Strengthening Governance of EU Funds Under Cohesion Policy

Description

Successfully managing and administering European Structural Investment Funds (ESIF) rests on the effective governance of the investment process, on the administrative capacity of Managing Authorities, and on the engagement of a diverse range of stakeholders, including beneficiaries. The OECD has developed an analytical framework with four dimensions – people management, organisational management, strategic planning, and framework conditions – to analyse the challenges and capacity gaps confronting Managing Authorities in the administration and management of these funds. Based on a pilot project with three national- and two regional-level Managing Authorities, the study identified a series of common challenges. These include being more strategic and innovative in how staff, processes and programmes are managed; managing the impact of framework conditions on stability and certainty in administrative and investment processes; and needing to ensure that capacity building among Managing Authorities and/or beneficiaries is undertaken at the appropriate scale. Capacity-building Roadmaps were built with each participant. This report recommends concrete actions for actors in the ESIF governance system to build and reinforce the administrative and investment management capacity of Managing Authorities throughout the EU. The findings can also benefit non-EU public actors in managing public investment. Foreword Acknowledgements Acronyms and abbreviations Executive summary Key findings Challenge Area 1: People and organisational management Challenge area 2: Strategic implementation of Operational Programmes Challenge area 3: Framework conditions Higher-level challenges Chapter 1. Building administrative capacity for Cohesion Policy financing Introduction The importance of effective public and ESIF investment for countries and citizens The state of public investment: spending is picking up, but needs remain significant EU Cohesion Policy financing: its benefits and challenges Quality governance contributes to optimising public investment spending Governance mechanisms and good institutional conditions support public spending and investment Defining administrative capacity building for ESIF investment Investment and administrative capacity Building administrative capacity through Technical Assistance for Managing Authorities Designing Roadmaps for administrative capacity building with the OECD diagnostic framework The OECD analytical framework for administrative capacity building People Organisation Strategic planning and co-ordination Framework conditions Notes References Chapter 2. Investing in People for Administrative Capacity Introduction Reinforcing skills and competencies for a Managing Authority performance The skills model identifies various gaps in MAs Attracting and recruiting the necessary expertise MAs were generally very restrained in their abilities to recruit candidates to fill skills gaps Training in MAs meets some short-term needs but there is scope to take a more strategic and long-term approach to leaning and development Towards a more strategic approach to learning and development Engaging and motivating employees to put their skills to work Employee engagement is suffering in some MAs References Chapter 3. Strategic, agile and responsive Managing Authorities Introduction Ensuring organisational structures and procedures are fit for purpose Complex institutional arrangements, including cumbersome processes and procedures, are perceived by stakeholders as hindering effectiveness and agility Ensuring structures are fit-for-purpose and simplifying processes and procedures Improving knowledge management and information sharing in the MA and MCS Internal communications and information-sharing mechanisms could be strengthened ICT systems and informal technical or thematic working groups could better be exploited to facilitate communication and information-sharing Addressing resource flexibility through better workforce planning and mobility MAs reported considerable difficulties in shifting (human and financial) resources where and when needed Strategic workforce planning Introducing greater managerial flexibility in budgeting processes Note References Chapter 4. Generating a more strategic investment cycle among Managing Authorities Introduction Taking a more strategic approach to OP planning, programming and priority setting Clear links to higher-level strategic frameworks can support strategic planning for OP investment Setting OP investment priorities that reflect national and regional development needs Capturing complementarities and synergies across and within OPs Optimising coordination for OP design and implementation Striking a balance between “hard” and “soft” coordination mechanisms Reinforcing coordination between national and subnational level authorities Addressing information gaps, improving knowledge sharing and expanding communication Information flows and knowledge sharing within the MA and throughout the MCS Communication with beneficiaries and citizens Building beneficiary capacity Meeting the challenges behind building beneficiary capacity Promoting ongoing information exchange with and among beneficiaries Partnering with beneficiary-support organisations Actively engaging with a broad-base of external stakeholders Strengthening OP design and delivery through stakeholder engagement Building multi-stakeholder dialogue platforms for broader and more effective stakeholder input Rendering OP implementation processes more strategic Aligning project calls and selection with beneficiary capacity Minimising the need to carry projects forward into the subsequent programming period Expanding performance measurement practices to better support outcome evaluations Monitoring and evaluation requirements and the EU Performance Framework Enhancing the strategic role of Monitoring Committees Building more robust measurement systems for OP investment performance Notes References Chapter 5. The impact of framework conditions on Managing Authorities Introduction Regulatory changes create instability and generate administrative burden Unclear, complex and changing regulations at the EU and national levels Adjusting Management and Control Systems to minimise one-size-fits-all approaches High administrative burden can slow investment processes Inconsistent control, verification and audit interpretations generate uncertainty Reinforcing capacity to manage public procurement processes Notes References Chapter 6. Conclusions and Recommendations Recommendations for Managing Authorities Recommendations for Challenge Area 1: People and organisational management Recommendations for Challenge Area 2: Strategic implementation of Operational Programmes Recommendations for national authorities Recommendations for the European Commission Annex A. Project background and methodology Annex A. Project background and methodology