title of the evaluation/fc / Mid-term evaluation of the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived
lead dg – responsible unit / DG EMPL / date of this roadmap / 02/2016
type of evaluation / Evaluation
Interim
Mixed / planned start date
planned completion date / 03/2016
12/2018
Planning calendar / http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/evaluation/index_en.htm
This indicative roadmap is provided for information purposes only and is subject to change.
2
A. Purpose(A.1) Purpose
The purpose of the evaluation is to assess the all evaluation criteria of the Better Regulation Guidelines, namely effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, relevance and EU added value of the FEAD at mid-term of the programming period 2014-2020.
(A.2) Justification
The Article 17 (1) of the Regulation (EU) No 223/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived ("FEAD regulation") states that the Commission shall present a mid-term evaluation of the Fund to the European Parliament and to the Council by 31 December 2018.
B. Content and subject of the evaluation
(B.1) Subject area
Interventions supported by the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived during the 2014-2016 programming period in all 28 Member States.
(B.2) Original objectives of the intervention
The EU's Food Distribution programme for the Most Deprived Persons (MDP)was set up inDecember 1987, when the Council adopted the rules for releasing public intervention stocks of agricultural products to Member States wishing to use them as food aid for the most deprived persons of the Community. Since 2014 it has been replaced by the newly established Fund for European Aid to the most Deprived (FEAD).
Article 3 of the FEAD Regulation states that the "Fund shall promote social cohesion, enhance social inclusion and therefore ultimately contribute to the objective of eradicating poverty in the Union by contributing to achieving the poverty reduction target of at least 20 million of the number of persons at risk of poverty and social exclusion in accordance with the Europe 2020 strategy, whilst complementing the Structural Funds". In 2010, out of the 116 million people in the EU who are at risk of poverty or social exclusion, about 40 million are suffering from severe material deprivation.
One of the main features of material deprivation is the inability to access appropriate quantities and quality of food. The share of the EU population unable to afford a meal with meat, chicken, fish (or vegetarian equivalent) every second day –defined as a basic need by the World Health Organisation – was 8.7% in 2010, i.e. more than 43 million people.
Thus, "the Fund shall contribute to achieving the specific objective of alleviating the worst forms of poverty, by providing non-financial assistance to the most deprived persons by food and/or basic material assistance, and social inclusion activities aiming at the social integration of the most deprived persons".
(B.3) How the objectives were to be achieved
The activities of the Funds are carried out in shared management between Member States and the Commission and take the form of operational programmes (OPs).
The Commission and the Member States shall ensure the effectiveness of the Fund, in particular through monitoring, reporting and evaluation and both shall ensure that the operational programmes are prepared, programmed, implemented, monitored and evaluated, respecting the partnership principle, when carrying out the consultations of relevant stakeholders as set out in this Regulation.
For each OP, the Member State designates a number of authorities, including a Managing Authority. The responsibilities of the Managing Authority include ensuring that operations selected for funding are in accordance with the criteria applicable to the operational programme (Art. 32(3b), Regulation 223/2014). The Managing Authorities are also responsible to ensure that data on each operation necessary for monitoring, evaluation, financial management, verification and audit are recorded and stored (Art. 32(2d), Regulation 223/2014).
There are two main types of operational programmes:
· Food and/or basic material assistance operational programmes (also referred to as "OPs I") include an identification of and a justification for selecting the type or types of material deprivation to be addressed under the operational programme and, for each type of material deprivation addressed, a description of the main characteristics information on the priority axes and their specific targets. 24 "OP I" have been adopted in 24 MS.
· Social inclusion programmes', also referred to as "OPs II" set out a strategy for the programme contribution to the promotion of social cohesion and poverty reduction in accordance with the Europe 2020 strategy, including a justification for the choice of assistance priority. The "OP II" is implemented in 4 MS.
The total amount of resources from the EU budget is € 3.8 billion for 7 years, in current prices. The maximum EU co-financing rate is 85%, the MS will provide 15% of the funding. It means that a total funding of FEAD operational programmes (EU + national resources) will amount nearly € 4.5 billion.
C. Scope of the evaluation/FC
(C.1) Topics covered
The evaluation covers all 28 operational programmes financed by the FEAD.
It will make use of monitoring data on output and results reported in the Annual Implementation Reports submitted to the Commission until 30 June 2018 and of evaluations and surveys conducted by Member States.
Findings, conclusions and lessons will be presented for both food and/or basic material assistance operational programmes' (also referred to as 'OP I') and social inclusion programmes' (also referred to as 'OP II') and by Member State.
(C.2) Issues to be examined
The evaluation will respond to the evaluation criteria as set by the Better regulation Guidelines relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, and EU added value. The evaluation of efficiency will in particular assess the potential for regulatory simplification and burden reduction.
Evaluation questions:
1. Effectiveness
1.1 What have been the outputs and results of OP I/OP II to date?
1.2 If targets were set, were they achieved?
1.3 To what extent have interventions covered the most vulnerable groups (homeless, children at risk of poverty, etc.)? In particular are there some groups insufficiently covered or some types of assistance insufficiently provided?
1.4 To what extent have the OP objectives been achieved, in particular as regards deprivation and social inclusion?
1.5 How well have horizontal principles such as reducing food waste been respected (Article 5 of FEAD regulation)?
1.6 What main factors, have facilitated or stood in the way of effective implementation, in particular regarding the Management and Control System set-up?
