Interim Evaluation No: R/SK/ESC/03.POHL		

	Interim Evaluation of the European Union 
Pre-Accession Instrument Phare

Country: Slovak Republic
Sector: Economic and Social Cohesion

Programmes covered:
SR-0107.01 Preparation for Structural Funds-Institution Building Support 2002/000-610.11 Consolidating the Institutional Framework for Structural Funds;
SR 0107.03 to 07 Regional Investment Projects ( Zemplinska Sirava, Humenne, Roznava, Spisska, Nova Ves, Velka Domasa).
SR-0113 and 2002/000 642.01. 03
Cross Border Co-operation Slovak Republic/ Austria;
SR-0102 and 2002/000- 603.01 and .02 and 2003/004-616.01/616.02
Cross Border Co-operation Slovak Republic/ Hungary;
SR-0101 and 2003/004.616.02 and 2002/000-635.01-.03
Cross Border Co-operation Slovak Republic/ Poland;
2003/004.995.03.12 External Border Initiative
SR-0107.02 HRD through Preventive and Individual Active Measures for Unemployed.
2002/000-610.12 Industry Development Grant Scheme;
2003/004.995.03.09 Support to Innovative SMEs
2002/000-610.13, 2003/004.995.03.08 Local and Regional Development Grant Scheme;
2002/000-610.14, 2003/004.995.03.10 Tourism Development Grant Scheme;
2002/000-610.15 Human Resources Development Grant Scheme;
2003/004.995.03.11 Grant Scheme on Equal Opportunities and Social Inclusion Support

Author: POHL Consulting

Date:   August 4th 2004
	
	This report has been prepared as a result of an independent evaluation by the POHL Consulting and Associates being contracted under the Phare programme.

The views expressed are those of the POHL Consulting and Associates and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Commission.

ABSTRACT

Scope of the evaluation
This Interim Evaluation covers assistance to the ‘Economic and Social Cohesion’ Programme in Slovakia funded under the Phare National and Cross-Border Co-operation Programmes and covers the years 2001, 2002 and partial information on 2003 Phare programmes. The programme has used a number of delivery mechanisms and these have included twinning, technical assistance, investments and financial and grant schemes. Funding for this sector for the 3 years covered amounts to 78.6 MEUR. 

In the last Interim Evaluation Report produced by the EMS Consortium for the period ending April 2003, there had been very little to report in terms of achievements since many of the projects had not yet been contracted. The latter quarter of 2003, however, saw a substantial upturn in the level of contracting and many of the projects are now starting in earnest although they are still in the early stages of implementation. While some preliminary evaluation can be undertaken for many of the projects, the scope of this Interim Evaluation is nevertheless limited.

Key achievements, findings and recommendations
Relevance. The individual Components are in the main relevant or even highly relevant for the development of the Sector and for the preparation for accession and the use of the Structural Funds. Delays, however, have been acute and these have been due to severe design shortcomings in the preparation of projects, demonstrating a major weakness in this area in the key Ministries responsible for implementation. Due to poor programming, most of the 2001 projects were only contracted at a very late stage in November 2003. Although this is a positive development when compared with the last IE report, it is to be hoped that this was not just a case of expediency to prevent the loss of funds and that the projects had been developed to an acceptable standard. Nevertheless, there must be concerns that the dramatic increase in contracting may pose an intolerable strain on the implementing agencies, which have to date demonstrated considerable shortcomings in their administrative capacities. Problems may also arise due to the shorter implementation time which will place considerable pressure on the administrations to perform. 

Efficiency has been poor with wastage and loss of funds. Much of this has resulted from what can be described as “ crisis management “ characterised by last-minute commitments. This has resulted from the poor quality of technical documents, deficiencies in inter-institutional co-ordination and co-operation and unclear implementation arrangements. This has been compounded by administrative inadequacies in the implementing agencies, shortcomings in the delivery of co-financing and protracted approval procedures. Whilst the 2001 programme saw a dramatic upsurge in contracting in the latter days of November 2003, it is to be hoped that this resulted from closer adherence to the technical requirements of the projects rather than a desire to sign off projects to prevent the loss of funds. If the latter were the case, then this would have potentially dire consequences when project implementation starts this year.

