3_Evaluation in Leader Jela Tvrdonova 2015 5. Content Legal requirements Focus in Leader evaluation Subject of assessment LDS intervention logic Leader.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Samuele Dossi DG for Regional Policy - Evaluation
Advertisements

Role of CSOs in monitoring Policies and Progress on MDGs.
The concepts/mechanisms/tools for developing a Joint Programme: Critical issues and UNDG Joint Programme Guidance and formats.
Seminar on community-led local development Keeping it simple Brussels, 6 February
1 Jela Tvrdonova,  Strategic approach to rural development  Common approach to evaluation: legal background and CMEF  Monitoring and evaluation.
Leader as a part of the new CAP
CENTRAL EUROPE PROGRAMME SUCCESS FACTORS FOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT: focus on activities and partnership JTS CENTRAL EUROPE PROGRAMME.
LEADER -The acronym ‘LEADER' derives from the French words "Liaison Entre Actions de Développement de l'Économique Rurale“ which means, ‘Links between.
Financial Allocations RDP Total Allocation of €2.19 billion over 7 years 7% allocated to LEADER (Minimum 5%) €153 million EAFRD allocated to.
Ⓒ Olof S. Leader as part of “community-led local development” under the CSF; networking aspects.
The URBACT II Programme General Presentation Vilnius, 20 January 2011.
Implementation of Axis 4 Leader Programme Measure 421 In Romania 2012.
Regional Policy Managing Authorities of the ETC programmes Annual Meeting W Piskorz, Head of Unit Competence Centre Inclusive Growth, Urban and.
2_Monitoring and Evaluation of CAP 2014 – 2020 Approach of PII
Leader approach in 2007 – 2013 in SR Jela Tvrdoňová.
European & Structural Funds Programme SELEP CLLD Workshop Church House, London 3 December 2013
Evaluation methods and tools (Focus on delivery mechanism) Jela Tvrdonova, 2014.
Innovation in the Rural Development Networks Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development Matthias Langemeyer & Iman Boot.
Community development strategy for Mesarya area through LEADER approach Roland HAMEL – ASP France Yenierenkoy on 5 th June 2013.
What makes a successful development project? Kristin Olsen IOD PARC
APPLICATION FORM OF ROBINWOOD SUBPROJECT SECOND STEP 1. The short listed Local Beneficiaries work together to create international partnerships and prepare.
The LEADER approach to integrated rural development in the EU UNDP International Conference, Kosice, 5 October 2009 Jean-Michel COURADES AGRI G1 - Consistency.
Guidance notes on the Intevention Logic and on Building a priority axis 27 September 2013.
The local development strategy content Jela Tvrdonova, 2012.
Regional Policy Common Strategic Framework The Commission's revised proposal for the CPR - COM (2012) 496 of 11 Sept.
1 European Union Regional Policy – Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Community-led local development Articles of the Common Provisions Regulation.
4/5 June 2009Challenges of the CMEF & Ongoing Evaluation 1 Common monitoring and evaluation framework Jela Tvrdonova, 2010.
Leader Axis in Slovakia – strategies and institutions, the case study LAG MICROREGION TEPLICKA.
LEADER / CLLD Approach and expectations from the EU - Pedro Brosei 28 October 2015.
Consultant Advance Research Team. Outline UNDERSTANDING M&E DATA NEEDS PEOPLE, PARTNERSHIP AND PLANNING 1.Organizational structures with HIV M&E functions.
Guidelines for LDS preparation for Croatian LAG’s Estonian Leader Union Kadri Tillemann and Kristiina Timmo 28 th of September, Zagreb.
Agriculture and Rural Development SFC2014 and Rural Development Programmes (RDPs) management Petr Lapka DG Agriculture and Rural Development Unit "Consistency.
1 EUROPEAN FUNDS IN HALF-TIME NEW CHALLENGES Jack Engwegen Head of the Czech Unit European Commission, Directorate General for Regional Policy Prague,
Evaluation of NRNs Andreas Resch, Evaluation Advisor.
Focus on Governance and territorial achievements in Leader Plus period European Commission Évora, Portugal, 2007 Jela Tvrdonova.
Seminar on community-led local development How to choose effective strategies, strong partnerships and coherent areas? Key building blocks for.
"The challenge for Territorial Cohesion 2014 – 2020: delivering results for EU citizens" Veronica Gaffey Acting Director EUROPEAN COMMISSION, DG for Regional.
Jela Tvrdonova, The EU priorities:  Use the Leader approach for introducing innovation in the thematic axis  better governance at the local level.
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.
The delivery of rural development policies: Some reflections on problems and perspectives in EU countries INEA conference: The territorial approach in.
04/2007 THE EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENT POLICY & ITS INSTRUMENTS OF IMPLEMENTATION Preparation & Draft of environmental projects THE EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENT POLICY.
Leader approach in 2007 – 2013 in SR Jela Tvrdoňová.
Project design – Activities and partnership CENTRAL EUROPE PROGRAMME Project development seminar Prague, 1-2 February 2010 Monika Schönerklee-Grasser.
3 Pat Henry Department of the Environment, Community & Local Government Rural Development Programme Ireland LEADER Pat Henry Department of the.
"The role of Rural Networks as effective tools to promote rural development" TAIEX/Local Administration Facility Seminar on Rural Development Brussels,
W. Schiessl, AGRI E.II.4 Programme management and institutions involved in monitoring and evaluation.
Leader Axis Rural Development Policy by Jean-Michel Courades AGRI-F3.
1 Wladyslaw Piskorz Head of Unit ‘Urban development, territorial cohesion’ European Commission Directorate-General for Regional Policy Seminar organised.
Rural Development Programme of the SR 2014 – 2020 Measure M19 – Support for local development within the LEADER initiative.
Recommendations on project/action design and structure.
Thematic Working Group no. 3 Guidelines Evaluation of LEADER/CLLD
GUIDELINES Evaluation of National Rural Networks
Evaluation : goals and principles
Business Environment
Business Environment
Business Environment
Common Monitoring and Evaluation System for Rural Development
ESF Committee plenary meeting in Rome
Gender Equality Ex post evaluation of the ESF ( )
Evaluation plans for programming period in Poland
The role of the ECCP (1) The involvement of all relevant stakeholders – public authorities, economic and social partners and civil society bodies – at.
Purpose of the presentation
Helene Skikos DG Education and Culture
Commission proposal for a new LIFE Regulation CGBN meeting
Monitoring and evaluation
Civil Society Facility and Media Programme Call for proposals: EuropeAid/162473/DH/ACT/Multi Webinar no. 3: Preparing effective Concept Note.
Project intervention logic
Integrating Gender into Rural Development M&E in Projects and Programs
The local development strategy content
Presentation transcript:

3_Evaluation in Leader Jela Tvrdonova

Content Legal requirements Focus in Leader evaluation Subject of assessment LDS intervention logic Leader method 2

What are legal requirements? LAGs ensure monitoring and specific evaluation activities (1303/2013, Art 34.3 g) – LDS shall contain description of M&E arrangements Monitor the implementation of LDS Carry on specific evaluation activities provide MA and evaluators with information for RDP evaluation (1305/2013, Art. 71) MA. describe the evaluation topics and activities to assess the contribution of LDS and planned support for evaluation at LAG level (808/2014, Annex I, part 1, point 9), e.g. provision of guidance NRN provide capacity building for LAG and disseminate M&E findings (1305/2013, Art. 54.3) 3

Focus of evaluation in Leader approach Leader/CLLD EAFRD/public funding LDS/CLLDS Method RDP/OP 7 principles Added value

Assessment of LDS and its intervention logic LDS as a management tool to address the LAG territory’s needs and improve the situation LDS covers several aspects: Analysis Strategy and budget Implementation Management Monitoring and evaluation Reporting and communication The heart of the LDS is its intervention logic, which is also the ground for its evaluation 5

Assessment of LDS Purpose Effectiveness Efficiency Relevance Contribution to RDP/OP objectives

The base for the intervention logic design Territory description SWOT analysis Needs assessment 7

Context situation analysed with SWOT Expected impacts Expected results Expected outputs Overall LDS Objective(s) LDS specific objectives LDS operational objectives LDS measures Inputs Needs of the LAG territory to be addressed with the LDS LDS contribution to programme objectives and changes in LAG territory Links to objectives of EFF, EFRD and ESF, financed programmes if relevant Links to RDP Objectives, RD priorities and FA (mainly 6B) and others if relevant Elements of LDS intervention logic 8

M&E elements in LDS design and implementation Evaluation questions help to (re)formulate objectives in order to be realistic, measurable and time- oriented focus evaluation and their answers help to demonstrate achievements Indicators help to increase coherence, effectiveness and efficiency of intervention logic measure achievement s 9 During LDS design During LDS evaluation

