1. Responses were received from:
THE APPROACHES OF MEMBER STATES TO PROMOTING TRANSNATIONALITY AND INNOVATION WITHIN THE ESF
Responses were received from:
Belgium – Flanders
The Netherlands
Bulgaria
Austria
The Czech Republic
Poland
Germany
Slovakia
Estonia
Sweden
Spain
UK - England and Gibraltar
France
UK - Northern Ireland
Italy
UK – Scotland
Latvia
UK - Wales
Luxembourg

2. The Value of Transnationality and Innovation to Member States
Avoiding duplication of investment and effort;
Encouraging the sharing of practical techniques, exchange of experience and best practice, thus stimulating and supporting innovation;
Helping to promote common standards and enabling products and ideas to be validated more widely and at
higher levels;
Increasing the capacity of the participating administrations and organisations;
Contributing towards shaping a European perspective and way of thinking – a true European mindset.

3. The Value of Transnationality and Innovation to Member States
Link between transnationality and innovation is broadly recognised as:
Leading to improvements in existing policy and practice;
Helping to fill gaps in existing policy and delivery frameworks;
Helping to avoid expensive policy development

4. Strategies for Transnationality and Innovation
Eight MSs (DE, ES, FR, IT, LT, NL, SE and UK-England and Gibraltar) provided information on their strategies.
Other Member States refer to the strategic use of innovation.
A close relationship between strategy and implementation can be detected from the documentation sent by some Member States.

5. Provisions within the OP(s) for Transnationality and Innovation
Transnational and inter-regional cooperation:
A dedicated priority;
A separate, dedicated priority axis and also eligible expenditure/horizontal priority in other priority axes;
Horizontal principles/priorities across all axes;
Supported by an activity or measure in the OP.

6. Provisions within the OP(s) for Transnationality and Innovation
A dedicated priority axis or sub-axis;
Horizontal principles/priorities across all axes;
Transnational and inter-regional cooperation or innovation;
An obligation for projects to have a transnational element;
An obligation for projects to have both a transnational and an innovative dimension.

7. Transnational and Innovative Activities that are funded
There are examples of collaboration between:
ESF authorities such as Managing Authority, Certifying Authority, Audit Authority and members of the Monitoring Committee;
Several individual projects such as the transnational arrangements under EQUAL;
Networks focusing on specific issues and topics.

8. Transnational and Innovative Activities that are funded
The types of activities that are supported include:
Exchange of information and experiences;
The organisation of international seminars and conferences;
Joint activities;
Transferring, incorporating and/or adapting models and products;
Development of new products and tools;
Exchange of experts, staff and participants.

9. Resources devoted to Transnationality and Innovation
The resources available do not always appear clearly in the background information that has been provided to the Commission;
In some MSs, the current economic crisis has resulted in transnational or innovative activities being re-planned or postponed;
Only BEnl and DE state that they use the transnational and inter-regional priority, which is an option under the European Social Fund Regulation for increased community assistance.

10. Existence of National Networks
There appear to be two types of national networks:
Those connected to the administration of the OP such as the networks of regional TCPs;
Those whose work is essentially thematic reflecting national priorities or those in a considerable number of MSs that focus on the themes of the ESF Learning Networks and the self- financing Roma Network.

11. Involvement in Learning Networks
Almost all of the Member States report an involvement in at least one Learning Network.
Belgium-Flanders’ involvement in 11 different networks was made possible by a call for transnationality type 1 that supports partnerships between ESF authorities to exchange experience, practice and ideas.
In the case of Spain, there is a Multi-objective Programme ‘Technical Assistance’ that is dedicated to transnational and trans-regional cooperation.
In the Netherlands, the strategy considers the ESF learning networks as the main vehicle for transnational cooperation.

12. Support given to Project Promoters and Others
Sweden has strategy with a focus on Knowledge, Information and Tools which also addresses ESF administrators.
Most MSs have web sites, newsletters and guidelines/manuals on transnationality.
Spain and France indicate that they offer transnational learning seminars or workshops through specialist teams that also offer guidance and support to projects.
Similarly, Belgium – Flanders and UK Northern Ireland also offer guidance and coaching to projects.

13. Mainstreaming Arrangements
To optimise the mainstreaming effect of the Learning Networks, the Netherlands and UK - England and Gibraltar participate in ‘couples’ with one representative from the ESF Managing Authority and one delegate from the policy-making directorate with respect to the theme.
Then, in UK - Northern Ireland, dedicated Innovative Projects must also network with the relevant policy-makers who selected the innovation themes and, in England, the national thematic networks provide projects with mainstreaming opportunities via the formative input provided by the policy-makers.

14. Monitoring and Evaluation Arrangements
No specific evaluations of transnational cooperation and innovation - included with other aspects of the on-going evaluations.
The Swedish Monitoring Committee will ensure that follow-up and evaluation of transnational cooperation is carried out at programme level.
Within the Technical Assistance Programme in Spain there is an intention to carry out an evaluation on the quality and impact of the transnational actions.
France monitors the ESF-funded projects closely with quantitative and qualitative data collected and stored in a Database Management System, called PRESAGE.

15. A Summary of Points for Discussion
1. Could other Member States provide written information on how their strategies have been translated into action in innovative and transnational activities? 2. Is a dedicated priority or even an obligation for projects to have a transnational or innovative element, any guarantee of more, or better quality, activity? 3. Could the Member States mentioned in Annexe A up-date these entries and could other Member States provide similar information on the types of project funded? 4. Would it be wise to negotiate an amount of money for T&I in any future OP budgets, which would be ring-fenced irrespective of the changing economic climate? 5. Which other Member States have used the mechanism of a specific, dedicated transnational and inter-regional priority and how it has helped?

16. A Summary of Points for Discussion
6. How can national networks best engender a positive dynamic and provide an effective exchange of knowledge and experience with European level thematic activities? 7. What have Member States gained, or expect to gain, from leading or participating in these networks? 8. How can Member States ensure that the existing transnational and innovative ‘acquis’ will be available for any subsequent calls or even for the next programming period? 9. What examples do other Member States have of linking networks or innovative projects with policy directorates or policy-makers? 10. Is there a need to look at indicators and, in particular, how the added value of transnationality can be measured?