One of the key problems has been the increasingly burdensome workload being placed on key Ministries especially the Ministry of Construction and Regional Development, which is the key coordinating body for the CSF. This has been compounded by the lack of experienced staff and shortfalls in the level of technical assistance provided.There has also been similar concern regarding the administrative and absorption capacities of the Ministry of Education, where there is a distinct lack of expertise in managing grant schemes; and at the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family and the newly formed Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and the Family where the recent reorganisation has had an adverse effect and a drop in morale. It is to be hoped that increased staffing and more stable structures at the MoCRD will improve the situation considerably and allow it to play a key coordinating role.

Effectiveness. A number of immediate objectives are at risk due to the delays in kick- starting the projects and administrative shortfalls. This is particularly the case for those projects which were designed to establish an institutional framework that would prepare the Slovak Administrations for accession and for the use of the Structural Funds. Delays here have meant that much of preparatory work has either had to be put on hold or has had to be undertaken by the Slovaks themselves. While work on the latter has commenced in earnest, protracted delays have meant that the real impact of these projects will be felt after accession, which was not what was intended. 
 
Impact. In the medium and long-term, all the Programmes are expected to have a positive impact but this is unlikely to be within the lifetime of the Programmes themselves due to the protracted delays in starting many of the projects.

Sustainability. Projections are just about sufficient provided that the administrative shortcomings can be overcome and the pace of implementation can be achieved quickly and effectively. It is to be hoped that the severe problems affecting the implementation of previous programmes is not repeated in the future and that the lessons learnt from the past can be translated into positive actions to ensure that the 2002 and 2003 programmes do not make the same mistakes and that implementation can be achieved more successfully and effectively.

Recommendations include:

•	The Ministry of Construction and Regional Development needs to take steps to further strengthen its programming capabilities and needs to improve internal communications and its coordination with other Ministries.
•	The Regional Development Support Agency should take steps to ensure that beneficiaries provide all the necessary documentation (building permits, Bill of Quantities etc.) for projects to prevent unnecessary delays in implementation. Efforts should be made to develop a pipeline of alternative eligible projects.
•	There is concern that the Implementation Agreement between the RDSA and the beneficaries of the investment projects is poorly drafted and is unlikely to provide any comfort if things go wrong in terms of the implementation of the projects
•	While much progress has been made in the preparation for the implementation of the various Grant Schemes with guidelines for applicants and application forms prepared, and evaluation committees more or less established, there is little evidence of the financial management and control systems necessary to handle the numerous payment claims that will result from such large numbers of successful applicants. More effort needs to be put into educating the beneficiaries.
•	NADSME should also ensure that the evaluation processes for the Grant Schemes under its control are completed on time and that the whole process is carried out in a transparent way with the Evaluation Committees previously agreed with the ECD respected.
•	With regard to the 2002 Institutional Building Programme, the MoCRD should ensure that the activities of the new twinning project for 2002 are synchronised with those of the 2001 project which has been seriously delayed; and with the TA Capacity Building Programme to ensure consistency in approach and to avoid possible duplication and the overlapping of activities. 
•	Every effort should be made to ensure that the Monitoring system for ERDF and ESF is developed on time ( April and June deadlines respected ) and that all Ministries and Agencies receive the appropriate level of training to ensure that they are familiar with the system and its applications and can comply with its requirements.
•	There is a need for the  Ministry of Education and the MoLFSA to acquire the skills necessary to manage the Grant Schemes under their control and to impart project management skills to the benficiaries in the regions.
•	Efforts need to be made to prevent the dilution of resources at the Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family to enable it to manage the Grant Schemes under its control; and to reinforce the technical capacities of the Local Labour Offices.
•	More effort needs to be put into developing strategic monitoring documents that are more concise and user friendly.

