European Cohesion Policy European Social Fund Monitoring and

European Cohesion Policy – European Social Fund Monitoring and Evaluation in 2014 -2020 Effie Meletiou Impact Assessment and Evaluation DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Nicosia, 26 November 2013

Outline 1. Monitoring: highlights of regulatory requirements 2. Monitoring: regulatory requirements on indicators 3. Monitoring: programme specific indicators 4. Evaluation

Monitoring: Highlights of regulatory requirements (with comments)

Monitoring committee (Art. 41) • Set up within 3 months of adopting the OP • Single MC can cover more than one programme • MC draws up its own rules of procedure with reference to institutional, legal and financial framework of the MS concerned 4

Composition of MC (Art. 42) • Decided by MS provided that it is composed of relevant MS authorities, IBs and partners referred to in Art. 5. • Representatives of these partners shall be delegated through transparent processes. • Each MC member may have a voting right • The list of members shall be published 5

Functions of the MC (Art. 43) • MC shall meet at least once a year • Review implementation of OP(s) • Shall be informed of progress of achieving targets and milestones in the performance framework and results of qualitative analyses • Shall examine all issues affecting performance of the programme, including the conclusions of the performance review • Shall be consulted on OP modifications and give opinion, if it considers it appropriate • May make observations regarding OP implementation and evaluations, including actions related to reduction of admin burden on beneficiaries 6 Regional Cohesion Policy

Functions of the MC (Art. 100) Shall examine: • Issues affecting performance • Implementation of evaluation plan and follow-up given to evaluation findings, • Implementation to communication plan, JAPs & financial instruments • Progress in fulfilling applicable ex ante conditionalities, where not fulfilled at the time of submission of OP or PA Shall examine and approve: • Evaluation plan (covering one or several OPs) and any modification thereof • Communication plan • Modification of OP 7 Regional Cohesion Policy

Important changes in Regulations, Implementing and Delegated Acts • Enhanced focus on results • Increased importance of monitoring and evaluation • Even stronger need for clear intervention logic • Close link with Europe 2020 strategy

Clear intervention logic • Composed of the hierarchy of programme objectives, actions, expected outputs and results • Important for all phases: programme design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation • E. g. choice of programme-specific indicators, timeplanning of evaluations 9

Clear intervention logic • Challenges and needs • Country-specific recommendations • National Reform Programme • European semester analyses Funding priorities Linkage to Europe 2020 Strategy • Consistent translation into thematic objectives and investment priorities

Programme theory – Intervention logic

Programme architecture Thematic objective Investment priority 1 Specific objective 2 Priority axis Investment priority 2 Specific objective 1 Specific objective 2 12

Programming (1) 1. Identification of development needs 2. Selection of thematic objectives and investment priorities as set out in the CPR and Fund-specific rules 3. Definition of at least one specific objective per investment priority to target the latter appropriately in the specific national or regional context 4. Definition of result indicators linked to specific objectives

Programme architecture Thematic objective Investment priority 1 Specific objective 2 Priority axis Investment priority 2 Specific objective 1 Specific objective 2 15

Specific objectives Art. 2 CPR - Definitions "specific objective' means the aim to which an investment priority or Union priority contributes in a specific national or regional context through actions or measures undertaken within such a priority" 16

Importance of specific objectives Art. 17 CPR – ex ante conditionalities 'applicable ex ante conditionality' means a concrete and precisely pre-defined critical factor, which is a prerequisite for and has a direct and genuine link to, and direct impact on, the effective and efficient achievement of a specific objective for an investment priority or a Union priority 17

Importance of specific objectives Art. 87(2)(b) CPR – Operational Programme For each priority axis: "the investment priorities and corresponding specific objectives" "in order to strengthen the result-orientation of the programming, the expected results for the specific objectives, and the corresponding result indicators, with a baseline value and a target value, where appropriate quantified in accordance with the Fundspecific rules" "a description of the type and examples of actions to be supported under each investment priority and their expected contribution to the specific objectives" 18

Importance of specific objectives Annex II – performance framework "Milestones are intermediate targets, directly linked to the achievement of the specific objective of a priority, where appropriate, expressing the intended progress towards the targets set for the end of the period" Milestones and targets shall be "consistent with the nature and character of the specific objectives of the priority" 19

Equal opportunities Art. 7 Equal opportunities "The Member States and the Commission shall ensure that equality between men and women and the integration of gender perspective are taken into account and promoted throughout the preparation and implementation of programmes, in relation to monitoring, reporting and evaluation. " 20

Programming (2) 5. Only after the development needs, objectives and the result sought have been clarified, should one consider the types of actions to be supported, choosing (a mix of actions) which best achieves the objectives defined 6. Output indicators should be logically linked to and reflect the types of actions planned. Outputs generated by actions should also contribute logically towards the results that one aims to achieve.

