Upload
roxanne-morton
View
215
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MONITORING
ERASMUS – MUNDUS ALENA KURUCZOVA
NITRA, 16 AUGUST 2007 AGRICULTURAL PAYING AGENCY
CONTENTCONTENT
1. Role of APA
2. Monitoring, Monitoring system, Logic of intervention, Indicators
3. Case study
4. Monitoring in APA, practical examples
APAAPA
Entry to EU – CAP The only agency in Slovakia providing supports to the
sectors of agriculture, forestry and fisheries Currently implemented programmes and measures:
EAGGF Guarantee EAGGF GuidanceFIFG
National supports – Decree of Minister yearly – paid out approx. 17 billion SKK (425 million
€)
SOP A-RDSOP A-RD
Objective 1
RDPRDP
Objective 2
Implementation of the SOP A-RD and RDP Implementation of the SOP A-RD and RDP NUTS II level NUTS II level
BASIC LEGISLATIONBASIC LEGISLATION Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 laying down general
provisions on the Structural Funds Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 on rural development
financing from EAGGF Council Regulation (EC) No 1263/1999 on financial
instrument for fisheries guidance (FIFG) Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on support for rural
development by the European Agricultural fund for rural development (2007-2013)– Sectoral Operational Programme –“Agriculture and rural development“– Rural Development Plan 2004-2006– Methodological Working Paper 3 –Indicators for Monitoring and
Evaluation (EC)
MONITORINGMONITORING
MONITORINGMONITORING
involves the collection, analysis, communication and use of information about the project’s progress,
should highlight strengths and weaknesses in project implementation and enable responsible personnel to deal with problems, improve performance, build on successes and adapt to changing circumstances.
MONITORING SYSTEMMONITORING SYSTEM
Monitoring systems and procedures should provide the mechanism by which relevant information is provided to the right people at the right time to help them make informed decisions
PRINCIPLE OF GOOD PRACTICEPRINCIPLE OF GOOD PRACTICE(Monitoring system)(Monitoring system)
Keep the users of information clearly in mind Build on local information systems and sources Collect only the minimum amount of information
required Triangulate There must be a plan against which performance can
be assessed Before project/programme implementation
MONITORING IN A PROJECT MONITORING IN A PROJECT CYCLECYCLE
Aid Delivery methods: Volume1:Project Cycle management. Brussels: Guidelines. March 2004
1. PROGRAMMING
2. IDENTIFICATION
5. IMPLEMENTATION
6. EVALUATION
3.FORMULATION
4. FINANCING
SLOVAK EXAMPLESLOVAK EXAMPLE
YEAR SAPARD SOP 2004-2006 RDP 2007-2013
2003-2004 Implementation, Mid-term evaluation
Programming, Identification, Formulation, Financing,Implementation
2005 Implementation -monitoring
Implementation
2006 Implementation -monitoring
Implementation -monitoring
Programming, Identification, Formulation, Financing, Ex-ante evaluation
2007 Monitoring, Ex-post evaluation
Implementation -monitoring
(Implementation)
2008 Monitoring Implementation -monitoring
Implementation –monitoring, on going evaluation
LOGIC OF THE INTERVENTIONLOGIC OF THE INTERVENTION
1. Setting of objectives Operational objectives Specific objectives Global objectives
2. Financial allocation
Bottom - up or top-down
INTERVENTION LOGIC OF A INTERVENTION LOGIC OF A PROGRAMMEPROGRAMME
Impacts
Results
Outputs
Programme
operations Inputs
Operational objectives
Specific
objectives
Global objectives
Programme objectives
INDICATORINDICATOR
Specific
Measurable
Available/Achievable
Relevant
Time
INPUT INDICATORSINPUT INDICATORS
Budget allocated to each level of the
assistance Eligible costs in SKK, EUR
of which: co-financing of EU co-financing of state budget
of which: eligible costs in individual regions, on priorities, measures, programme
ALLOW FINANCIAL MONITORING
OUTPUT INDICATORSOUTPUT INDICATORS
Activities, measured in physical units
No of supported firms Ths. Liters of pasteurised milk Kilometers of newly built roads No of built stables No of participants in training
RESULT INDICATORSRESULT INDICATORS
Direct and immediate effect brought by a programme.They provide information on changes .