Economic and Social Cohesion	
Number	Type of Assistance	Programme/ project title	Implementing Authority	
SR-0107.01	TWIN, TA	Preparation for Structural Funds - Institutional Building	Ministry of Construction and
Regional Development/RDSA	
2002/000-610.11	TWIN, TA			
SR-0107.03	INV	Regional Development and
Business Support - Investment	Ministry of Construction and
Regional Development /RDSA	
SR-0107.04	INV			
SR-0107.05	INV		
RDSA	
SR-0107.06	INV			
SR-0107.07	INV			
SR-0113	INV, JSPF	Cross Border Co-operation
Slovakia/Austria, Slovakia/
Hungary, Slovakia/ Poland
Phare External Border Initiative

	Ministry of Construction and
Regional Development/RDSA
	
2002/000-642.01-03	INV, GS, JSPF			
SR-0102	INV, JSPF			
2002/000-603.01-02	INV, JSPF			
2003/004.616.01	INV			
2003/004.616.02	JSPF			
SR-0101	INV, JSPF			
2002/000-635.01-03	INV, JSPF			
2003/004.995.03.12	INV, JSPF			
SR-0107.02	GS	Social Affairs and Human
Resources Development
	Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family/Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family  	
2003/004.995.03.11	GS, TA			
			Ministry of Construction and
Regional Development/
Central Offiice of Labour, Social Affairs and Family Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family  	
2002/000-610.12	GS, TA	Economic and Social Cohesion –
2002, 2003 Grant Schemes
	NADSME
RDSA
RDSA/NADSME
Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family
Ministry of Education
NADSME

2002/000-610.13	GS, TA			
2002/000-610.14	GS, TA			
2002/000-610.15	GS, TA			
2003/004.995.03.08	GS, TA			
2003/004.995.03.09	GS, TA			
2003/004.995.03.10	GS, TA			
GS – Grant Scheme, SC – Service Contract, INV – Investment, JSPF – Joint Small Project Fund, TA – Technical Assistance, TWIN – Twinning, 

Institutional Building Support –Preparation for Structural Funds is designed to develop an Operational Framework to underpin future Structural Fund support. This is to be achieved through the strengthening of the Managing Agencies and Paying Agencies responsible for the SF assistance through TA and Twinning arrangements; the development of a monitoring system for ERDF and ESF linking the various agencies responsible in Slovakia;assistance with project development; and the development of procedures,manuals etc.

Regional Development and Business Support-Investments are designed to contribute to the implementation of policies aimed at tackling internal and external imbalances and sustaining macro-economic stability, to enhance the competitiveness of the national economy, to improve the productive sector in Eastern Slovakia, to reduce regional economic development disparities and to improve Small and Medium Enterprises in priority regions via investments in industrial park and tourism support investment., 

Cross Border Co-operation Slovakia/Austria, Hungary and Poland is designed to strengthen bilateral relations between Slovakia and its neighbouring countries, Austria, Hungary and Poland via the improvement of transport and cross-border infrastructure, fulfilling the environmental protection standards of the EU and developing  peopleto- people relations.

Social Affairs and Human Resources Development is designed to implement preventive and employability-oriented strategies for the unemployed; and to implement individual career paths for the long term unemploye as part of the programme to assist the most vulnerable groups in deprived areas.

Economic and Social Cohesion – 2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes are designed to increase the competitiveness of Slovak Industry on the international markets;, to improve local and regional capacity to implement Regional Operational Programmes; to enhance the administrative capacities to absorb EU Structural and Cohesion Funds particularly in the field of touris;to restructure the Slovak production sector towards the knowledge based economy and to increase its productivity; to foster sustainable development of the SME sector and to improve its competitiveness in EU markets through innovation; to prevent unemployment, and to develop and promote social integration and labour market flexibility across the regions. 

Individual parts of the assistance are in line with the National Plan for Regional Development of the Slovak Republic and should contribute directly to the capacity to further develop and manage the National Development Plan in various areas, including a number of related Sector Operational Programmes and/ or Regional Operational Programmes. The Cross Border Co-operation programmes and their priorities are defined in the respective Joint Programming Documents for each neighbouring state. For the Small and Medium Enterprises related part the governmental Mid-term Strategy for Small and Medium Enterprises Development provides basic local legal provisions.	