Programming (3) 7. Completing the drafting of the intervention logic 8. Reflection and adjustment of intervention logic 9. Testing the intervention logic – ex ante evaluation 10. Reflection and adjustment of intervention logic

General remarks on indicators • Common and where relevant programme-specific • Financial, output and result • No impact indicators (difference with 2007 -2013) • Reported annually and electronically by MA as structured data as part of the AIR, broken down by investment priority • Reported as annual data, not cumulatively (difference with 2007 -2013) • Relate to partially or fully implemented operations (definition in Art. 2 draft CPR) 24

General remarks on indicators • Recommendation: monitoring data entered into system throughout the year by beneficiaries/ bodies in charge of entering monitoring data • Clear name, unequivocal and easy to understand definition, measurement unit (provided for common indicators) 25

Monitoring information system The system must record and store data on individual participants in a way that permits the managing authorities to perform the tasks related to monitoring and evaluation in conformity with the requirements set out in Art. 49 and Annex XX CPR and Articles 5 and 15(iv)(4) and (6), Annex I and II of the ESF Regulation Tasks include: 1. undertake impact evaluations 2. Be able to contact participants after they have left the support 3. draw a representative sample of participants 26

Micro-data • CPR (Art. 114(2)(d)) sets out a legal obligation for the managing authorities to establish a system that records and stores individual participant data in computerised form • Micro-data of participants should be collected and stored • Micro-data are observation data collected on an individual object, i. e. a participation record • Observation data (characteristics and results) collected by indicators • Micro data allow MS to create output/result statistics and to match different observation data • May be complemented by unique personal identifiers 27

Data protection The data processing arrangements must be in line with the provisions of Data protection Directive 95/46, in particular Articles 7 and 8 thereof. Indicators require the collection of two categories of data on individuals: • Personal data – indicator marked with * • Personal sensitive data – indicator marked with ** 28

Increased importance of monitoring - Delegated and Implementation Acts 1. Model for the OP (IA) 2. Performance framework: arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining milestones and targets and for assessing the attainment of the milestones and targets (IA) 3. Performance framework: financial corrections criteria (DA) 4. Data to be recorded and stored in computerised form (DA) 5. Model for the annual and final implementation report (IA) 6. Model for the progress report (IA) 29

1. Model for the Operational Programme (IA) • Performance framework for the priority axis • Broken down by Fund • Broken down by category of region • Key implementation steps, financial indicators, output indicators and where appropriate result indicators • Indicators are set at IP level, but the indicators for the performance framework have to be aggregated Indicators and implementation steps must be representative for the priority axis • Milestones for 2018 and targets for 2023 30

2. Performance framework (IA): arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining milestones and targets and for assessing their attainment Main elements of the Implementing Act: 1. Arrangements for documentation of the establishment of milestones and targets 2. Basic requirements for different types of indicators 3. Arrangements for determining milestones and targets 4. Arrangements for the verification of the attainment of milestones and targets 31

2. Performance framework (IA): arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining milestones and targets and for assessing their attainment 2. 1. Arrangements for documentation of the establishment of milestones and targets • Methodologies and criteria to select indicators for PF ensuring milestones and targets comply with criteria of Annex II, § 3 CPR • Use of data/evidence and calculation method to estimate the value of milestones and targets • Rationale for the selection of output indicators, including explanation on share of the financial allocation represented by the operations which will produce the outputs + method to calculate the share -must represent more than 50% of financial allocation to the priority • Info on how methodology to ensure consistency in the PF has been applied in accordance with the provisions of the Partnership Agreement • Rational of selection of result indicators and key implementation 32 steps