Increase of production of pasteurized milk in % Increase of production capacity in % % of trainees successfully completing the course
(men/women) Decrease of transport costs
IMPACT INDICATORSIMPACT INDICATORS
Consequences of the programme beyond the immediate effects on its direct beneficiaries.Global or specific
No of safeguarded and created jobs a year after the project realisation (specific impact)
No of nights sold per year in assisted accommodation –after year
Increase of GDP/per capita in the region (global impact)
Decrease of unemployment
Example: Possible indicators for a Example: Possible indicators for a major infrastructure project major infrastructure project (road (road
construction) construction)
Description Indicators
Specific impact
Global
Increased safety
Increase in socio-economic activity
Decrease of accident rate by 15 %
Increase of regional GDP per capita by 5%
Result Reduce journey time and transport costs
Time saving in 20 min. Cost savings by 15%
Output Construction of road 10 km of constructed road
Zdroj: Working Paper 3.
Example -Intervention logicExample -Intervention logic Overall Objective
To increase labour productivity and the competitiveness of agricultural holdings while maintaining environmental protection
Specific Objectives
To reduce production costs and improve working conditions, To increase the competitiveness of agricultural production, To introduce new environmentally-friendly technologies, To increase the level of hygiene conditions and animal welfare.
Operational Objectives (Indicative Activities)
Construction, reconstruction and modernization of buildings/facilities Acquisition and installation of new and reconstruction/modernization
of existing technical and technological equipment Construction, reconstruction and modernization of fruit orchards and
small fruit, asparagus and medicinal plants plantations; Reconstruction and modernization of vineyards; Strengthening of the agriculture in rural areas and creating
supplementary income sources Output:
Total number of projects in measure Number of projects according to the main type of holding production Number of projects according to the type of the investment Number of projects for environmentally-friendly investment Number of projects where the owner or co-owner is a woman Number of projects of young farmers Number of projects according to the legal forms Number of projects according to the place of realization Number of projects according to the type of less-favoured area
Result: Result of the operations for the accounting period in assisted
holdings (ths. SKK) Total income (ths. SKK)
Impact: Average number of employees (number of persons) Number of created jobs - permanent (number of jobs) Number of created jobs – seasonal (number of jobs) Labour productivity counted from the added value per 1 employee
(ths. SKK)
MONITORING & EVALUATIONMONITORING & EVALUATION
INPUT OUTPUT RESULT IMPACT
MONITORING EVALUATION
MONITORING & EVALUATIONMONITORING & EVALUATION
INPUT OUTPUT RESULT IMPACT
MONITORING EVALUATION
MONITORING AND EVALUATION MONITORING AND EVALUATION SummarySummary
WHO?WHO? Internal management responsibility
WHEN?WHEN? Continuous
WHY?WHY? Check progress, take remedial action, update plans
LINK TOLINK TO:input, output, result
WHO?WHO? Usually incorporates external inputs
WHEN?WHEN? Periodic WHY?WHY? Learn broad
lessons applicable to other programmes/projects and as an input to policy review
LINK TOLINK TO: result, impact
RESPONSIBILITY FOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR MONITORINGMONITORING
Managing authority and Monitoring Committee with the help of physical and financial indicators
Team workTeam work
MONITORING IN APAMONITORING IN APA
Agreement on Delegation of competencies between MA and APA
Responsibility – Monitoring division of APA
ORGANISATION CHARTORGANISATION CHART
Monitoring Division Director: 1
SOP and RDP Department Head of Department: 1 Officers: 4
Support of IS Department Head of Department: 1 Officers: 4
MAIN ACTIVITIES OF MDMAIN ACTIVITIES OF MD
Monitoring of projects, measures, programmes
Statistic, Reporting Indicators
DATA SOURCEDATA SOURCE
Application forms Monitoring reports List of :
– Approved projects– Rejected projects
Additional information from beneficiaries Information from authorisation division and
paying section
MONITORING OF PROJECTS –MONITORING OF PROJECTS –MONITORING REPORTSMONITORING REPORTS
SAPARD– Reports every 6 months – 5 years after finishig the project (Statement of Finances
& Declaration of taxes)
SOP &RDP- Reports yearly - Last report after 1 year of the finishing the project
RDP 2007-2013- Reports after the finishing of a project
MAIN REPORTSMAIN REPORTS
Standard monthly reports“: List of submitted, approved, rejected, finished, projects and payments Summary table of the commitments and payments Evaluation of calls for submission of applications
Reports for on-going and annual reports about implementation of SOP a RDP:
SOP – tables according to the requirements of MA CSF RDP - tables according to the requirements of MA (Rural Development Dep.)
