The Estonian experience with ex-ante evaluation – set-up and progress

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Research and Innovation Why does ERA Need to Flourish ERA - State of Play Octavi Quintana Trias Brussels, 19th April 2013.
Advertisements

The Implementation Structure DG AGRI, October 2005
1 EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region Evaluation: Setting Outcome Indicators and Targets Seminar: 15 March 2011, La Hulpe Veronica Gaffey Acting Director.
Guidance document on ex-ante evaluation
Mid-term Evaluation Implementation of the EU Structural Funds in R&DI and Higher Education, Stage 1: Strategic view
Analytical Evidence on Research & Innovation in the Danube Region Progress of WP4 Vienna, Béla Kardon, PhD; RCISD
Ex-ante conditionality – General guidance Workshop on strategic programming, monitoring and evaluation Ilse De Mecheleer, DG EMPL Madrid, 22 February 2013.
Evaluating public RTD interventions: A performance audit perspective from the EU European Court of Auditors American Evaluation Society, Portland, 3 November.
Benchmarking as a management tool for continuous improvement in public services u Presentation to Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation u Peter.
Reporting on financial instruments to the Commission under the Annual and Final implementation reports Directorate General for Regional and Urban Policy.
EU-Regional Policy and Cohesion Structural Funds and Accession 1 SPP BUILDING IMPLEMENTATION CAPACITY Training seminar on evaluation Prague February.
Quality assurance in IVET in Romania Lucian Voinea Mihai Iacob Otilia Apostu 4 th Project Meeting Prague, 21 st -22 nd October 2010.
1 Framework Programme 7 Guide for Applicants
Evaluation methods and tools (Focus on delivery mechanism) Jela Tvrdonova, 2014.
Information by the Managing Authority on thematic evaluation of EU structural funds in Iruma Kravale Head of Strategic Planning Unit, European.
Ex-ante evaluation for RDPs 4 th International Evaluation Conference Budapest, 26th September 2013 Zélie Peppiette, DG AGRI Rural Development.
The LEADER approach to integrated rural development in the EU UNDP International Conference, Kosice, 5 October 2009 Jean-Michel COURADES AGRI G1 - Consistency.
IPA Funds Programme Management sept Bölgesel Rekabet Edebilirlik Operasyonel Programı’nın Uygulanması için Kurumsal Kapasitenin Oluşturulmasına.
Guidance notes on the Intevention Logic and on Building a priority axis 27 September 2013.
Progress update on developing Health Sector Strategic Plan (HSSP IV) Joint Annual Health Sector Review Technical Review Meeting Wednesday 5 th.
Managing Authority of EU Funds – Ministry of Finance 1 Methodology of selection of project applications for EU funds including preparation of appraisal.
1 European Union Regional Policy – Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Community-led local development Articles of the Common Provisions Regulation.
Aaron Zazueta Chief Evaluation Officer 2013 EVALUATION IN THE GEF.
Quality System Assessment in Italy European Curricula for Economic Animator in the Enlarging Europe – ECONOMIC ANIMATOR PT04/PP/08/36/446.
Evaluation Plan New Jobs “How to Get New Jobs? Innovative Guidance and Counselling 2 nd Meeting Liverpool | 3 – 4 February L Research Institute Roula.
Project Management Learning Program 7-18 May 2012, Mekong Institute, Khon Kaen, Thailand Writing Project Report Multi-Purpose Reporting.
Regional Policy Veronica Gaffey Evaluation Unit DG Regional Policy International Monitoring Conference Budapest 11 th November 2011 Budapest 26 th September2013.
Projects spanning over two programming periods Department for Programme and Project Preparation Beatrix Horváth, Deputy Head of Department Budapest, 5.
Project preparation workshop “Bringing a transnational project to life” Project idea “Challenges and chances from Climate Change for regional and local.
Evaluation Unit EuropeAid Martyn Pennington Head of Evaluation Unit- Devco B2 Workshop on Lessons Learned from International Joint Evaluations French Ministry.
SEA in the Czech Republic Prague, 24 September 2008.
Guidelines for LDS preparation for Croatian LAG’s Estonian Leader Union Kadri Tillemann and Kristiina Timmo 28 th of September, Zagreb.
Structural Funds Managing Authority – Ministry of Finance 1 Technical Assistance Ilze Aleksandroviča Head of Control and Development Division EU Funds.
1 Information by the Managing Authority on EU funds evaluation Monitoring Committee meeting October 15, 2009.
DESCRIPTION OF THE MONITORING AND EVALUATION SYSTEM IN POLAND Action Plan and the Two-year NRN Operational Plans.
Information Overview SF: Planning & Programming Workshops for EC Delegation Patrick Colgan & Ján Krištín PROGRAMMING PROCEDURES in Support of Regional.
"The challenge for Territorial Cohesion 2014 – 2020: delivering results for EU citizens" Veronica Gaffey Acting Director EUROPEAN COMMISSION, DG for Regional.
Polish National Rural Network Bureau of Technical Assistance Responsible for: -Technical Assistance in Programs of Rural Development for period.
EVALUATION OF THE SEE SARMa Project. Content Project management structure Internal evaluation External evaluation Evaluation report.
Indicators – intervention logic, differences ( vs programming period, ESF vs. ERDF) Piotr Wolski Marshall’s Office Zachodniopomorskie.
Croatia: Result orientation within the process of preparation of programming documents V4+ Croatia and Slovenia Expert Level Conference Budapest,
Information by the Managing Authority on evaluations of EU funds in 2009 Monitoring Committee meeting 25 March 2009.
TAIEX-REGIO Workshop on Applying the Partnership Principle in the European Structural and Investment Funds Bratislava, 20/05/2016 Involvement of Partners.
Annual Review Meeting for Cohesion Policy Funds Specific Thematic Focus 2 - Review the status and state of play of smart specialization strategy.
GUIDELINES Evaluation of National Rural Networks
SOUTH BALTIC CROSS-BORDER CO-OPERATION PROGRAMME
Proposed Organisation of Evaluation of the Romanian NSRF and Operational Programmes, Niall McCann, Technical Assistance Project for Programming,
Annual Review Meeting OP for Cohesion Policy Funds Specific Thematic Focus 2 - Review the status and state of play of Smart specialization.
The NRN evaluation process in Poland
The role of the Passport Indicators in Monitoring PFM Strategy
Performance Framework
Budget Community of Practice (BCOP)
Ex-ante evaluation: major points and state of play
Role of external contractors - Assistance, monitoring and evaluation
ESF Performance reports and Thematic reports
Evaluation plans for programming period in Poland
FP7 SCIENTIFIC NEGOTIATIONS
Information session SCIENTIFIC NEGOTIATIONS Call FP7-ENV-2013-two-stage "Environment (including climate change)" Brussels 22/05/2013 José M. Jiménez.
Information session SCIENTIFIC & TECHNICAL NEGOTIATIONS Call FP7-ENV-2013-WATER-INNO-DEMO "Environment (including climate change)" Brussels 24/06/2013.
How did we do it? Case examples from AIC
MINISTRY OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS DG “PROGRAMMING OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT” Mid-term evaluation of Operational Programme “Regional.
Mandate of the Eurostat Working Group
Danish Case Study presentation
Information on projects
Policy needs for rural development statistics and data analysis
The Atlantic Forum Process and outcomes European Commission – DG MARE
EVALUATIONS in the EU External Aid
European Statistical System Network on Culture (ESSnet Culture)
ESF monitoring and evaluation in Draft guidance
Role of Evaluation coordination group and Capacity Building Projects in Lithuania Vilija Šemetienė Head of Economic Analysis and Evaluation Division.
Presentation transcript:

