Lessons learned from the evaluation of
the ESF 2007-2013
Monitoring Committee
Valmiera, 10 May 2017
Muriel GUIN
Head of Unit: Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania
DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion
1
Evaluation questions
Art. 49.3 of Council Regulation 1083/2006
 Extent to which the resources were used
 Effectiveness
 Efficiency
 Socio-economic impact
Criteria added by DG EMPL:
 Community Added Value
 Gender sensitivity
 Sustainability
 Lessons Learned
2
24 Clusters of interventions
Preparatory study
ESF Evaluation
Thematic studies
Human capital
52,5 BEUR EU-28
276 MEUR in Latvia
Access to employment
39,7 BEUR EU-28
315,5 MEUR in Latvia
Social inclusion
16,5 BEUR EU-28
51,6 MEUR in Latvia
Synthesis study
Synthesis
including:
Update 2014 data
+
28 country reports
+
Smaller studies (institutional
capacity, partnership)
Open Public
Consultation
Commission
Staff
Working
Document
LV ESF 2007-2013 spending
4
Limitations
• Priority Axes in the OP not matching priorities of the ESF
Regulation
• Data problems despite improvements related to Annex
XXIII:
 Data on participations, not participants
 Sometimes indirect participants reported
 Disadvantaged groups underreported, incomplete reporting on socioeconomic characteristics
 Data reported only at priority level
• Lack of common
indicators
definitions
and
common
results
• Evaluations from MS providing little evidence on impacts
5
Key achievements
• EU-28
• Latvia
6
Key messages and findings (EU-28)
•
Challenging times for implementation. Mitigated negative effects of
the economic and financial crisis.
•
Instrumental in supporting EU strategic objectives, national policies
and related CSRs.
•
Implementation has progressed adequately. ESF has reached most
relevant target groups of participants (low skilled, inactive, youth).
•
ESF interventions generally effective in all policy fields, though
comparatively more in individual than in system results (longer time
to bear fruit).
•
Average cost per participant is below EUR 900 (EUR 802 in Latvia).
•
Public consultation points to management and control systems,
reporting, and audit as the more burdensome areas.
•
Weak evidence on sustainability of results.
7
Country report: Latvia
•
Effectiveness: good. Measures for unemployed people, PhD, vocational
students & people at risk of social exclusion were the most effective ones.
•
Efficiency: assessment was problematic due to lack of data.
•
Sustainable results in introduction of a quality evaluation scheme.
•
Community added value:
•
•
Volume effects: more people enabled to participate in the active labour market;
•
Scope effects: decreasing social exclusion of youth and integration of disabled youth into
education;
•
Role effects: innovative approach in interventions (quality evaluation scheme; VET curriculum);
•
Process effects: capacity building of the public employment services; improvement of VET
programmes and development of VET teachers’ competences;
Many lessons learned where transmitted into the new programming period.
8
Lessons learned (EU-28)
Policy choices:
 Continue aligning ESF with EU/national priorities
 Flexibility to adjust to emerging needs
Programming:
 Robust definition of objectives, targets and results
 Apply more evidence-based programing
Target groups:
 Ensure coverage of disadvantaged groups
 Continue focus on young and old and balanced
representation by gender
Programme
Implementation:
 Promote customisation to the needs of specific
target groups
 Improve capacity building
 Further simplify procedures and continue reducing
administrative burden
Monitoring systems:
 Higher standardisation of programme indicators
 Improve use of longitudinal and micro-data
 Capture effects other than employment and
qualifications – "soft results"
Evaluation:
 More robust impact evaluations
 Reintroduce final evaluations/timing of evaluations
9
Lessons requiring attention from COM on
2014-2020 and post 2020
•
•
•
•
Encourage MS to report on "soft results"
Increase uptake of simplification
Continue building MS evaluation capacity
Better capture the results of capacity building
activities of the programme
• Support and promote use of FEIs
• Streamlining application of the single audit principle
• Consider the recommendations of the High Level
Group on simplification
10
Thank you!
Link to all evaluation documents
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=2684&f
urtherNews=yes
11