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………………………… … ..2
TABLE OF CONTENTS	7
PREFACE	9
GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS…………………………………………………………………………………..11
FINANCIAL DATA	13
Financial and Contractual Data of the Sector ‘Economic and Social Cohesion’	13
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	15
Main Report	21
1. SECTORAL BACKGROUND AND SCOPE OF EVALUATION	21
1.1.	Sectoral Background	21
1.2.	Scope of Evaluation	21
1.2.1 Performance of Activities	22
1.2.2 Corrective Actions already undertaken for each Component	27
1.2.3 Anticipated actions for the next Interim Evaluation	27
2 EVALUATION RESULTS	28
2.1 Relevance	28
2.2 Efficiency	31
2.3 Effectiveness	35
2.4 Impact	37
2.5 Sustainability	38
3	CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS	39
3.1 Conclusions and Recommendations	39
3.2 Performance rating	44
ANNEXES	45
ANNEX 1. Indicators of Achievement OF SECTOR OBJECTIVES AND EVALUATION CRITERIA	46
ANNEX 2. LIST OF INTERVIEWS	54
ANNEX 3. LIST OF Documents Referred to in the INTERIM EVALUATION	57
ANNEX 4 - NATIONAL PROGRAMME FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE ACQUIS Communautaire (NPPA)	59
ANNEX 5 - Recommendations FROM previous ASSESSMENT / Interim Evaluation AND follow-up	60
ANNEX 6 - DISSENTING VIEWS	65
ANNEX 7 - ANNEX TO CHAPTER 1	66

PREFACE
This Interim Evaluation covers Phare assistance to “ Economic and Social Cohesion “ under the following Programme Components:

 SR-0107.01 Preparation for Structural Funds-Institution Building Support 
2002/000-610.11 Consolidating the Institutional Framework for Structural Funds;
SR 0107.03 to 07 Regional Investment Projects ( Zemplinska Sirava, Humenne, Roznava, Spisska, Nova Ves, Velka Domasa).
 SR-0113 and 2002/000 642.01. 03 Cross Border Co-operation Slovak Republic/ Austria;
SR-0102 and 2002/000- 603.01 and .02 and 2003/004-616.01/616.02 Cross Border Co-operation Slovak Republic/ Hungary;
 SR-0101 and 2003/004.616.02 and 2002/000-635.01-.03
Cross Border Co-operation Slovak Republic/ Poland;
 2003/004.995.03.12 External Border Initiative
SR-0107.02 HRD through Preventive and Individual Active Measures for Unemployed.
2002/000-610.12 Industry Development Grant Scheme;
2003/004.995.03.09 Support to Innovative SMEs
2002/000-610.13, 2003/004.995.03.08 Local and Regional Development Grant Scheme;
2002/000-610.14, 2003/004.995.03.10 Tourism Development Grant Scheme;
2002/000-610.15 Human Resources Development Grant Scheme;
2003/004.995.03.11 Grant Scheme on Equal Opportunities and Social Inclusion Support

Note: These programmes has been based on an initial list provided to the contractors at the end of December 2003. New programmes which are now funded under 2002 and 2003 may not have been in the initial list and therefore are excluded for this IE.

This Interim Evaluation has been prepared by Pohl Consulting and Associates of Germany during the period from December 2003 to February 2004 and reflects the situation at the 31st December 2003 which is the cut-off date for the Interim Evaluation. The factual basis for this evaluation has been provided by the following Monitoring Reports prepared by the Aid Co-ordination Unit at the Slovak Office of Government:

•	M/SK/SOC/02002 covering the period from May 2002 to August 2002 and issued on 18 November 2002;
•	M/SR/ESC/02002 covering the period from May 2002 to August 2002 and issued on 14 October 2002 and;
•	M/SR/ESC/02003, covering the reporting period September 2002 to December 2002 and issued on 15 April 2003.
•	M/SR/ESC/03005 covering the reporting period 1st May 2003 to 31st August 2003 and issued  on the 27th November 2003.

Other findings have been based on an analysis of the Financing Memoranda, formal Programme documentation, interviews with relevant Ministries and agencies and published material. The Interim Evaluation examines the progress of the programmes towards the objectives stated in the formal programming documents, i.e. Financing Memoranda, Project Fiches, etc. The report is intended to provide management information for the benefit of the Joint Monitoring Committee (JMC) and other relevant parties. It draws conclusions and puts forward Recommendations. It provides a general assessment of programmes or components under consideration and included in the corresponding Sectoral Monitoring Reports. This IE provides a bridge between the last evaluation carried out under the EMS contract and the next one to be carried out under the new technical assistance contract. Its importance lies in the fact that it will probably be the final one before accession. The findings will therefore have a bearing on the degree to which Slovakia is ready for accession and for the use of Structural Funds. 