The Estonian experience with ex-ante evaluation – set-up and progress Miryam Vahtra Coordinating specialist for evaluations 16.11.2012

Programming process

Ex-ante evaluation Evaluation will be carried out by Praxis in cooperation with Centre for Pure Development. Evaluation team – leading expert on methodology and evaluation content, process leader, evaluation working groups for each field and working group leaders. Kick-off meeting was on 22.08.2012 Inception Report has been presented, includes specific timeline and process description, agreed methodology and the list of interviewees. Evaluators prepare 3 Interim Reports (Excel table supplemented with text) and Final Evaluation Report. Final Evaluation Report is due 28.06.2013 Public presentation of evaluation results in July or August 2013

Ex-ante evaluation (2) Subject to evaluation are the selected objectives and their solutions for EU financing (I report), formed priority axis and initial financing plan (II report), first draft of the partnership agreement and OP (III report) and final version of the partnership agreement and OP. Basis for the evaluation are the documents approved by the cabinet, reports are due 15 working days after approval. In addition recommendations and problem areas are presented if necessary as they arise to enable prompt reaction and taking them into account as soon as possible.

Ex-ante evaluation (3)– theory based evaluation – sources Evidence-based material: Applied research and policy analyses (pre-analyses for 2014+) Previous evaluation reports (all evaluation reports are public) Statistics (Estonian, EU) Policy guidelines Estonian 2020 strategy, sector development plans EU (http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/what/future/index_en.cfm) Recommendations made to Estonia (EU stability pact, OECD) Experience of policy experts Interviews with experts coordinating 2014+ planning, involved partners, officials of the SF implementing systems Opinion leaders, researchers, policy field representatives Participation in the planning related meetings and seminars Output from planning process Evaluators have received the list of selected priorities and their solutions for EU financing, which has been discussed with the ministries and presented to the cabinet on 1st of November. According to progress in the planning process next decision papers will follow.