M&E framework of the LDS Linking evaluation elements to IL Expected results Expected outputs LDS specific objectives Measure objectives LDS measures (EAFRD, EFRD, ESF, EFF) Inputs Result indicators Output indicators Evaluation question Impact indicators Overall LDS objective(s) Expected impacts 10

CMES elements Evaluation questions: FA 6B : To what extent have RDP interventions supported local development in rural areas? Evaluation questions related to FAs, which can be linked with LDS objectives Indicators: Leader related common indicators Common indicators linked to measures implemented via LDS and to FAs which can be linked with LDS objectives 11

Leader related CMES output indicators LAG level O 18 - Population covered by LAG O 19 - Number of LAGs No of LAGs using multi-fund No of LAGs implementing co- operation projects O 1 - Total public expenditure in preparation and implementation of cooperation activities of the LAG – paid O 1 - Total public expenditure for support for running costs and animation – paid Project level O 1 - Total public expenditure - committed O 1 - Total public expenditure - paid O 21 - No of cooperation projects per LAG O 22 - Number and type of project promoters (co-operation projects) 12

Leader related CMES target indicators LAG level : T 21 - Population covered by LAG Project level: T 1 Total public expenditure - paid T 23 - Jobs created 13

LDS-specific M&E elements LDS-specific evaluation questions linked to LDS- specific objectives LDS-specific indicators linked to LDS specific outputs (in case of LAG own measures), results and impacts 14

Intervention logic Evaluation questions Indicators Evaluation methods Data Evaluation framework for LDS Basis of evaluation Focus of evaluation Measurement tools Attribution of impacts Collection of evidence

Evaluation of Leader method – 7 principles Bottom-up approach with decision power for LAGs Local public – private partnership Area – based local development strategies Multi-sectorial design and implementation of strategies Implementation of innovative approaches Networking of local partnerships Implementation of cooperation projects

Bottom up Informovanosť územia: Miestni ľudia a/alebo ich zástupcovia a organizácie sú informovaní pravidelne o aktivitách a rozhodnutiach partnerstva a majú možnosť poskytnúť spätnú väzbu Účasť na strategických rozhodnutiach o území: Miestni ľudia a/alebo ich zástupcovia a organizácie sú zapojení v strategických rozhodnutiach partnerstva pre dané územie a majú možnosť takéto rozhodnutia navrhnúť Účasť na aktivitách a projektoch partnerstva v území: Miestni ľudia a/alebo ich zástupcovia a organizácie majú pravidelne možnosť zúčastňovať sa projektov a aktivít partnerstva a majú možnosť takéto projekty a aktivity partnerstva navrhnúť Schopnosť pripraviť a realizovať vlastné projekty a aktivity: Miestni ľudia a/alebo ich zástupcovia, organizácie a podniky pripravujú a realizujú projekty/aktivity Využitie miestnych materiálov: Miestne materiály sú predovšetkým využívané v implementácii projektov a aktivít partnerstva a miestnych ľudí Využitie miestnej infraštruktúry : Miestna infraštruktúra je predovšetkým využívaná implementácii projektov a aktivít partnerstva a miestnych ľudí Využitie miestnych verejných financií: Miestne verejné financie sú predovšetkým využívané v implementácii projektov a aktivít partnerstva a miestnych ľudí Využitie miestnych súkromných financií: Miestne súkromné financie sú predovšetkým využívané v implementácii projektov a aktivít partnerstva a miestnych ľudí Využitie miestnych podnikov: Miestne podniky sú predovšetkým využívané v implementácii projektov a aktivít partnerstva a miestnych ľudí

Area-based strategies - territory Identita územia: Územie má definovanú svoju identitu a táto identita je rozpoznaná a akceptovaná občanmi územia, občania majú pocit hrdosti a vlastníctva voči svojmu územiu, Homogenita územia: územie je homogénne z pohľadu sociálnych štruktúr, ekonomických štruktúr a infraštruktúry, Zdroje územia: územie má dostatočné/kritické množstvo prírodných, materiálnych, ľudských, kultúrnych a ekonomických zdrojov pre rozvoj, Kritické množstvo subjektov schopných realizovať aktivity vrátane potenciálnych užívateľov intervencií: územie má dostatočné/kritické množstvo aktívnych subjektov a užívateľov pre stratégie/projekty/aktivity.

