1. Brussels, October 21, 2011 POR ERDF Sardinia 2007-2013 Pilot test indicators UNIONE EUROPEA REPUBBLICA ITALIANA REGIONE AUTONOMA DELLA SARDEGNA Unit regional evaluation Regional Working group Lodovico Conzimu (Evaluation Unit) Sonia Pistis (Evaluation Unit) Eloisa Canu(Evaluation Unit) Manuela Murru(Managing Authority)

2. Priority Axis Total Public Contribution Axis on the total weight 1- Information Society170.167.941 10,00% 2 - Inclusion, Social Services, Education and Lawfulness 161.659.544 9,50% 3 – Energy187.184.735 11,00% 4 – Environment, Attractiveness of Natural and Cultural Resources, Tourism 382.877.868 22,50% 5 – Urban Development306.302.295 18,00% 6 – Competitiveness459.453.442 27,00% 7 – Technical Assistance34.033.588 2,00% EU Contribution680.671.765 National Public Contribution1.021.007.648 Total1.701.679.413 Breakdown of finances by Priority Axis 2 Brussels, October 21, 2011 Pilot test indicators The overall objective is To increase the competitiveness of the productive system and the attractiveness of regional integration through the diffusion of innovation, promoting the potential of local identity and traditions and preserving natural resources

3. Priority 2: present situation 3 Breve informativa sul PO FESR e sul sistema di monitoraggio Indicators Priority axis List of corresponding indicators (where applicable) Allocation Specific ObjectivesOutputsResultsImpacts* Improving the quality and accessibility of service delivery to those at risk of social exclusion, integration between the institutions and the local population and strengthen the instrumental equipment and infrastructure for learning in a perspective of in social, cultural and economic non- discrimination 2.1 Guaratee increased/better level of security for citizens and business Pilot projects Perceived risk of crime (Families who feel very or fairly uncomfortable with the risk of crime in their area of total households) (%)(N.) 2.2 Improve the quality in the structure and services serving the population, including education, with particular attention on equal opportunity and non-discrimination … Interventions Percentage of seniors receiving home care Integrated (ADI) in the total elderly population (65 years and over) Involved students Percentage of municipalities that have enabled services for children (nursery schools or other innovative services and supplementary) of the total municipalities in the Region Involved local public institutions Percentage of facilities dedicated to educational and social value of the total schools surveyed in Region Pilot test indicators Brussels, October 21, 2011

4. New framework Priority 2: accessibility of health and social care system 4 Breve informativa sul PO FESR e sul sistema di monitoraggio What do you want to change? (results) Indicators Allocation Result indicatorOutput indicators Enhancing the accessibility of facilities and services to the population within the health system Name_.1.1: waiting lists Definition_1.1: Reduction of time (days) for the waiting lists for services performed with a high-tech equipment Source_1.1: Regional plan of government waiting lists Baseline_1.1:138 Name_1.1: high-tech equipment Definition_1.1: Number of high-tech equipment purchased Source_1.1: Assessorato dell'igiene e sanità e dell'assistenza sociale (Regional Department of hygiene and health and social care) Target_1.1: to be defined 68.067.000 Name_1.2: Percentage of elderly people receiving integrated home care (ADI) in the total elderly population (65 years and over) Source_1.2: DPS-Istat Baseline_1.2: 2,3 Name_1.3: Distance Health infrastructure Definition 1.3 : Average travel time to hospital services Source_1.3: survey Baseline_1.3: to be defined Name_1.2: Interventions made Definition_1.2: Number of houses of health built (case della salute) Source_1.2: Assessorato dell'igiene e sanità e dell'assistenza sociale (Regional Department of hygiene and health and social care) Target_1.2.: 11 Name_1.4: Coverage rate – Disabled Definition_1.4: Percentage of disabled recipients of interventions in the total population with severe disabilities (art. 3 co.3 L.104/99) Source_1.4: Assessorato alla Sanità- Direzione Politiche Sociali (beneficiari L.162/98) Sardegna Baseline _1.4: 0 Pilot test indicators Brussels, October 21, 2011

