INTERACT Presentation Template
Download
Report
Transcript INTERACT Presentation Template
Harmonised
Implementation Tools
- HIT
Towards simplification and
streamlining of programme
implementation
23 October 2013 | Stockholm
Why harmonise?
Less administration for programmes and
beneficiaries!
More emphasis on results
More strategic monitoring
of (the quality of) project’s
outputs and results
Attracting new (desired)
project partners
2
Analysis of current practice
Tools
Number of
Programmes analysed
Number of
Programmes involved
Budget lines and eligibility
criteria
3 Interregional
Programmes
6 TN Programmes
2 CBC Programmes
11 Programmes
3 Interregional
Programmes
9 TN Programmes
26 CBC Programmes
6 IPA Programmes
44 Programmes
3
Legal package
Project selection
Administrative and
Eligibility Criteria
YES
Quality Assessment
Criteria
Strategic and
Operational
Assessment Criteria
Performance framework
ETCspec.
Indicators
Project
Application Form
PART A – Project
Summary
PART B – Project
Partnership
PART C – Project
Description
PART D – Project
Budget
PART E – Annexes
Project
implementation
Fact
sheets
BL
Project
Progress Report
PART A – Activity
report
PART B – Finance
report
FLC
certificate
FLC
checklist
Progress Report
Monitoring
Checklist
Administrative
criteria
Project progress
Problems,
deviations,
changes
Financial
monitoring
FLC
report
Analysis of current good practice
4
HIT tools
• Joint activities, ETC/INTERREG programmes and ETC +
•
•
•
•
Commission
Almost 20 templates / fact sheest been drafted until
now
The complete list is available on INTERACT web
More to come, e.g. HIT tool for Communication being
developed this winter, presented in the EU-wide ETC
Communication meeting in March 2014 in Finland
Ambition is that 75 % would use / get inspired by HIT
5
Harmonisation does not mean ’identical’!
• Reasonable harmonisation!
• Common foundation on which to build programmespecific elements
6
Why harmonise?
Simplification and harmonisation of rules and
procedures!
Reduction of errors and
irregularities
Efficient programme management
Transparency and accountability
Q: Would you agree that the system
needs to be simplified in order to
avoid errors?
Would you agree that harmonisation
brings more legal certainty?
7
Project budget – 5 budget lines
1. Staff costs
2. Office and administration
3. External services and experts
4. Travel and accommodation
5. Equipment and investment
5 budget lines in the Application Form and Project Progress
Report
Coherence between budget lines and categories of costs
eligible under each line
LOOK: Fact sheets on Budget Lines
Guidance on what costs are eligible: definitions of eligible
costs
8
Harmonised approach to cost calculation
LOOK: Fact sheets on Budget Lines
Guidance on how to calculate the eligible cost: rules
Example: Staff costs (calculation of hourly rate)
Staff working full time on the project
Eligible: total personnel cost
Staff working part time on the project
Eligible: hours worked on the project * hourly rate
Hourly rate = total personnel cost
hours worked overall
Proposal by the Council:
Hourly rate = annual gross employment cost
1720 hours
9
Simplified cost options
Flat rate as defined in the Regulations (no justification
required)
Staff costs: up to 20% of direct costs other than staff
costs (Art. 18 of the ETC Reg.)
Office and administration (indirect costs): up to 15% of
direct staff costs (Art. 58 of CPR)
Standard scale of unit costs defined by individual
programmes
Staff costs: method required to define fixed rates
Travel and accommodation (daily allowance): max. rates
based on Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 337/2007
LOOK: Guidance on simplified cost options in ETC
10
”In my programme monitoring
system we use different fields and
a different language. How do the
HITs relate to existing monitoring
systems?”
11
”In my programme, we are
currently not asking for a project
summary in English/project
beneficiary/target group
classification. Why would we need
to ask for that?”
12
Collecting harmonised data
Necessary to demonstrate the benefit of territorial
cooperation
Necessary to make sure that projects capitalise on
available knowledge and past results
13
European Territorial Cooperation
Branding 2007-2013
European
Territorial
Cooperation
Status quo of transnational cooperation in a few pictures…
European Territorial Cooperation
Branding 2007-2013
European
Territorial
Cooperation
The result is…
… a rather low visibility of European territorial cooperation programmes
on all governance levels. At the same time the principles of harmonisation,
simplification, result-orientation and better spending as introduced in the new
legislation are hardly met when communicating the programmes.
European Territorial Cooperation
Branding 2014-2020
European
Territorial
Cooperation
Technical opinion expressed by ETC Programmes over summer: 32 out of 35
programmes responding support the initiative of harmonising branding
Next steps
• Decision on common branding in all ETC technical programme bodies
– by mid-December 2013
• Development of common INTERREG logo by a working group made up of
Programme representatives and EC (coordinated by INTERACT)
– early January 2014
• Consultation of and decision on INTERREG logo (ETC Programmes, process
coordinated by INTERACT)
– mid-January to mid-March 2014
• Programme variations of common INTERREG logo (coordinated by INTERACT)
– Spring 2014
Thank you for your attention
Please do not hesitate to contact us for any further information
or visit www.interact-eu.net
INTERACT Point Turku
[email protected]
INTERACT Point Valencia
[email protected]
INTERACT Point Vienna
[email protected]
INTERACT Programme Secretariat
[email protected]
INTERACT Point Viborg
[email protected]
INTERACT is co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) | European Territorial Cooperation