Progress report for Fishery requirement from DG FISH (annual)
„Brussels monitoring tables“ Common indicator tables for monitoring rural development programming (DG
AGRI) – annual For SOP and RDP
Unexpected, irregular and immediately needed reports
Practical example - Collection of indicatorsPractical example - Collection of indicators MMeasure easure Investment in agricultural holdingsInvestment in agricultural holdings
Planned value of indicators Planned value of indicators Part of application form Part of application form
Real value of indicators Real value of indicators Monitoring report from beneficiary Monitoring report from beneficiary
Type Name Unit Periodicity of monitor.
2003 2004 2005 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Gross economic result Ths. SKK yearlyTotal income Ths. SKK yearly
Average number of employees No. yearly
Number of created jobs - permanent No. yearlyNumber of created jobs - seasonal No. yearlyLabour productivity counted from the added value Ths. SKK yearly
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
EXPECTED VALUES OF INDICATORS - MEASURE 1.1 - INVESTMENTS IN AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS
Impact
Result
Physical outputs: State planned physical outputs, which you expect in the year after realization of investment (e. g. purchase dairy facility for 500 dairy cattle, 2 transports vehicles, 1 high - lift, 3 transporters, reconstruction of 1 building, purchase PC...)
Output
VALUE BEFORE THE REALIZATION OF
PROJECTEXPECTED (PLANNED) VALUESMEASURABLE INDICATOR
Practical example of indicators – Practical example of indicators – Supplementary Supplementary monitoring datamonitoring data (Common indicator table for monitoring (Common indicator table for monitoring rural development programming) I.rural development programming) I.
1. MAIN PRODUCTION Please class your farm in one of following category according to the main type of production which is most shared in turnover of your farm.
Field crops Catle-rearing and fattening Horticulture Pigs
Vineyards Poultry
Fruit cultivation Other types of livestock-farming
Mixed production and other vegetable production Other
Dairying
Part of applications form Different for each measure
2. TYPE OF INVESTMENT Which is main type of your investment? Please choose only one of following category:
Buildings for Cattle Plant and mobile equipment
Pighouses Facilities for manufacture and direct sale of farm products
Other livestock building Facilities for the diversification of activities on the holding
Other farm buildings Other
Greenhouses and related equipment
Practical example of indicators – Practical example of indicators – Supplementary Supplementary monitoring datamonitoring data (Common indicator table for monitoring (Common indicator table for monitoring rural development programming) II.rural development programming) II.
3. AGE OF APPLICANT Is applicant under 40 years of age on the day of submission of application? yes no
4. GREEN INVESTMENTS Is main aim of your investment protecting and enhancing the enviroment as well as livestock hygiene and animal welfare? yes no
If yes, how many % of total eleigible costs of project are green investments? .............%
5. SECTORS In which sector will be your investment directed? Cattle Cereals
Pigs Oils plants
Sheeps Feedingstuffs
Goats Fruits
Poultry Vegetables
Rabbits Potatoes Horses Vineyards
Bees Herbs
Other animal production Protein seeds Other vegetable production Sugar beet
INFORMATION / REPORTS FOR:INFORMATION / REPORTS FOR:
Management of APA EC Beneficiaries &Public Managing authority Ministry of finance, Office of Governement Others on request
INFORMATION SYSTEMSINFORMATION SYSTEMS
SAPARD – „ISAS“accounting systemSOP – „ITMS“, centraly prepared by the
MA CSFRDP 2004-2006 – „IS PLUS“
REASON FOR ITMSREASON FOR ITMS
System implementation: - entry condition for SR to EU, - providing full support for whole process of management of
structural founds and cohesion fund;- securing of consistence and transparency of whole process
System preparation: MA CSF - Ministry of Construction and Regional Development in cooperation with the Ministry of Finance of SR
System provision – public international tender – winner: SIEMENS BUSINESS SERVICES
System development from 28.11.2003
DESCRIPTION OF ITMSDESCRIPTION OF ITMS
ITMS comprises the following processes:
1. Programming process: registration, evaluation and selection of project proposal, contracting
2. Monitoring process: monitoring of financial and progress indicators, reporting
3. Financial management process: applications for payment, certification
SYSTEM USERSSYSTEM USERS
COMMUNITY SUPPORT FRAMEWORK (CSF)
Operational programmes
SOP Agriculture and rural developmentSOP Industry and ServiceSOP Human ResourcesOP Basic Infrastructure
Joint Programme Documents
JPD Objective2JPD Objective 3JPD EQUALJPD INTERREG III A, B, C
Cohesion Fund
System users: Managing Authority, Intermediate body under managing authority,
Paying Authority, Paying Unit, Controls,...