2. Performance framework (IA): arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining milestones and targets and for assessing their attainment 2. 2. Requirements for indicators and key implementation steps • Milestones and targets to be set at level of the priority • In case of multi-fund/multi-category of regions priority axes: breakdown by Fund and by category of region • For financial indicators: M&T refer to total amount of eligible expenditure entered into accounting system of certifying authority… • For ESF output indicators M&T refer to achieved value for fully or partially implemented operations • Key implementation steps refer to an important stage in delivery of a priority, with verified completion, and expressed as number or percentage. • Result indicators used where appropriate, closely linked to interventions 33

2. Performance framework (IA): arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining milestones and targets and for assessing their attainment 2. 4. Arrangements for verification of the attainment of milestones and targets • To be assessed at priority axis level • In case of multi-fund/multi-category of regions priority axes: assessment by Fund and by category of region • Achievement of milestone/target: all indicators of the performance framework of the priority axis have attained at least 85% of milestone (2018) or target (2023) value • Serious failure to achieve M&T: • Max 2 indicators/priority axis: any of the output or financial indicators failed to attain at least 65% of the milestone/target value • More than 2 indicators/priority: at least 2 of the output or financial 34 indicators failed to attain at least 65% of the milestone/target value

3. Performance framework (DA): financial corrections criteria Conditions for applying financial corrections at end of programming period on basis of final implementation report: i. Serious failure to achieve targets liked to financial indicators or output indicators • Max 2 indicators/priority: any of the indicators failed to attain at least 65% of target value • More than 2 indicators/priority: at least 2 of the indicators failed to attain at least 65% of target value ii. Serious failure is due to clearly identified implementation weakness iii. Commission previously communicated to MA the clearly identified implementation weakness iv. MS failed to take necessary corrective action v. No socio-economic or environmental factors, no significant changes in the economic or environmental conditions in a MS…seriously affecting implementation of priorities concerned 35

EC reporting (Art. 46 bis) • Reporting by the EC and debate on the ESI Funds • Three types of report: summary report and strategic reports and annual progress reports • Summary report: • Summary report based on AIRs, including summary of evaluations • Starting in 2016, to Council, EP, ECOSOC, Cd. R • Strategic report: • In 2017 and 2019, based on progress reports • Annual Progress Reports: • Starting in 2018, every two years • To spring summit, ESI Funds contribution to Europe 2020 36 Regional Cohesion Policy

Implementation reports - timeline April 2015 YEI report (Annex I and II indicators for YEI funding) (Art. 15(iv)(3) ESF Reg. ) May 2016 light AIR (Art. 44(1) and (2) CPR), Annex I and II indicators, special reporting on YEI evaluation findings, Art. 15(iv)(4) ESF Reg. June 2017 strategic AIR (Art. 44(3) and 101 CPR), Annex I (including data on homeless and rural area) and Annex II ESF Reg. May 2018 light AIR, Annex I and II June 2019 Strategic AIR (Art. 44(4) and 101 CPR), Annex I, including longer-term indicators, special reporting on YEI evaluation findings (Art. 15(iv)(4) ESF Reg. ) May 20202023 Light AIR, Annex I and II December Final report, including longer-term indicators of Annex I, 37

Monitoring: Regulatory requirements on INDICATORS

List of common ESF and YEI indicators • Structure of Annex I and II • Annex I - common ESF indicators • • (1) Common output indicators on participants (2) Common output indicators on entities (3) Common immediate result indicators (4) Common longer-term result indicators • Annex II - Youth Employment Initiative indicators • (1) Immediate result indicators • (2) Longer-term result indicators

Annex I Common indicators 40

Output indicators on people Employment status 1. unemployed, including long-term unemployed* 2. long-term unemployed* 3. inactive* 4. inactive, not in education or training* 5. employed, including self-employed* 41

Output indicators on people Age 1. below 25 years* 2. above 54 years* 3. participants above 54 years who are unemployed, including long-term unemployed, or inactive not in education or training * Education 1. with primary (ISCED 1) or lower secondary education (ISCED 2)* 2. with upper secondary (ISCED 3) or post-secondary education (ISCED 4)* 3. with tertiary education (ISCED 5 to 8)* 42

Participants above 54 years who are unemployed, including long-term unemployed, or inactive not in education or training Unemployed, including long-term unemployed Inactive, not in education Above 54 years or training 43

