ESF Data Support Centre Data collection and validation support for the management of the ESF 2014-2020 Andy Fuller ESF Support Centre Alphametrics Ltd. & Applica Sprl. 15 October 2014

ESF data support centre Established to provide MS with advice and guidance on methodological and practical issues related to the collection, storage and processing of ESF monitoring data. Underlying objective to ensure a common understanding and application of the monitoring requirements set out in the Regulations and thereby contribute to improving the quality, reliability and consistency of the data for common and programme-specific indicators. Key outputs: Practical guidance (Annex D to Commission guidance) Key requirements (data collection, storage, reporting, transmission, quality) Reporting (changes in indicators, reporting schedule) Key issues (participation records, use of registers, representative sampling, aggregation and validation..) Data collection and recording for indicators (each variable) FAQ guide available in SFC support portal (full text PDF in en+fr+de) MIS survey

Minimum requirements Collection of detailed data about each participant Individual participation records (micro-data) Personal data (including sensitive variables) Data storage -> computerised system to record and store data on each operation Data transmission –> Electronic via SFC2014 (AIR) Reporting of indicators (all common indicators for each IP – zero values if not relevant) Aggregate data (not micro-data) Annual data (rather than cumulative) IP level, with breakdown by category of region (except for YEI) and gender

Minimum requirements A participation record is a computerised record of a participant’s characteristics and situation (before and after) within the scope of a single operation Requirements for participation records: Operation identifier Personal identifier Dates of starting and leaving operation Complete personal data (employment status, age, education, gender and household situation) Incomplete records should not be included in aggregate data-sets Means to trace and re-contact the participant (longer-term results) Full data set at IP level needed to draw representative samples

FAQ Guide Online at SFC Support Portal under Support Materials -> Monitoring

FAQ Guide Covers common questions on topics such as: Definitions For which indicators is it appropriate to use national definitions? Participants and related indicators Who should be considered as participants in different types of intervention? Understanding of the target group “other disadvantaged” What counts as a qualification? Can persons who refuse to provide personal data still be supported? Data management Is it obligatory to collect and record personal identifiers for all participants? YEI and Youth Guarantee How do YEI immediate result indicators comply with the YG requirement to receive an offer within 4 months?

Survey on ESF monitoring & information systems (MIS) Questionnaire to MA (end-Jan 2014) on monitoring systems and any existing and anticipated problems in meeting new monitoring requirements for 2014-2020 and interviews with geo-desks (Feb-Mar 2014) Reply received for all but 4 MS Information on problems/issues contributed to development of practical guidance and FAQ More technical information on MIS rather variable in terms of detail and content -> more structured 2nd round of survey required (in progress) A questionnaire on the ESF monitoring systems was sent to all MA end-Jan 2014 to better understand the types of difficulties they have/anticipate in relation with the new requirements for the 2014-2020 programming period. 63 replies in total: 38 from MS (missing: IE (lead body not established yet and MIS not designed yet), FR (Aude Faravelli), CY and HU (Tofarides/Lilla Jutkusz both promised to send…) 25 from geo-desks (missing DK, HR, LV, LT, FI) Questionnaire sent to the following geo-desk officers (steering group):  MELIS Pieter - FR NL BE LU LANCIAPRIMA Luca - IT DK SE GONZALEZ-BLANCH Francisco - ES PT KISS Julia - HU FI LT EE LV PEZELJ Miha - DE AT SI HR RODRIGUEZ Eleuterio - UK IE EL CY PRAVDA Ondrej - PL SK CZ SHOYLEKOVA Mina and DOBRESCU Septimia - RO BG MT

Survey on ESF monitoring & information systems (MIS) - Main issues raised by MS (1) Processing of sensitive personal data is likely to be an issue because this is often prohibited by law Requirement to provide complete personal data may have a deterring effect on participation Definitions of indicators Migrants, people with foreign background, minorities Homeless or affected by housing exclusion LTU Rural areas Young persons

Survey on ESF monitoring & information systems (MIS) - Main issues raised by MS (2) Data collected directly from participants: self-declaration may not necessarily reflect the reality Migrants, foreign background, minorities Disadvantaged households Data extracted from registers: timing is a potential issue Programme-specific indicators Further guidance on indicators for institutional capacity and public administration was requested (document produced by the Commission) Expected delays in reporting Time needed to meet the new requirements Important turnover within monitoring bodies

Survey on ESF monitoring & information systems (MIS) – Risks identified (1) Collection of sensitive personal data Required by the ESF Regulation  arrangements with relevant authorities need to be put in place to avoid any delay in implementation Estimate figures not accepted for monitoring, actual figures only Eligibility for support and monitoring not necessarily linked (MS decision). Individuals with incomplete personal data can still be supported (“grand total” to be reported).

Survey on ESF monitoring & information systems (MIS) – Risks identified (2) Use of administrative registers Questions to consider before using registers: Are all participants covered? Are all variables covered, with definitions consistent with those provided in EC guidance? Timing of observations - is the information up-to-date? Will data be available for long enough to fulfil requirements? Can data be obtained when needed to satisfy reporting requirements?

Survey on ESF monitoring & information systems (MIS) – Risks identified (3) Completeness, consistency and validation of data Manual validation is not enough, automated validation checks on participation records are needed Incomplete/inconsistent records maintained in the database need to be identified (e.g. flagged) and excluded from aggregates for reporting indicators Data validated only at MA level: risk of missing opportunity to correct data (no direct contact with individuals) Data validated only at beneficiary level: each beneficiary should use same methods so that the data are fully coherent.

Survey on ESF monitoring & information systems (MIS) – Risks identified (4) Data storage Level of micro-data storage is not prescribed by the Regulation (MS decision), but a single dataset including all individual participation records (micro-data) is needed for representative sampling If micro-data are not stored at the MA level (e.g. beneficiary or IB level), combination of different datasets will be needed. Technical/practical aspects of ensuring reliable combination of datasets. Data aggregation Systems should be designed to support flexible data extraction methods to answer to information requests for routine monitoring (indicators) and for evaluation and audit purposes.

ESF data support centre Available to provide advice and guidance: Methodological support on monitoring information systems Clarification regarding data collection, recording, validation and storage Guidance regarding transmission of structured data to the EC using SFC2014 (technical queries still go to SFC support) Contact 9.00 a.m. – 5.00 p.m. Monday-Friday E-mail: support@esfsupport.eu Phone: +44 1480 702003