Evaluation of the ESF contribution to the European Employment Strategy (EES) Undertaken in 2009 and 2010 – i.e. Lisbon Strategy as the reference point

Contribution of ESF to EES Purpose: An overall assessment of the contribution of the ESF to the EES. Perspectives: How does ESF contribute to EES To what extent does ESF contribute to EES Focus: Governance – intentionality and strategies behind ensuring contribution

Data sources Documents (NRP, NSRF, OP, implementation reports) Interviews with ESF and EES responsible Delphi – surveys (experts) Case studies: interviews with policymakers, project managers and social partners

To what extent does ESF contribute ESF relevant contribution chains contribute to all IEG ESF is regarded important for EES Extent of contribution by volume, scope or innovation depending on MS, especially – Relative size of ESF – Climate for trying new measures

Contributions to different EES guidelines EES guidelines Number of examples during the preliminary analysis 19 – Inclusive labour markets, enhance work attractiveness, and make work pay for job-seekers, including disadvantaged people, and the inactive76 23 – Investment in human capital66 18 – A life-cycle approach to work52 20 – Matching of labour market needs42 24 – Adapt education and training systems in response to new competence requirements42 21 – Flexibility combined with employment security and reduce labour market segmentation, having due regard to the role of the social partners40 17 – Full employment33 N/A31 Total382

How does ESF contribute to EES ESF contributes to the EES mainly through the results of activities, and only to a limited extent through transfer of ideas. In Member States with few national resources for ALMP, the ESF can be essential for achieving the NRP objectives. In Member States where innovation in labour market policy is less practised ESF can be used to test innovative ideas. All Member States can benefit from using ESF funds to broaden existing activities to new target groups or with new measures that make them more effective.

Strategic linkage between ESF and EES has been poor The different cycles of ESF and EES make such linkage difficult. The catch-all character of the Integrated Guidelines means that strategic linkage is not necessary. Drafting NRP and OP development and implementation do not include the same people/departments

Recommendations I A clear statement is needed that a main objective of the ESF is to contribute to the EES in a strategic way. Member States should be encouraged to use ESF to fund the implementation of country specific recommendations when relevant. ESF should mainly contribute to the EES through the results of activities and less through the transfer of ideas. Clear strategies for and systems to support transfer of ideas from EES to ESF should be designed. It is recommended not to invest too much energy and effort into “bottom up” transfer of ideas and innovations from ESF to EES.

Recommendations II The OPs should be based on the NRP (contribution to specific measures of the NRP) OP and NRP should be more directly linked, to reduce bureaucracy (OP as an implementation plan for NRP) The policy cycles of the NRP and the OP should be synchronised. A country specific procedure or structure should be designed for coordination and communication purposes, linking the NRP and the OP processes. The “raison d'être” of the NSRF as a strategic document for the OP is to be assessed.