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

2. AIR 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 programmes
The Ex-post evaluation now launched will rely on the 2013 data (deadline for ex-post end-2015)

3. 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

4. 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)

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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?

8. 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)

9. 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?