Regional Operational Programmes in the Czech Republic

Zagreb, June 2008

Jiří Blažek Dept. of Social Geography and Regional Development,

Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague,

e-mail: blazek@natur.cuni.cz

2

Introduction (1)• The whole implementation structure for the new

programming period differs significantly from the one that was used for period 2004-2006

• First of all, the number of operational programmes

increased several times

• This is a result of not only involving larger number of state departments in managing EU SFs money but also due to decentralization of significant financial resources and esp. responsibilities to 7 cohesion regions (NUTS II) consisting of 1-3 self-governing regions at NUTS III level

• The second main impetus for changes of institutional

structure stems from new EU requirements on paying, auditing and control authorities

3

Introduction (2)

• Thirdly, profound changes are designed in the sphere of financial management to streamline and speed up the absorption of EU SFs financial resources as a result of extensive evaluation effort of previous programming period

• On the other hand, all institutions which have been

already involved in managing programmes from programming period 2004-2006 are in more or less identical manner involved also in managing of the new set of programmes

• To sum up, there is a lot of change but also significant

continuity or more precisely of institutional inertia

4

National Implementation Framework (1)

• Main coordinator: Ministry for Regional Development (MRD), in conjunction with the Ministry of Finance which is responsible for the system of financial flows

• Key institutions:

– National Co-ordination Authority – Monitoring Committee: Management and Co-ordination

Committee– Paying and Certifying Authority: National Fund – Audit Authority: Central Harmonisation Unit for

Financial Control

5

National Implementation Framework (2)

• For the overall co-ordination of NSRF is responsible National Co-ordination Authority of the NSRF (NCA) and is the official partner for the EC on NSRF issues

• A specific department within MRD has been appointed to perform the competence for National Coordinating Authority of the NSRF

• The role of the Monitoring Committee of NSRF is fulfilled by the Management and Co-ordination Committee (MCC), established by MRD under Act No. 248/2000 on Regional Development Support

• The NCA supports the Monitoring and Co-ordination Committee in its tasks and provides for secretarial assistance

6

Subcommittees of MCC

• As the coordination among operational programmes (including ROPs) often concerns specific sectors like RD&I, environment, transport, urban issues, rural development, the NSRF Coordinating Authority organizes besides the regular meetings of the Monitoring Committee of the NSRF, meetings focused on the four strategic objectives of the NSRF

• For this purpose the following co-ordination committees

have been established under the MCC:- Competitive Czech Economy - Open, Flexible and Cohesive Society - Attractive Environment- Balanced Territorial Development

7

National Implementation Framework• The overall coordination rests in 3 pillars:

- Coordination and methodological role of National framework for Cohesion Policy chaired by Ministry for Regional Development

- Development of integrated central information system for programming period (responsibility: Ministry for Regional Development (MSSF)

- Role of central paying, certification and auditing body in responsibility of Ministry of Finance

• Important tool for overall coordination, management, evaluation and publicity is the newly established OP Technical Assistance

8

National Implementation Framework

• The following bodies on national and regional levels were charged by the government with responsibility of managing authorities (MA) for operational programmes: - Ministry for Regional Development - Ministry of Trade and Industry - Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs - Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport - inistry of Environment - Ministry of Transport - Cohesion regions at NUTS II level

9

System of financial flows

• In previous programming period (2004-2006), the system of financial flows operated in the way that from SFs were cover only expenditures which were already executed by final beneficiary and which were subsequently certified by Paying Authority of respective operational programme

• This was a lengthy procedure in addition representing significant financial burden on final beneficiaries

• Motivation: anti–fraud measure • In the new programming period all financial resources

from SFs and CF are integrated into state budget • Final beneficiaries will receive an advance from Czech

state budget PCA then manages transfer of money from EC accounts back to state budget

• This system should significantly speed up the absorption of EU financial resources

10

ROPs - context• Czech Republic established in 2001 14 self-governing

regions • However, negotiation with EC/Eurostat ----only 8

cohesion regions (NUTS II)• Accession expected sooner (around year 2002) ---

regions new and therefore considered weak (esp. by EC) ---- therefore for period 2004-2006 Joint Regional Operational Programme was prepared covering all Czech regions eligible for support under Obj. 1. (except Prague).

• MA – department of MRD• However – part of responsibilities concerning selection of

projects and day to day implementation MRD transfered to Regional Councils established at NUTS II level (single purpose bodies and units)

• (7 regional councils – each consisting from 10 elected regional representatives of each region, i.e. 20 or 30 members )

11

Self-government units (NUTS III) versus „cohesion regions (NUTS II)

12

Conflict over Intermediary Bodies (1)• Intermediary Bodies (IB) – management of the

project cycle.• Firstly, MRD established a network of regional

branches of its subordinate institution of Centre for Regional Development (CRD) expecting these bodies would play a role of IB.