Output indicators on people Disadvantaged participants 1. participants who live in jobless households* 2. participants who live in jobless households with dependent children* 3. participants who live in a single adult household with dependent children* 4. migrants, people with a foreign background, minorities (including marginalised communities such as the Roma)** 5. disabled** 6. other disadvantaged** 44

Participants who live in jobless households* All household members either unemployed or inactive Household – housekeeping/social unit: • having common arrangements; • sharing household expenses or daily needs; • in a shared common residence. -> one person living alone / group of people, not necessarily related -> living at the same address Excluded: - Households composed solely of students. - Collective / institutional households (hospitals, old people’s homes, residential homes, prisons, military barracks, religious 45 institutions, boarding houses and workers’ hostels, etc. )

Participants who live in jobless households with dependent children * Subindicator of Participants who live in jobless households* Dependent children - all children under 17 years of age and - persons between 17 -24 years of age who are economically dependent on their parents -> Participant can be any household member (parent, dependent child, other household member) 46

Participants who live in a single adult household with dependent children* NO subindicator to "jobless household", but same definitions regarding - household - dependent children 47

Output indicators on people Disadvantaged participants 7. 8. Data to be submitted homeless or affected by housing exclusion* in from rural areas* June 2017 The data on participants under the above two indicators are to be provided in the AIR as specified in Article 44(3) of Regulation (EU) No [. . . ] CPR (i. e. in 2017). They are to be collected based on a representative sample of participants within each investment priority. Data for participants about rural areas are to be collected at LAU 2 (local administrative unit, former NUTS 5). 48

Homeless or affected by housing exclusion National definition or ETHOS (European Typology of Homelessness and Housing Exclusion) definition – classification of four living circumstances : 1. Rooflessness (living rough / emergency accommodation), 2. Houselessness (in accommodation for the homeless, in women's shelters, in accommodation for immigrants, people due to be released from institutions and people receiving long-term support due to homelessness), 3. Insecure accommodation (insecure tenancies, under threat of eviction or violence), 4. Inadequate housing (unfit housing, non-conventional dwellings) 49 -> Reference "Confronting Homelessness in the European Union"

From rural areas • Rural areas are to be understood as thinly populated areas according to the Degree of urbanisation (DEGURBA category 3) classification. • Thinly-populated areas means that more than 50 % of the population lives in rural grid cells. • The data shall be collected at the Local Administrative Unit level of LAU 2 (local administration/communes). The DE-GURBA category 3 shall be established according to http: //ec. europa. eu/eurostat/ramon/miscellaneous/index. cfm? Ta rget. Url=DSP_DEGURBA header "for reference year 2012". 50

From rural areas 51

LAU 2 AT Gemeinden FI Kunnat / Kommuner NL Gemeenten BE Gemeenten/Comm unes FR Communes PL Gminy BG Населени Места/Naseleni Mesta GR Demotiko diamerisma /Koinotiko diamerisma PT Freguesias HR Municipalities HU Települések RO Comune + Municipii + Oraşe CY Dimoi, koinotites IE Electoral Districts SE Kommuner CZ Obce IT Comuni SI občine DE Gemeinden LT Seniūnijos SK Obce DK Sogne LU Communes UK Wards (or parts thereof EE Vald, linn LV Pilsētas, novadi, pagasti ES Municipios MT Kunsilli 52

Output indicators on entities 1. number of projects fully or partially implemented by social partners or non-governmental organisations 2. number of projects dedicated to sustainable participation and progress of women in employment; 3. number of projects targeting public administrations or public services at national, regional or local level 4. number of supported micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (including cooperative enterprises, enterprises of the social economy) 53

Number of projects dedicated at sustainable participation and progress of women in employment Project with the aim of increasing the sustainable participation and progress of women in employment, thus combating the feminisation of poverty, reducing gender-based segregation and combating gender stereotypes in the labour market and in education and training, promoting reconciliation of work and personal life for all and equal sharing of care responsibilities between men and women. ESF Regulation, Art. 7, Promotion of equality between men and women 54

Immediate result indicators 1. inactive participants engaged in job searching upon leaving* 2. participants in education/training upon leaving* 3. participants gaining a qualification upon leaving* 4. participants in employment, including selfemployment, upon leaving* 5. disadvantaged participants engaged in job searching, education/ training, gaining a qualification, or in employment, including selfemployment, upon leaving** 55