Comments requested on the Draft version were received from the following parties:

Parties invited	Comments
Received	
Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family 	Yes	
Ministry of Construction and Regional Development/ Regional Development Support Agency ( RDSA )	No	
Ministry of Construction and Regional Development/ Section for Regional Policy 	No	
Ministry of Construction and Regional Development/ Section for Management of EU Assistance 	No	
Ministry of Education 	Yes	
Ministry of Finance/ Central Finance and Contracting Unit 	Yes	
Ministry of Finance/National Fund 	No	
Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family/ European Social Fund Unit 	Yes	
National Agency for Small and Medium Enterprises  ( NADSME )	No	
Office of the Slovak Government/ Aid Co-ordination Unit 	Yes	
Commission Services at the Delegation 	Yes	
Commission Services at Headquarters/Country Team Slovakia 	No	
Commission Services at Headquarters/ Evaluation Unit 	No	

GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS

ACU 			Aid Co-ordination Unit
AP 			Accession Partnership
AU 			Austria
BIC 			Business Innovation Centre
CBC 			Cross-border Co-operation
CFCU 			Central Finance and Contracting Unit
COLSFA		Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family
CSF 			Community Support Framework
ECD 			European Commission Delegation
EMS 			The Independent Interim Evaluation and Monitoring Services of Phare
EU 			European Union
ERDF 			European Regional Development Fund
ESC 			Economic and Social Cohesion
ESF 			European Social Fund
FCP 			First Contact Point
FM 			Financing Memorandum
GS 			Grant Scheme
HU			Hungary
HRD 			Human Resource Development
IA 			Indicator of Achievement
IE 			Interim Evaluation
IO 			Immediate Objective
INV 			Investment
IT 			Information Technology
JSPF 			Joint Small Project Funds
JMC 			Joint Monitoring Committee
M€ 			Million(s) of Euro
MoCRD 		Ministry of Construction and Regional Development
MoE 			Ministry of Economy
MoED 			Ministry of Education
MoF 			Ministry of Finance
MoLSAF 		Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family
MoU 			Memorandum of Understanding
NAC 			National Aid Co-ordinator
NADSME 		National Agency for Small and Medium Enterprises
NLO 			National Labour Office
MR 			Monitoring Report
NF 			National Fund
NLO 			National Labour Office
NPAA 			National Programme for Adoption of the Acquis Communautaire
OoG 			Office of the Government of the SR
PAA 			Pre-Accession Advisor
PAO 			Programme Authorising Officer
PF 			Project Fiche
PIU 			Programme Implementation Unit
PL 			Poland
RAIC 			Regional Advisory and Information Centre
RDSA 			Regional Development Support Agency
RDA 			Regional Development Agency
ROP 			Regional Operational Programme
SAC 			Sector Aid Co-ordinator
SC 			Steering Committee
SF 			Structural Funds
SK/SR 		Slovak Republic
SKK 			Slovak Crowns
SME 			Small and Medium Enterprise
SMSC 			Sectoral Monitoring Sub-Committee
SOP 			Sector Operational Programme
SPF 			Small Project Funds
SR/SK 		Slovak Republic
SRA 			Slovak Road Administration
TA 			Technical Assistance
TC 			Twinning Covenant
TD 			Tender Dossier
ToR 			Terms of Reference
TWIN 			Twinning
WO 			Wider Objective

FINANCIAL DATA
Financial and Contractual Data of the Sector ‘Economic and Social Cohesion’
Programme 
Number	Programme
Title	Expiry
Date for contracting	Expiry
Date for
Disbursement	Allocation (in MEUR)	Phare Funds	Co-financing	
				Phare	Co-financing	Commitment	Disbursement	Commitment	Disbursement	
Preparation for Structural Funds - Institution Building Support	
SR-0107.01	Institutional Building
Support for Structural Funds	30/11/2003	30/11/2004	4.700	0.435	4.679