1.7 What were the most effective delivery modes? What good practice cases and success factors can be identified?
2. Efficiency
2.1 How do costs compare to outputs and results? What are main reasons for differences in costs per output or result between operations?
2.2 Is the level of administrative burden on recipients, partners and MA appropriate and how could it be reduced, while allowing for accountability?
Administrative burden should encompass the entire lifecycle of operations.
- Designation and set-up of MCS including Information systems ;
- Appropriateness of the eligibility requirements for partner organisations and end recipients;
- Project selection;
- Requirements for the implementation by the project partners, including public procurement;
- Reporting on implementation and indicators;
- Evaluations;
- Audit;
- Level of the technical assistance and its use.
2.3 Was FEAD used to supporting donations and upscaling interventions?
2.4 What's the feasibility of application of alternative delivery mechanisms and support modes (e.g shared management, indirect management, budget support)?
2.5 Were flat rate arrangements appropriate?
3. Relevance
3.1 To what extent has the OP contributed to national objectives and EU policies of achieving poverty reduction?
3.2 How relevant was the aid to the target groups and how well does it responded to the needs? In particular, does it allow for adjustments when needs change or new needs emerge?
3.3 Were accompanying measures provided, corresponding to the needs of the target groups?
4. Coherence
4.1 To what extent are the interventions coherent with other EU or national interventions which have similar and complementary objectives, in particular operations related to ESF and AMIF?
4.2 To what extent is the OP coherent internally (e.g. multiple support forms, delivery methods)?
5. EU-added value
5.1 What are the main types of EU added value resulting from the FEAD support (volume, scope, role, process)?
5.2 What would be the most likely consequences of stopping the FEAD support?
(C.3) Other tasks
A 12-week internet based open public consultation will be carried out.
D. Evidence base
(D.1) Evidence from monitoring
The Commission and the Member States agreed on a common set of output and result indicators on which the Member States will report annually (in the Annual Implementation Reports) from 2015 to 2024 for both types of OPs. The reporting will be done at programme level and the evaluation will make use of the qualitative and quantitative information reported by Managing Authorities on allocations, expenditure, and output and result indicators.
During the evaluation, MA and selected partner organisations will be interviewed. Also, it is foreseen to organise a focus group to explore further some key issues. Furthermore a survey of all MA and partner organizations will be undertaken.
The Commission will propose during 2016 a template for the structured survey on end recipients of the FEAD to be carried out in 2017 and 2022 by all managing authorities responsible for a food and/or basic material assistance operational programme (OP I type). This will also constitute a source of information that may be used by Member States and the Commission for the evaluation of the FEAD. In accordance with Article 17 (4) of the FEAD Regulation, this template was subject to several consultations of relevant stakeholders and Member States, including the FEAD Evaluation Partnership. It takes due account of their views. This template is expected to be adopted early 2016.
(D.2) Previous evaluations and other reports
The Commission issued an Impact Assessment accompanying the document "Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived" (ref.: SWD(2012) 350 final of 24.10.2012).
(D.3) Evidence from assessing the implementation and application of legislation (complaints, infringement procedures)
N/A
(D.4) Consultation
The Commission is engaged in constant dialogue with the Member States and other stakeholders, including in the form of meetings with all managing authorities to discuss different aspects of the implementation of the Fund.
Stakeholders in the FEAD implementation during 2014-2015 period can be grouped in 4 categories;
1. Stakeholders involved in the management of operational programmes such as: Member states, Managing Authorities/Implementing bodies, social and other partners represented in the monitoring committee
2. Partners involved in the delivery of ESF operations as project partners: NGOs, municipalities (including not just actual but also potential partner organizations)
3. End recipients of the support measures such as individuals,
4. General public: citizen and organizations of EU.
An open 12-week internet-based public consultation is planned in fourth quarter of 2016. It will give opportunities for all stakeholders, including the general public, to contribute by expressing their views on the FEAD planning and implementation during the 2014-2016 period. The questions of the open public consultation will relate to the main evaluation criteria set by the Better Regulation Guidelines. This consultation will be carried out by using EU survey tools via DG EMPL consultation website. The consultation will also be available via the EU's Your Voice In Europe Portal (http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/index_en.htm).
The results of the stakeholder consultation will be summarised in a Synopsis report that will be published on the consultation website of the DG. The outcome of the open public consultation will also be reflected in the Commission Staff Working Document on the evaluation.
(D.5) Further evidence to be gathered
The evaluation will be supported by an external study.
E. Other relevant information/ remarks
For internal use only – not for publication
PlanningKey milestones (indicative)
[Indicate the expected dates for the steps which apply to this evaluation. Where a step does not apply e.g. no expternal contract, the row can be deleted. A milestone with date can be added as appropriate.]
Steering Group set up / 03/2016
Public Consultation / 11/2016
Other Stakeholder Consultation / 11/2016
Interim Report / 04/2017
Submission to Regulatory Scrutiny Board / 07/2018
Final Report / 05/2018
ISC launch / 11/2018
Deadline for Report to Council and European Parliament / 31/12/2018
Dissemination Plan / IV/2018
Action Plan / IV/2018
2