Immediate result indicators Disadvantaged are: • participants who live in jobless households* • participants who live in jobless households with dependent children* • participants who live in a single adult household with dependent children* • migrants, people with a foreign background, minorities (including marginalised communities such as the Roma)** • disabled** • other disadvantaged** • homeless or housing exclusion • rural area

Disadvantaged participants in job searching, in education/training, gaining a qualification or in employment upon leaving Different logic than other immediate result indicators - All disadvantaged groups to be reported together - All immediate results to be reported together 57

Longer-term result indicators 1. participants in employment, including self-employment, 6 months after leaving* 2. participants with an improved labour market situation 6 months after leaving* 3. participants above 54 years in employment, including self -employment, 6 months after leaving* 4. disadvantaged participants in employment, including selfemployment, 6 months after leaving** These data are to be provided in the annual implementation reports as specified in Article 44(4) of Regulation (EU) No [CPR] (i. e. 2019 & 2023). They are to be collected based on a representative sample of participants within each investment priority. 58

59

60

Participants in employment, including self-employment, - 6 months after leaving Including self-employment No separate reporting of self-employed 6 months after leaving 61

Targets for common result indicators An output indicator as reference is needed. OP/AIR templates and SFC 2014 will give a drop-down menue. Only those combinations will be possible. 62

Annex II YEI indicators 63

1. Reported annually, including the longerterm result indicators 2. Reported in addition to the common indicators above 3. First report on YEI implementation due in April 2015, i. e. one year earlier than for the rest of the ESF 64

YEI immediate result indicators (I) 1. unemployed participants who complete the YEI supported intervention* 2. unemployed participants who receive an offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship or traineeship upon leaving* 3. unemployed participants who are in education/training, gaining a qualification, or in employment, including self-employment, upon 65 leaving*

YEI immediate result indicators (II) 4. long-term unemployed participants who complete the YEI supported intervention* 5. long-term unemployed participants who receive an offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship or traineeship upon leaving* 6. long-term unemployed participants who are in education/training, gaining a qualification, or in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving* 66

YEI immediate result indicators (III) 7. inactive participants not in education or training who complete the YEI supported intervention* 8. inactive participants not in education or training who receive an offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship or traineeship upon leaving* 9. inactive participants not in education or training who are in education/training, gaining a 67 qualification, or in employment upon leaving*

YEI immediate result indicators 3 target groups x 3 immediate results = 9 immediate result indicators 68

YEI immediate result indicators Completion of intervention Attendance according to schedule until the last day/last session of scheduled end. -> No recording as immediate result if irregular attendance/ drop out. 69

YEI immediate result indicators Offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship or traineeship upon leaving Voluntary conditional promise, Indication of offeror's willingness to enter into agreement under specific terms with the participant Acceptance result in binding agreement with legal commitment of both parties 70

YEI immediate result indicators Continued education Enrolment in - formal education or - training programmes leading to recognised vocational qualification. 71

YEI immediate result indicators Apprenticeship - Training contract or formal agreement (occupation, duration, skills to be acquired, wage or allowance etc. ) - Directly or via the education institution - Normally part of formal education and training at upper secondary level (ISCED 3) - Duration on average 3 years - Successful completion leads to nationally recognised qualification 72

YEI immediate result indicators Traineeships • Limited period of work practice spent at business, public bodies or non-profit institutions • Last a few weeks to a few months • Usually not considered to constitute employment contracts 73

YEI longer-term result indicators 1. participants in continued education, training programmes leading to a qualification, an apprenticeship or a traineeship 6 months after leaving* 2. participants in employment, including selfemployment, 6 months after leaving* 3. participants in self-employment 6 months after leaving* The data for longer-term result indicators are to be collected based on a representative sample of participants within each 74 investment priority.

