Interim Evaluation of the Regional Operational Programme
Interim Evaluation of the Regional Operational Programme from 01.01.2007 until 30.06.2009
Country – Romania
Beneficiary – Ministry of Regional Development and Housing
The general objective of the project was to contribute to the successful implementation of the Regional Operational Programme 2007-2013 by evaluating the progress and performances registered in its management and implementation, within the period 1st January 2007 and 30th July 2009.
The Specific Objectives of the ROP 2007-2013 interim evaluation were:
• Examining the extent to which the ROP strategy (priority axes, objectives, etc.) is further relevant and coherent in the context of socio-economical modifications;
• Analyzing the progress registered in the program implementation/objectives reached and identification of internal and external factors that have an influence over performances of the ROP Management Authority and Intermediate Bodies in its management and implementation
• Evaluating the efficiency of the ROP implementation system;
• Provision of information that responds to the strategic reporting requirement according to article 29th of the Regulation no. 1083/2006
• Identification of the learned lessons and necessary measures for achieving ROP objectives, including those regarding the development of the relevant capacities.
COMPONENT 1 – TO WHICH EXTENT THE ROP PRIORITIES AND OBJECTIVES DEFINED IN THE ROP STRATEGY ARE STILL RELEVANT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHANGES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE SINCE THE PROGRAM WAS ELABORATED ?
• An analysis of the validity of the ROP strategy, by examining the socio-economic changes that have taken place in Romania during the evaluated period;
• Identifying the impact of the changes in the socio-economic context over the implementation of the ROP strategy, describing and explaining the changes, as well as the future tendencies;
• Analyzing the relevance of the ROP indicators in reaching its objectives, in the context of the latest socio-economic changes
• Desk analyses and organizing workshops;
COMPONENT 2- DOES THE PROGRESS MADE IN ROP IMPLEMENTATION LEAD TO REACHING THE OBJECTIVES OF THIS PROGRAM?
• Analyses of the project’s efficiency from the time since the request for financing was submitted till the financing contract was signed, including project implementation;
• Analyses of the efficiency and impact of ROP information and promotion system;
• The analyses of the projects portfolio within each priority axis and within each key area of intervention, so as to determine whether the ROP indicators and activities will be implemented (the actual level of the indicators and the perspectives for their implementation in order to achieve the objectives of the ROP strategy)
• Desk analyses, interviews, organizing workshops;
COMPONENT 3- WHICH ARE THE INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL MAIN FACTORS THAT CAN INFLUENCE OR HAVE INFLUENCED THE AM AND OI POR PERFORMANCE IN COORDINATING AND IMPLEMENTING THE PROGRAM?
• An analyses that will cover all ROP priority axis and that will explain all internal and external repetitive factors that have influenced the performance in program coordination and implementation, in each development area/OI and for each key area of intervention, including those that refer to the regional and local administrative capacity
• Analyzing of the context in which these factors occurred and developed and underlining the tendencies in the near future;
• Identifying and presenting a set of measures and practical actions that can be immediately implemented, which should improve the effects of the factors identified through the previous analyses.
• Desk analyses, interviews, organizing workshops;
COMPONENT 4 – IS THE SYSTEM FOR ROP IMPLEMENTATION SUITABLE FOR THE PROCESS OF SELECTION P, CONTRACTING AND MONITORING THE PROJECTS CALLED AT EACH DEVELOPMENT REGION LEVEL AND WITHIN EACH PRIORITY AXIS?
• A detailed analysis of the selection and contracting process, made at each development region level and within each priority axis, including:
• The analysis of the extent to which the system and the period for project evaluation and selection could influence the accomplishment of the strategic objectives of the program, potential changes / adjustments of the implementation system
• The analysis of the way in which the selection criteria were used and of the main causes for project rejection
• Analyzing at each IB and MA level the efficiency of the project monitoring system and the extent to which it provides the necessary information for monitoring the achievement of the indicators at program level.
• Interviews, organizing workshops;
COMPONENT 5- how do the performances of the ROP implementation system reflect AT the level of the CALLS FOR REIMBURSEMENT?
• The analysis of how efficient cash flow is , including the analysis of the current and anticipated financial situation in order to see to what extent the Management Authority can comply with the rule „n+3” and „n+2”;
• The analysis of the use of pre-funding for expenditures reimbursement within the priority axis, correlated with the impact upon complying with the rule „n+3” and „n+2”, including at each development region level;
• The impact the VAT reimbursement for the eligible expenditures within the financed contracts from the state budget has upon the efficiency of the payment flow and upon achieving the program’s objectives;
• Desk analyses, interviews, organizing workshops
COMPONENT 6 – what contribution did ROP have in implementing and achieving some strategic objectives during the evaluated period?
• An analysis of the ROP contribution to:
• The implementation of the objectives of the cohesion policy as they were stipulated in the Treaty for establishing the European Community;
• Carrying out the tasks/mission RDEF set through regulation 1083/2006;
• The implementation of the priorities described in the Community Strategic Axis regarding the Cohesion and mentioned within the priorities set through the National Strategic Reference Framework;
• Achieving the objective of encouraging competitivity and creating jobs which should lead to the achievement of the objectives of the Integrated Axis for Development and Employment (2005-2008);
• Identifying the achievements, opportunities and future perspectives related to the implementation of the strategy;
• Presentation of some examples of good practice identified by the evaluator.
• Desk analysis and interviews.