	0.835
	0

	0

2002/000-610.11	Consolidating the
Institutional Framework for
Structural Funds	30/11/2004 	30/11/2005 	2.500 	0.250 	1.910
	0	0	0	
Regional Development and Business Support – Investment	
SR-0107.03 to .07	Regional Development
Investment projects
(Zemplinska Sirava,
Humenne, Roznava, Spisska
Nova Ves, Velka Domasa)	30/11/2003
	30/11/2004 	11.900 	6.888 	8.2930 
	0	5.235
	1.688	
Cross Border Co-operation	
SR-0113	Cross Border Co-operation
Slovakia/ Austria	30/11/2003	30/11/2004	6.000 	2.151 	5.134	0.377
	2.298 	0.143	
2002/000642.01-.03		30/11/2004 	30/11/2005 	6.000 	1.940 	0	0	1.300	0	
SR-0102 	Cross Border Co-operation
Slovakia/ Hungary	30/11/2003 	30/11/2004 	2.000 	2..400 	1 .097 
	.071
	0.784	0.491
	
2002/000-603.01 & .02		30/11/2004 	30/11/2005 	2.000 	0.620	0.185 	0	0.600 	0	
2003/004.616.01		30/11/2005 	30/11/2006 	1.800	0.600	0	0	0	0	
2003/004.616.02		30/11/2005 	30/11/2006 	0.200	0.020	0	0	0	0	
SR-0101 	Cross Border Co-operation
Slovakia/ Poland	30/11/2003 	30/11/2004 	4.000 	2.905	1.885	0.142	0.541	0	
2002/000-635.01-.03		30/11/2004 	30/11/2005 	4.000 	1.632 	0	0	0	0	
2003/004.995.03.12	Phare External Border Initiative	30/11/2005 	30/11/2006 	1.400	0.300	0	0	0	0	
Social Affairs and Human Resources Development (HRD)	
SR-0107.02	HRD through Preventive and
Individual Active Measures
for Unemployed	30/11/2003 	30/11/2004 	3.000 	1.000 	2 .998 	0	1.398 	0	
Economic and Social Cohesion – 2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes	
2002/000-610.12	Industry Development Grant
Scheme/ Support to Innovative SMEs	30/11/2004 	30/11/2005 	3.500 	1.100 	0	0	0
	0
	
2003/004.995.03.09		30/11/2005 	30/11/2006 	3.100	2.03	0	0	0	0	
2002/000-610.13	Local and Regional
Development Grant Scheme	30/11/2004 	30/11/2005 	3.500 	1.278 	0.200
	0.120
	0	0	
2003/004.995.03.08		30/11/2005 	30/11/2006 	6.000	1.700	0	0	0	0	
2002/000-610.14	Tourism Development Grant
Scheme	30/11/2004 	30/11/2005 	3.500 	2.200 	0	0	0
	0
	
2003/004.995.03.10		30/11/2005 	30/11/2006 	3.500	1.200	0	0	0	0	
2002/000-610.15	Human Resources
Development/ Equal Opportunities and Social Inclusion Support Grant Scheme	30/11/2004 	30/11/2005 	3.500 	1.100 	0	0	0	0	
2003/004.995.03.11		30/11/2005 	30/11/2006 	2.500	0.850	0	0	0	0	

	Total			78.60	32.59 	26.38	1.545	11.486	2.322	
Source: Perseus dated 31/12/2003, National Fund information dated 31/12/2003Source: Monitoring Reports No. M/SR/ESC/03005 dated 27th November 2003
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
Slovak Republic-Economic and Social Cohesion

Monitoring Report: M/SR/ESC/03005, issued on 27th November 2003
Interim Evaluation Report: R/SK/ESC/03.046

This Interim Evaluation has been prepared by Pohl Consulting and Associates of Germany and covers Phare assistance to the ‘Economic and Social Cohesion’ Sector under the Phare National and Cross-Border Co-operation Programmes for the years 2001, 2002 and 2003.

Scope and Objectives

‘Economic and Social Cohesion’ comprises some 30 Programmes under the Financing Memoranda 2001, 2002 and 2003, totalling some 78.6 MEUR in funding. Overall co-ordination of the programme rests with the Ministry of Construction and Regional Development A number of central and regional institutions are involved in the programming, implementation and monitoring of assistance to the sector, which is being delivered through a number of mechanisms including twinning, technical assistance, investments and financial and grant schemes. These Programmes relate to the adoption and application of the acquis communautaire in the areas of regional policy, small and medium enterprises development, Cross Border Cooperation and social affairs and employment. Individual parts of the assistance are in line with the National Plan for Regional Development and a number of other related governmental provisions.