Priority axes covering more than one category of region Can be justified where identical objectives and actions are pursued across all regions Re-percussions: • Co-financing rate and financial management by priority axis and by category of region • Breakdown of performance framework and output indicators (and in case of ESF, also result indicators)by category of region

Baselines and targets • Baselines for result indicators with a target • Cumulative target values for 2023 (for output and result indicators), if n+3 rule adopted • Targets are quantified for all output indicators (absolute numbers) and common result indicators (absolute numbers or shares/rates) and quantified or qualitative for programme-specific result indicators • Consult background papers for ESF target setting http: //ec. europa. eu/esf/main. jsp? cat. Id=67&lang. Id=en&news. Id=8174 76

Targets for common result indicators - example • Investment priority: • “Equality between men and women and reconciliation between work and private life” • Specific objective: • Increase participation of low skilled inactive or unemployed people with care responsibilities in the labour market Targets for common result indicators should be set in function of the data reported for common output 77 indicators.

Result target is often expressed in % The % requires a reference value, i. e. the relevant output data. CI Result: Participants gaining a qualification upon leaving Targets: 50% gaining a qualification upon leaving WRONG! 50% of whom? Of all participants? No! 50% of the low skilled participants (ISCED 1 and 2) gaining a qualification upon leaving 78

CI Result: Participants in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving Targets 50% in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving WRONG! 50% of whom? Of all participants? No! 50% of the unemployed in employment, including selfemployment, upon leaving 40% of the inactive in employment, including self 79 employment, upon leaving

Monitoring: Programme specific indicators

Principles for sound indicators • Integrated set of indicators consisting of CI and programme-specific indicators • With a limited set of targets. Not all indicators need a target. But the most important ones do. • Indicators should cover the main scope of a priority (i. e. target group, type of activity etc. ) • Targets should also cover large parts of a priority • Indicators should be simple - sophisticated data require evaluation 81

Programme-specific indicators – recommendation • Use common indicators and their definitions when establishing programme-specific indicators – decrease of administrative burden 82

Programme-specific longer-term result indicators • Possibility to monitor longer-term results over a longer time span than 6 months after leaving If the same population/sample as for longer-term result indicators is covered – information on sustainability of results 83

Enhanced monitoring of results • With access to database with micro-data on employment status, enhanced monitoring could be envisaged: • Employment / unemployment spell of participants can be monitored in a prolonged period of time after leaving project

Time series with employment results of participants Number of participants Participants in employment x months after leaving, N=1000 Common longerterm result indicator 85 Programme-specific longer-term result indicators Number of months after participants left project

Example (Flanders) from Belgium People that never fell back into unemployment After 6 months: about 1000 never worked about 500 never worked Source: presentation "Impact evaluation of PES action for the unemployed in Flanders" by Benedict Wauters (ESF Agency Flanders) and Steven Groenez (KU Leuven HIVA) given at ESF Evaluation Partnership 13 -6 -2013

Programme-specific result indicators • Need to be logically linked to outputs (directly supported participants or entities) • Global effects on a target group are to be assessed through evaluations • Data comes from monitoring or surveys, or from existing databases building on micro-data => Avoid indicators based on general statistics, such as (increase of) employment rate in a region (by x%) YES: participants aged 20 or younger starting an apprenticeship NO: share of young people aged 20 or younger 87

Three approaches to set programme-specific indicators 1) By combining different common ESF indicators 2) By combining common ESF indicators with programme specific characteristics/ features 3) By setting new indicators focusing solely on programme specific characteristics/ features 88

1) By combining different one-dimensional common ESF indicators Advantage: Data have to be collected anyway. Less administrative burden linked to data collection NB: Some common ESF indicators are based on such combination • Participants above 54 years who are unemployed, including long-term unemployed, or inactive not in education or training* • Disadvantaged participants engaged in job searching, education/ training, gaining a qualification, or in employment, including selfemployment, upon leaving** • Participants above 54 years in employment, including selfemployment, 6 months after leaving* • Disadvantaged participants in employment, including selfemployment, 6 months after leaving** 89

Common output indicator: Participants above 54 years who are unemployed, including long-term unemployed, or inactive not in education or training* Above 54 years Unemployed, including longterm unemployed Inactive, not in education or training

Common longer-term result indicator: Disadvantaged participants in employment, including self -employment, 6 months after leaving** Migrants, people with a foreign background, minorities (incl. marginalised communities such as the Roma) Other disadvanta ged Disabled Participants in employment, including self-employment, 6 months after leaving

Programme Output Indicator: Young low skilled inactive participants Inactive, not in education or training With primary or lower secondary education Below 25 years 92