• However, self-governing regions were aware of the fact that these bodies would play a key role in implementation so they established their own network of secretariats of Regional councils.

• After difficult negotiation between MRD and regions a „compromise“ solution was found that both subjects will be involved.

13

Conflict over Intermediary Bodies (2)• Therefore, regional councils played all roles of

Intermediary Bodies untill contract signature (i.e. preparation and management of call for proposals, evaluation of projects proposals, selection and preparation of individual contracts)

• Then, Regional Branches of CRD came into the scene – signature of the contracts, monitoring, on spot checks, payments.

• Management od JROP oversees the Monitoring committee, and in each of NUTS II regions implementation oversees „Committee for Regional Development“ (i.e. monitoring subcommittees) – composition reflects the principle of partnership.

14

Regional operational programmes2007-2013

• Introduction of 7 Regional operational programmes (i.e. one in each of 8 Czech cohesion regions except for Prague which is not eligible for support within the Convergence objective) is one of fundamental changes of the overall implementation structure for cohesion policy in the Czech Republic.

• Due to significant pressure form self-governing regions and due to sympathetic attitude of the EC the Czech Republic authorities reached an agreement that instead of Joint Regional Operational Programme a set of ROPs will be prepared under the responsibility of regions.

• Namely, in all cohesion regions single purpose Offices of Regional Councils were established and charged with a role of Managing Authority for each of the ROPs.

15

Regional operational programmes2007-2013

• In addittion these former „Secretariats of Regional Councils“ continue to play a role of IBs.

• In cases when self-governing region is both NUTS III and NUTS II region, the preparations were quite straightforward.

• In case that the particular cohesion region consists of more than one self-governing region (and this is more common in the Czech Republic than previous case) special groups were set up to coordinate preparations for new EU programming period in the sphere of cohesion policy (e.g. group for programming).

16

Implementation system for ROPs• The role of Managing authority for each ROP is assigned

to a single purpose Regional Council which is assisted by administrative and managerial support from the Office of Regional Council.

• This Office is legally independent from self-government bodies but its director is appointed by Regional Assembly.

• In cases when the cohesion region consist of more than one self-governing region, the Office of Regional Council has a branch in each of self-governing region to smooth up the implementation in particular region by being closer to potential applicants.

• In addition, each Regional Council also establishes also Board of Regional Council to be more operational

• and • a standard Monitoring Committee to respect the principle

of partnership and to monitor implementation of ROP in line with EC regulations.

17

Implementation system for ROPs

• The role of Paying and Certification Body as well as the role of Audit Authority is fulfilled by The Ministry of Finance.

• Therefore, the key responsibilities of The Office of Regional Council are information provision to potential project applicants, administration of evaluation procedure, contracting, and control of projects.

• Regional Council as a Managing Authority is responsible for transparent ROP preparation and negotiation with the EC, monitoring data collection, reporting, project selection, monitoring of projects, provision of co-financing from national public resources, chairing of Monitoring Committee, and for publicity on a programme level.

18

Example of structure of selected ROPs. • ROP NUTS II Southwest• Priority Axis 1 – Accessibility of transport• Priority Axis 2 – Development of sustainable tourism• Priority Axis 3 – Sustainable development of towns and rural settlements• Priority Axis 4 – Technical assistance

• ROP NUTS II Southeast• Priority Axis 1 – Transport• Priority Axis 2 – Integrated development and renewal of the region• Priority Axis 3 – Tourism • Priority Axis 4 – Technical assistance

• ROP NUTS II Central Moravia• Priority Axis 1 – Urban regeneration and development• Priority Axis 2 – Integrated support of local development• Priority Axis 3 – Transport accessibility and services• Priority Axis 4 – Sustainable development of tourism • Priority Axis 5 – Technical assistance

19

Organization structure of Office of Regional Council

Director

Directors´ office Dept. of ROP management Financial department

Internal audit

Communication and publicity

Technical assistance and absorption cap.

Methodological support

Monitoring and evaluation

Project administration

Implem. of projects and payments

20

Description of tasks of the departments

Methodological support - Drafting and up-dating of methodogies for administrative proceedures

of the Office employees - Drafting and up-dating of guidance for project applicants

Monitoring and evaluation - Monitoring of implementation of the programme (data collection,

analyses, reporting)- Evaluation of progress of ROP (analyses, regular reports for EC)- Proposals for enhancement of absorption capacity - Dealing with MSSF

Internal audit - Implementation of internal audit - Cooperation with external auditors- Reporting of irregularities outside ROP structure

2121

Support to project applicantsCommunication and publicity– drafting and implementation of communication plan- ensuring publicity and marketing of ROP (workshops, web

pages, information leaflets and publications, mass media etc.)

