Preparation of Annual Implemention Reports (AIR) 2013 John WALSH DG Regional and Urban Policy Brussels, 11 March 2014 Cohesion Policy

AIR 2013 - Context Cohesion policy makes up more than 50% of public investments for many MS 7 years of implementation completed – 60% on average of expenditure declared by end 2013 Stronger political focus on effective and better investment Need to draw policy learning and build on good experiences for 2014-2020 programmes The Ex-post evaluation now launched will rely on the 2013 data (deadline for ex-post end-2015)

Commission work to date Core indicators Working paper 2009 – LINK Strategic reports 2010 & 2013 – LINK AIR 2012 data analysis presented to COCOF and Evaluation Network – LINK REGIO Corrected 2012 DATA published on line: LINK DG REGIO Expert Network - LINK Annual Synthesis Reports (2013 forthcoming) 2013 report on reporting of Job creation

Expert Network Synthesis Report 2013 "Despite the delays in implementing programmes, there is growing evidence on the outcome of expenditure, though the deficiencies of the Annual Implementation Reports (AIRs), emphasised in previous reports, often make it difficult to assess their importance and their contribution to meeting policy objectives. This tends to lead to the achievements of Cohesion policy being under-appreciated and under-valued." – 2013 Synthesis report (forthcoming)

Ex Post WP 0: Data collection and quality – Work programme Consultants contacting all ERDF / CF Programmes concerning 2012 output indicators - Focussing on 21 Core indicators (ToR: LINK) June 2013 – Country reports on monitoring systems and data reliability End June: Programmes to submit 2013 AIRs July – September: REGIO quality check with programmes September – re-contacting programmes on the 2013 Data End 2014 – Produce corrected core indicator data

REGIO treatment of 2013 AIR Quality of contents of AIR taking into account Consultants comments on 2012 data **NEW** - Internal assessment of implementation and performance of each programme Project Selection rate Payment rate Output indicators – Core and programme specific Programmes Evaluations Other qualitative elements

Specific request to ETC programmes ETC programmes do not generally use core or common indicators. Mr Deffaa, Director General, REGIO wrote on 20/2/2014 asking for a statement in the 2013 AIR on What, in your opinion, has your Programme achieved? Who has benefitted? What evidence do you have for achievements – from indicators, from evaluation, or from other sources?

Key Questions to Programmes Are all core indicators values collected/and encoded when relevant? (complete) Are the indicator definitions consistent with common definitions and practices? (consistent) Are the units of measurement correctly expressed? (correct) (check decimals, Mw vs MwH, Km vs M, Km² vs Ha, ...) Are the indicator values based on completed (operational) projects? Is there a quality control at OP level? (checks)

Questions to MS In your Member State … Is there a central overview / quality check taken of the different OP AIRs? Are you happy that AIRs report accurately on implementation and performance? Have you taken measures to improve monitoring systems and AIRs in relation to quality of reported project selection and output indicators since 2012 AIR? … or Are you planning measures in that sense before June 2014?