Programme Immediate Result indicator: high skilled unemployed in employment upon leaving Unemployed, including long-term unemployed With tertiary education Participants in employment upon leaving

Programme Immediate Result indicator: low skilled older workers gaining a qualification upon leaving Employed, including self -employed With primary or lower secondary education Above 54 years Participants gaining a qualification upon leaving 94

2) By combining common ESF indicators with programme specific characteristics/ features Advantage: indicators can take into account specific aspects of the programme. 95

Output indicator: NEETS Participants between 16 and 24 years Inactive, not in education or training Unemployed, including long-term unemployed 96

Output indicator: Disadvantaged pupils Pupils below 16 years Migrant and minorities Other disadvantage d Disabled 97

Output indicator: Young high-skilled participants establishing a start-up upon leaving Below 25 years With tertiary education Start-ups or Participants in employment, including selfemployment, upon leaving 98

Result indicator: Disadvantaged pupils in education or training upon leaving Pupils below 16 years Migrant and minorities Disabled Other disadvantage d In education or training upon leaving 99

Result indicator: NEETs in education or training upon leaving Inactive, not in education or training Unemployed, including long-term unemployed Participants between 16 and 24 years Participants in education/ training upon leaving 100

3) By setting new indicators focusing solely on programme specific characteristics/ features 101

This example shows possible subdivision of a common indicator into programme-specific indicators. 102

Steps in designing programme-specific indicators 1. 'Deconstruct' the programme with view to the following categories: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Target groups (people & entities) Type of planned activities Themes Projects Type of expected results 2. Prioritise the content of each category in order to then identify indicators on the most important aspects 3. Develop indicators e. g. by combining characteristics/ features from the various categories 4. Review intervention logic to ensure that the most 103 important aspects are covered by indicators

Example • Investment priority: • “Equality between men and women and reconciliation between work and private life” • Specific objective: • Increase participation of low skilled inactive or unemployed people with care responsibilities in the labour market 104

Target groups Type of activity Expected type of results Self-/Employment Qualification Inactive not in education or training /unemployed/ LTU with care responsibilities with ISCED below 3 Support for child care/care for dependent persons Training 105

Common output I with target • With ISCED 1 or 2 Programme-specific output indicators • Inactive not in education or training with care responsibilities with ISCED below 3 • Unemployed with care responsibilities with ISCED below 3 • LTU with care responsibilities with ISCED below 3 CI results with targets • Participants gaining a qualification upon leaving Programme-specific result indicators • Low skilled (below ISCED 3) inactive or unemployed participants in employment who received support in their care responsibilities • Participants in employment, including selfemployment, upon leaving • Participants in employment, including selfemployment, 6 months after leaving 106

Unemployed Inactive not in education or training LTU with care responsibilities with ISCED below 3 Inactive, not in education Unemployed LTU or training With ISCED 1 or 2 With care responisibiliti ties Below ISCED 1 Participants in employment, Gaining a including selfqualification employment, upon leaving 107

Evaluation

What is hopefully going on right now

Intervention logic Programme design Interactive process Iterative process Monitoring Implementation Indicators On-going evaluation Ex-post evaluation 110 Ex-ante evaluation

The ex-ante should check for a clear intervention logic • Challenges and needs • Country-specific recommendations • National Reform Programme • European semester analyses Funding priorities Linkage to Europe 2020 Strategy • Consistent translation into thematic objectives and investment priorities

The ex-ante should check for a clear intervention logic • Specific objectives (SO) • Precise definition (of change) - Should be more specific than the investment priority about target groups, problem area or structure, procedures, institutions, etc. it seeks to change - Should logically link to the proposed actions • Measurement (result indicators) • Types of actions • The most appropriate interventions to achieve SO (the right "action mix"? ) • The choice based on an analysis of problems • Measurement of their outputs (output indicators)

The ex-ante should check for a clear intervention logic • Clarifies the intervention logic • Demonstrates causal links between: Types of actions -> outputs -> intended results / specific objective Output indicators Result indicators Description of how planned actions will contribute to specific objectives is often lacking in first OP drafts reviewed. • Helps identifying for which results/outputs, not captured by common indicators, programme-specific indicators should be established