Technical assistance and absorption capacity– drafting of plan of TA- preparation and implementation of TA projects- implementation of measures for strenghtenning the absoprption

capacity

Project administration– Consultation with potential project applicants (!!! –

consistency, highly demanding – each project is different)– Checks of formal criteria of submitted applications – Evaluation – Preparation of materials for decision of Regional Council

22R E G I O N Á L N Í R A D A R E G I O N U S O U D R Ž N O S T I S T Ř E D N Í Č E C H Y

WWW.ROPSTREDNICECHY.CZ22

Financial management and projects checks

Financial department– Transfer of fin. resources from Regional Council

(RC) budget on account of FB– Management of RC budget– Cooperation with MRD and MoF

Implem. of projects and payments– signing of contracts wit projects applicants– ex-ante, interim and ex-post checks– checks of monitoring reports of individual projects– autorization of payment requests

2323

Director´s office

- personnal agenda

- education of employees

- material and technical operation of the Office

2424

Project cycleConsultation + application submission

Check of formal criteria + of eligibility + evaluation of project application

Project approval + signing of contract

On-going check of project implemen.

Financial reporting

Transfer of financial resources to Final B.

Check of sustainability of projects outputs (5 ys.)

Publicity, monitoring and evaluation; technical assistance

25

The role of European integration department of Regional Office

• Regional Office = self-government body • „the other side“ of implementation of SFs

in regions• Organization structure• Unit of grant schemes• Unit of grants in the sphere of life-long

learning • Unit for preparation and implementation

projects from EU funds

26

Administration of fin. resources(Unit of grant schemes, Unit of grants

in the sphere of life-long learning)Region is not beneficiary of grants, but

reallocates resources to other subjects in the region.

Coordination of of projects co/financed by SFs (Unit of prep.

and management of projects)Region is implementing the projects and is beneficiary of grants.

JROP (308 mil. Kč)

OP HRD (58 mil. Kč)

OP VK (GG)(1 800 mil.Kč)

OP VK (IP)

ROPJROP Abcap (34 mil.

Kč)

OP HR & Empl.

IOP OP International cooperation

(INTERREG)

OP TA

Dept. of EUROPEAN INTEGRATION

PROCURE E-Ten

?

27

DirectorDirector

Units for prep. and implem. projects from EU

funds

Units for prep. and implem. projects from EU

funds

Unit of grant schemes

Unit of grant schemes

Unit of grants in LLL Unit of grants in LLL

lawyerlawyer asistentasistent

economisteconomist

1+7 referents1+7 referents 1+9 referents1+9 referents 1+7 referents 1+7 referents

Structure of Dept. of European Integration

28

Unit of grant schemes

• 7 project managers, 2 financial managers each responsible for particular sphere or priority within given OP

• Redistribution of fin. resources applicants, check of eligibility of expenditure

• 138 projects (most of them active). • Also contact point for Norwegian funds for

Central Bohemia• Preparation of global grant in the sphere of

retraining

29

Unit of grants in the sphere of life-long learning

• 3 project managers, 2 financial managers each responsible for particular sphere or priority within given OP, 1 Manager of TA, 1 manager of publicity

• Projects in the sphere of: • knowledge society and strenghtenning of

competitiveness, • modernization of system od elementary, secondary

and tertiary education • Improvement of conditions for R&D• but also respect to children with special needs

30

Unit for preparation and implem. projects from EU funds

• 6 project managers • Tasks: • projects in the sphere of absorption capacity • preparation and implem. projects from EU funds

in the sphere of international cooperation including Procure

• Preparation of procedure of project management

• Management of Regional Fund for advance financing of EU projects

• Project pipeline

31

Main problems:• Personal dimension:

– Inadequate number of employees with regard to scale of agenda

– Finding a suitable personnel (high demands). – High fluctuation of staff (high demands vs. Public

sector pay vs. fees for consultants ---- benefits for staff)

• Communication:– External – among different units of implementation

strucuture – Internal – among different units of Regional Office (a

lot of documents has to be approved by the elected regional representatives).

– Political influences

32

And perhaps final remark…

• In programming period 2004-6 the share of JROP on total allocation within Obj. 1 was about 38% in new programming period „only“ 18%.

• But total amount annually available from EU SFs more than trippled.

• Regions can also apply and gain support via TOPs.

33

• Thank you for your attention• and • many thanks • to Mgr. Marek Kupsa (Director of Office of

Regional Council) • and to • Mgr. Ivo Říha (Director of European Integration

Department of Central Bohemia region).