5. New framework Priority 2: Increasing attractiveness of education system and the skills of students 5 Breve informativa sul PO FESR e sul sistema di monitoraggio What do you want to change? (results) Indicators Allocation Result indicatorOutput indicators Increasing attractiveness of education system Name_2.1: Drop out rate Definition_2.1: Percentage of students who leave school in two years of superior school (age 14- 16). Source_2.1: Ministry of Education, University and Research. Baseline_2.1: to be defined Name 2.1.: Interventions of technological modernization Definition_2.1: nr of Interventions of technological modernization in the schools Source_2.1: Assessorato della pubblica istruzione, beni culturali, informazione, spettacolo e sport (Regional Department of Education, cultural, information, entertainment and sports) Target_2.1: to be defined 92.085.000 Name_2.2: Rate of diffusione of intervetions on school buildings Definition_2.2: Share of school buildings equipped with space and materials for extracurricular activities Source_2.2: Assessorato della pubblica istruzione, beni culturali, informazione, spettacolo e sport (Regional Department of Education, cultural, information, entertainment and sports) Target_2.2: 13 Increasing the skills of students Name_2.2 : Mathematical skills of students Definition_2.2: Percentage of 15- year-olds, with up to the first level of competence in mathematics Source_2.2: DPS-Istat Baseline_2.2: 45.3 Target_2.2: 21 Name_2.3: Involved students Definition_2.3: Nr. of potentially students involved actually using the new equipment Source_2.3: Assessorato della pubblica istruzione, beni culturali, informazione, spettacolo e sport (Regional Department of Education, cultural, information, entertainment and sports) Target_2.3: to be defined Pilot test indicators Brussels, October 21, 2011

6. New framework Priority 4: Increase attractiveness of tourism 6 Breve informativa sul PO FESR e sul sistema di monitoraggio Pilot test indicators Brussels, October 21, 2011 Specific Objectives Indicators Result indicatorsOutput indicators 4.2 Develop the tourism offer in a sustainable manner based on the attractiveness of the naturalistic, landscapes and cultural assets Number of tickets sold for theatre, concerts per 100 inhabitants number of visitors for cultural venues Number of interventions Number of tourist accomodation restructured and improved Number of tourist accomodation located in the Ecogical regional network Number of tourist companies certificated (ecolabel, EMAS, ISO 14001) Number of Integrated tourist itineraries POR 2007-2013 What do you want to change? Indicators Result indicators Output indicators Changement: improve the tourism demand in the low season number of presences in low season by contries and regions of origin number of visitors in museums and archeological areas in low season number of events ( conventions and initiative de- seasoning or other type of events) funded by Region that comprise at least one night stay in the low season number of de seasoned initiatives funded by bonus addressed to non resident people Number of tourist facilities funded N° of residents that stay at least one night in low season Pilot test

7. New framework Priority 5: Urban development 7 Breve informativa sul PO FESR e sul sistema di monitoraggio Pilot test indicators Brussels, October 21, 2011 POR 2007-2013 Pilot test Specific ObjectivesResultsOutputs 5.1 Promoting integrated re- qualification of urban areas, improving their environmental, social and economic conditions and strengthening their connections with the surrounding areas Usage of public transport (percentage of workers and students using public transit on total of commuters)(%) No. of transfer facilities No. of projects concerning intermodal transportation 5.2 Promoting development of disadvantaged areas contrasting decline and enhancing historical, artistic and productive heritage Assisted living for elderly people: Percentage of elderly people receiving integrated home care (ADI) in the total elderly population (65 years and over) No. of interventions No. of sustain actions What do you want to change? (results) Result indicatorOutput indicators Fostering urban quality and urban services (above all, public transport) Percentage of workers and students using public transport on total of commuters Source_1.1: DPS-Istat Nr. of transfer facilities Nr. of projects concerning intermodal transportation Enhancing attractiveness of small towns and their capacity to retain/attract population by acting on infrastructures, services and enterprises Growth of micro- enterprises in municipalities interested by the OPs projects Source_2.1: Chamber of commerce Nr of interventions Nr. of sustain actions

8. Conclusions 8 StrengthsWeaknesses Clear definition of the link (causality) between objectives, activities and outcomes. Planning aimed at measurable outcomes. Difficulty in identifying other factors. Cost to carry out evaluations of the other factors Definition of targets Difficulty in measuring the change using only one indicator. OpportunitiesRisks Enhance monitoring activities. Coordination between regional statistics offices, management authorities and other areas of the administration. Overemphasis on indicators rather than overall objective Pilot test indicators Brussels, October 21, 2011