Ex-ante evaluation (4) - Methodological sheets Before each evaluation phase starts the evaluators present us the methodological sheet used for analyses (specified questions, evidence-based triangulation). Always marked 3 sources whether confirming or negating the decisions made – basis for recommendations. Excel sheets enables to track the sources. Detailed explanation of evaluation questions: Evaluation question Sub problem Relevant analyses Explanation what will be evaluated (specific problem, trend etc.) Validity Is the analyses complete (possible additional data needed)? Relations Preferable alternatives

Ex-ante evaluation (5) - Methodological sheets In each evaluation phase one file per field (economy and entrepreneurship, environment, employment etc) On each sheet one criterion In addition summarized sheet (automatic) Must enable data aggregation and analyses Unitary structure Comments for working team responsible for evaluating specific field Kick-off meetings for each evaluation phase to the members of working team Written instructions for filling up the sheets

Ex-ante evaluation (6) - Methodological sheets Ex-ante evaluation – 1 phase - CONCLUSIONS   Field Explanation On this sheet the aggregated analysis is needed regarding the analyses made on sub problems 1.1 - 1.13. Conclusions made on the level of sub problems will be automatically copied to the first sheet. Evaluation questions must have short and clear answers, which are supported by analyses made on the sub problem level. Sub problem (Relevance, Coherence, Impact) Opinion 1.1 To what extent identified problems are valid? (Relevance) 1.2 Does the analyses lack essential problems? (Relevance) 1.5 To what extent the specified development needs are derived logically from problems and external trends? (Relevance) 1.8 To what extent the specific objectives (solutions) are justified? (Relevance, coherence) 1.9 Regarding the development needs to what extent it has been focused on most relevant objectives? (Relevance, impact)  1.13 What are the preconditions necessary for impact? (Impact)  Evaluation questions 1 Whether and to what extent the set objectives of the OP correspond to Estonian development needs. 2 Whether and to what extent the set objectives contribute to the objectives of Europe 2020? 4 To what extent the proposal of objectives and investment priorities presented to the cabinet are relevant and justified regarding the need to ensure the longer term socio-economic development?

Ex-ante evaluation (7) - Methodological sheets 1.1 To what extent the identified problems are valid (Relevance)   Explanation 8 problems with regard to pre-analyses and development needs. Most field do not have as many problems to point at, the rest must be left unfilled. Each problem must be backed up or negated presenting specific sources at least 2-3. Input Final assessment Argumentation Recommendation Problem 1 Source Confirmation 1 Source of confirmation Confirmation 2 Confirmation 3 Argument against 1 Source for negation Argument against 2 Argument against 3 Assessment Comment

Ex-ante evaluation (8) Evaluators attend 27 meetings where proposed priority axis and indicators are discussed. 3 open seminars for 200 participants in November and February where initial findings are introduced. Before each interim report and final evaluation report validation seminars will be organized with representatives of the ministries and 2014+ planning team, where the initial findings and recommendations are discussed. 4 meetings on discussing findings and recommendations presented in evaluation reports with MA and 2014+ planning team.

Ex-ante evaluation (9) Project meetings every 3 weeks for briefing evaluators on the recent decisions and receiving input for the planning process. Evaluation reports will be commented by MA, 2014+ planning team in the Ministry of Finance and the members of the Evaluation Working Group. Agreed methodology - theory based evaluation, no surveys, policy field practical experience incorporated through interviews with leading experts and attending the discussion meetings during the planning process.

Ex-ante evaluation (10) - Main tasks To evaluate the validity of selected national objectives and their solutions for EU financing. Give recommendations for setting the specific objectives and priority axis as well as defining the intervention logic and developing measures. Evaluate internal coherence of the OP and its relation with other national and EU instruments. Assess the relevance of set indicators and verify baselines for result indicators, evaluate monitoring and control systems, identify future evaluation needs and collection of data needed. Give recommendations for forming the implementation system.

Ex-ante evaluation (11) - Ex-ante evaluation covering Partnership Agreement and OP of CP funds and separate contract for SEA co-ordinated by MoF as well as ex-ante evaluation on RDP co-ordinated by Ministry of Agriculture are running in parallel. Ex-ante evaluation for EMFF OP will be commissioned separately. Thank you! Miryam.Vahtra@fin.ee