Modules of ITMS
System administration User tools Administration tools Program structures Applicants / Beneficiaries Projects Monitoring Financial operation Internal audit Control
Change password: Handbook:
Practical examples -SOPPractical examples -SOP
Total of which from EUCattle 117 1 303 293 701 231 456 153Pigs 29 405 435 206 562 141 902Sheep 22 156 212 85 669 54 674Poultry 31 464 659 234 272 162 631Rabbits 14 131 911 65 955 46 169Horses 1 22 244 11 122 7 785Kozy 1 4 507 2 704 1 577Bees 4 2 807 1 512 983Other anim al production 1 26 248 13 124 9 187Cereal 463 4 060 949 2 196 306 1 421 332Oil seeds 19 126 439 71 535 44 254Forage crops 89 712 061 403 600 249 222Fruit 24 284 064 143 928 99 422Vegetable 34 456 613 232 258 159 815Potatoe 14 101 374 54 075 35 481Vineyard 19 159 831 82 473 55 941Medicinal plants 4 45 303 23 298 15 856Legum inous plans t 1 2 202 1 101 771Sugar beet sectors 8 53 317 26 804 18 661Other Plant production 18 138 148 76 187 48 352
Total 913 8 657 616 4 633 716 3 030 166
Sector of the projectNo of approved
projectsTotal eligible costs
in ths. SkPublic eligible costs in ths. Sk
Approved projects as at 30 June 2007 in Measure - Investments in Agricultural Holdings
Practical example – young farmersPractical example – young farmers
Totalof which from
EU
Young farmers 10 70 376 38 707 24 632
Farmes in LFA 362 2 751 220 1 650 732 962 927
Young farmers in LFA
24 175 111 113 822 61 289
Others (not young farmers, not working in LFA)
517 5 660 909 2 830 455 1 981 318
CELKOM 913 8 657 617 4 633 716 3 030 166
Type No of
approved projects
Total eligible costs in ths.
Sk
Public eligible costs in ths. Sk
Approved projects as at 30 June 2007 in Measure 1.1 - Investments in Agricultural Holdings according young farmers and farmers in LFA
Approved public eligible costs in %
Young farmers in LFA2%
Farmes in LFA36%
Young farmers1%
Others (not young farmers, not w orking
in LFA)61%
Practical example – regional Practical example – regional structure, number of projectsstructure, number of projects
219
251
385
226
311
204
257
348
353
156
232
108
174
212
211
131
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Nu
mb
er o
f p
roje
cts
No of approved projects according regions as at 30 June 2007
SOP R-DP
RDP 2004-2006
Practical example – regional Practical example – regional structure, eligible costsstructure, eligible costs
36 920
31 684
54 982
33 861
43 617
26 342
9 576
58 760 73 526
30 268
26 362
19 620
24 825
37 278
35 580
14 975
0
10 000
20 000
30 000
40 000
50 000
60 000
70 000
80 000
90 000
100 000
Elig
ible
co
sts
in E
UR
Approved projects according regions - Eligible costs in ths. EUR
Program SOP P-RV
Program PRV
APPROVED PROJECTS APPROVED PROJECTS SOP & R-DPSOP & R-DP
ZILINAZILINA
TRENCINTRENCIN
TRNAVATRNAVA
62 10362 103
BRATISLAVABRATISLAVA68 604 ths.EUR68 604 ths.EUR
NITRANITRA
BANSKABANSKA
BYSTRICABYSTRICA
PRESOVPRESOV
KOSICEKOSICE
342342//50 55550 555 509509//103 794103 794
340340//45 98245 982
386386
470470
605605//68 33668 336
611611//88 84388 843
515515//69 95969 959
ThThank you for your attention !ank you for your attention !
alenaalena..kuruczovakuruczova@@apaapa..sksk0915 762 1930915 762 193
Agricultural Paying Agency, Agricultural Paying Agency, Bratislava, SlovakiaBratislava, Slovakia