The ex-ante checks for relevant and clear indicators Ex-ante evaluators should consult carefully draft guidance on ESF Monitoring and Evaluation 2014 -2020 and assess: • Relevance • Result indicators should capture a change in the situation of supported participants or entities • Clarity • Indicators should have a clear title and an unequivocal and easy to understand definition

Indicators with realistic targets and identified data sources Ex-ante evaluators should also assess: • Target values – are they realistic? • Consult background papers for ESF target setting http: //ec. europa. eu/esf/main. jsp? cat. Id=67&lang. Id=en&news. Id=8174 • Data collection • Will data be collected and reported on time? • Have necessary arrangements been put in place to collect and store micro-data of participants? • Are existing databases used as data sources? (NB: reduction of admin. burden for beneficiaries) • Are procedures in place to ensure quality of data?

Evaluation during the programming period

Evaluation during the programming period (Art. 49) • MA shall ensure that evaluations are carried out to assess effectiveness, efficiency and impact and that they are subject to appropriate follow-up • Evaluation plan covering one or several OPs drawn up by MA or MS • EC may carry out evaluations at its own initiative. Regional Cohesion Policy 117

Evaluation Plan (Art. 104) • Evaluation plan to be submitted to the MC no later than a year after the adoption of the programme(s) • By December 2021 MA shall submit to EC a report summarising evaluation findings and main outputs and results of programme, providing comments on the reported information 118 Regional Cohesion Policy

YEI Evaluation Art. 15(iv)(6) ESF Reg. Two evaluations required: 1. completed by end 2015 2. completed by end 2018 Scope: assess effectiveness, efficiency and impact Be aware of scope of reporting requirement! 119

YEI Reporting Art. 15(iv)(4) ESF Reg. The report in 2016, 2019 and 2024 "shall set out and assess the quality of employment offers received by YEI participants, including the disadvantaged, those from marginalized communities and those leaving education without qualifications. The Report shall set out and assess their progress in continuing education, finding sustainable and decent jobs, or moving into apprenticeship or quality traineeship. 120

Summary report Art. 104(2) CPR "By 31 December 2022, managing authorities shall submit to the Commission, for each programme, a report summarising the findings of evaluations carried out during the programming period and the main outputs and results of the programme, providing comments on the reported information. " 121

Ex-post evaluation (Art. 50 + 104) • The EC shall carry out the ex post evaluations in close cooperation with MS and MA • Examine effectiveness and efficiency of ESI Funds and their contribution to Europe 2020 strategy, taking account of the EU targets • By 31 December 2024 and for each ESI Fund, EC shall prepare a synthesis report outlining the main conclusions of ex-post evaluations 122 Regional Cohesion Policy

Contents of evaluation plan • • • Subject Purpose (reasoning/use), scope, specific objectives Key evaluation questions Data sources and key methods Timing (link to "reasoning") Budget Partnership Audience Dissemination strategy 123 Regional Cohesion Policy

Impact evaluation: Expert assistance at your disposal

• • CENTRE FOR RESEARCH ON IMPACT EVALUATION - CRIE http: //crie. jrc. europa. eu

CRIE: What is it? • Centre for Research on Impact Evaluation • Joint DG EMPL-DG JRC initiative Established in June 2013 • Support to MS and DG EMPL • to set up necessary arrangements for carrying out • Counterfactual Impact Evaluations (CIE) 126 • of ESF funded interventions

WP 2 CRIE support to MS • CRIE supports MS to set up the necessary arrangements for carrying out Counterfactual Impact Evaluations (CIE) of DG EMPL funded interventions by: • WP 2 A Organizing training workshops on impact evaluation methods • WP 2 B Providing tailor-made advice on methodological and data issues that arise when designing, implementing and evaluating an initiative • WP 2 C Provide support to MS for arranging CIEs (preparation and implementation phase) 127

WP 2 A Are training workshops needed? • Specific ESF guidance on CIE now exists: v EC DG EMPL (2012), • “Design and commissioning of counterfactual • impact evaluations - A guide for ESF • Managing authorities” v Other • books and handbooks • on CIE are now available • 128

WP 2 A Value added of training workshop • WP 2 A 1. Problem-based learning methodology • WP 2 A 2. Exemplar CIEs are used to illustrate the issues and challenges • WP 2 A 3. Customized: Participants can propose examples of CIEs (they are working on or in the process of commissioning) for discussion at the workshop 129

Thank you for your attention! 130