving support which implemented (i.e. in application) new forms of work organisation to … –No. of (entities) receiving support which implemented new IT system to …  ID relevant state change with regard to capacity improvement targeted

Examples of indicators for institutional capacity building based on material from available OPs SKILLS AND COMPETENCES Outputs: - No. of staff participating in training on late payment and debt recovery legislation - No. of internal auditors participating in training - No. of court managers participating in training on financial management Results: - No. of staff dealing with late payment and debt recovery disputes, who have improved their professional competence - No. of certified internal auditors 6 months after training - No. of court managers who have improved their financial management skills

Examples of indicators for institutional capacity building based on material from available OPs PROCESSES Outputs: - No. of administrations receiving support to introduce a quality management system - No. of units of tax administration receiving support to introduce an IT tool for management of tax collection - No. of e-services receiving support for development Results: - No. of administrations that have implemented a quality management system as a result of supported development activities - No. of tax administration units in which a newly implemented IT tool in use to improve tax collection - No. of supported e-services at transaction stage

Thank you for your attention