Multi-sector strategies Multi-sektorová stratégia: stratégia pokrýva riešenie problémov verejného a súkromného sektora, tiež minimálne dvoch a viacerých sektorov: primárny sektor: poľnohospodárstvo, lesníctvo, ťažba surovín, sekundárny sektor: spracovanie, terciárny sektor: obchod a služby vrátane sociálnych a kultúrnych služieb, kvartérny sektor: vzdelávanie, výskum. Multi-sektorové projekty: pripravené a realizované ako verejno- súkromné projekty, tiež projekty ktoré riešia problémy viacerých sektorov, minimálne dvoch, Multi-sektorové aktivity: aktivity pripravené a realizované minimálne dvoma subjektmi (jednotlivec, skupina, organizácia)

Networking Siete v území: v území partnerstva sa tvoria a existujú siete medzi jednotlivcami, skupinami a organizáciami, napríklad siete medzi školami, dobrovoľnými združenia alebo ľuďmi s rôznymi záujmami. Siete mimo územia: územie aktívne podporuje a realizuje sieťovanie s inými územiami, napríklad s inými partnerstvami v rámci NSK alebo mimo neho v SR ako aj mimo SR (napríklad účasť v národnej sieti rozvoja vidieka, v dobrovoľných združeniach a sieťach.

Cooperation Spolupráca v území: príprava a realizácia projektov spolupráce medzi jednotlivcami, skupinami a organizáciami v území, napríklad projekty, ktoré pripravia dva alebo vieré subjekty spolu, a/alebo ich realizujú viaceré subjekty. Spolupráca s inými územiami v kraji a v SR: Príprava a realizácia projektov spolupráce s s inými partnerstvami v kraji alebo v iných krajoch v SR, Spolupráca s inými územiami mimo SR: Príprava a realizácia projektov spolupráce s územiami mimo SR.

Innovation Inovatívnosť stratégie: partnerstvo zavádza inovatívne prvky do stratégie vrátane inovatívneho zamerania intervenčnej logiky stratégie a opatrení/aktivít, napríklad stratégia je zameraná na oblasti, ktoré zatiaľ neboli realizované (cestovný ruch, zapojenie mládeže a pod.) Inovatívnosť stratégie a projektov: partnerstvo podporuje inovatívne projekty a aktivity, napríklad projekty ktoré prinášajú nové riešenia pre staré problémy, ako je inovatívny prístup k pohybovým aktivitám, kultúre a pod. Inovatívnosť propagácie a publicity: partnerstvo zavádza inovatívne prístupy k publicite a informáciám, napríklad využíva netradičné spôsoby v propagácii územia, ako dni otvorených dverí, rôzne spoločenské podujatia pod záštitou územia, súťaže a pod. Inovatívnosť budovania kapacity: Partnerstvo zavádza inovatívne aktivity v oblasti budovania kapacít, napríklad alternatíve spôsoby organizácie školení a konferencií s využitím interaktívnych metód, malý grantový program a pod.

Partnerships Two aspects: verejno-súkromného partnerstva alebo miestnej akčnej skupiny manažement a inštitucionálne a administratívne zázemie

Areas of partnership assessment Balanced structure Decision making Partnership in strategy development Partnership in strategy implementation

Balanced structure of partnership - representativeness Partnership is composed of representatives of public, private and civil sector and membership is well balanced Partnership also reflects equal representation of: Territory, Institutions, Social groups Gender

Decision making Decision making bodies (presidium) are representing membership of partnership well The structure/representativeness of decisive bodies (presidium) enables effective implementation of interventions/actions Sufficient capacities for the identification, selection, and control of project implementation Structure of partnership and its decision bodies enables effective monitoring and self-evaluation of interventions/actions Decisions are effectively divided among partnership and its management

Strategy development and implementation Strategy development and approval Involvement of partners Passive Active Professional ability Strategy implementation

Areas of management assessment Decision making procedures Daily management (office) development Publicity and communication Monitoring and evaluation

Decision making procedures - projects High independence of the partnership in the area of financial decisions for projectsThe clear rules for preparation and implementation of projectsManagement has enough human and professional capacities (or access to) for: Helping potential beneficiaries in project design and implementation Sufficient amount of potential projects beneficiaries exist in the territory Project beneficaries have the capacity to co-finance and implement projects Projects are selected and approved in line with the strategy and its prioritiesApproved projects are equally distributed in the territory are innovative have high added value for the territory

Management Management is technically an financially well equipped for implementation of interventions/actions

Publicity and communication Management is recognized in the territory and is well accessible for all Public is informed sufficiently about rules in connection with projects Management has ability to create contacts and networks among stakeholders within partnership and outside of it

Partnership in monitoring and self- evaluation sufficient human capacities enough experiences the system of on-going self- evaluation

33 Thank you for your attention!