Evaluation Results

Relevance 

	The individual Components are in the main relevant or even highly relevant for the Sector's goals which are focused on accession and preparation for the Structural Funds.There have, however, been severe design shortcomings which have resulted in protracted delays in contracting and loss of funds. A number of the 2001 investment projects have only just been contracted and are just starting to be implemented.	
Efficiency 	The efficiency of most of the Components has been poor to date. The entire assistance to the Sector has been charcterised by “ crisis management “ with last-minute commitments, unclear implementation arrangements, deficiencies in  administrative capacity, shortcomings in the timely delivery of cofinancing and protracted approval procedures. The substantial upturn in contracting at the end of 2003 substantially improved the  situation on the contracting front but it is to be hoped that this was not simply for the sake of expediency. Difficulties may arise due to the short implementation time especially for 2001 projects.	
Effectiveness 	Effectiveness is difficult to predict as implementation is at an early stage or contracting has in many cases only just started.	
Impact 	All Programmes are expected to have some positive impact, provided that the individual activities can be implemented on time and the initial design shortcomings have been resolved. This will be dependent on the absorptive capacity of the institutions responsible for implementation and the final beneficiaries. Much of the impact will be beyond the projects' duration.	
Sustainability 	Sustainability is difficult to predict as implementation is at an early stage or contracting has only just started. In the main, projections for sustainability are just about sufficient, although this will depend on the Slovak administrations themselves after accession.	

Relevance
While the individual Components are in the main relevant or even highly relevant for the Sector purpose, they have suffered from considerable design shortcomings. Programming work performed by the Ministry of Construction and Regional Development (regional development and cross-border co-operation projects) has been poor and a number of 2001 investment projects have only just moved through the contracting phase. The Programmes directly related to Small and Medium-sized Enterprises have been adequately designed. The design of individual interventions under the ‘Social Affairs and Human Resources Development’ Component are logical but their success will be conditional upon the capacity of the implementing institutions to manage the projects, to ensure inter-ministerial collaboration and upon the beneficiaries themselves.

The ‘2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes’ address the priority areas of industry, tourism, regional and local development and human resource development and are designed to assist beneficiaries in their preparation for the use of the Structural Funds. The Grant Schemes are perceived as playing a key role in preparing local and regional authorities for SF Assistance and these programmes are complementary to programmes targetted at institutions at the central level.

Efficiency

The Efficiency of most of the Components has been poor. Assistance to the Sector has been characterised by “ crisis management “ with last-minute commitments, resulting from the low quality of technical documents weak inter-institutional co-ordination and communication between central and regional levels, unclear implementation arrangements, lack of administrative capacity, shortcomings in the timely delivery of co-financing and protracted approval procedures. 

A number of 2001 investment projects were at high risk and were potential candidates for the re-allocation or loss of funds. This was due to difficulties with the lack of construction permits, unclear land ownership , insufficient municipal co-financing, and poor technical design. Many of the problems have resulted from the increasing heavy workloads of the Ministry of Construction and the lack of experienced personnel to manage the projects. There have been considerable shortcomings on the side of the beneficiaries.

Communication within the Ministry of Construction and Regional Development - between the implementing Regional Development Support Agency and the Section for Regional Development (carrying out programming responsibilities) -has been weak. There is little experience at the Ministry of Education with regard to the management of Grant Schemes. Management and coordination capacities can be positively assessed only for National Agency for Small and Medium Enterprises and the Central Office for Labour, Social Affairs and Family, although the recent reorganisation has diluted the resources of the latter, which may have an effect on its efficiency and its capacity to implement the Grant Schemes. It is to be hoped that increased staffing at the MoCRD and more stable structures will enable it to continue to improve its coordinating role.

Effectiveness

Effectiveness for most of the Components is difficult to predict as implementation is at an early stage or contracting has only just been completed.While the last IE showed poor performance, there has been an increase in activity and many of the Grant Schemes have moved forward rapidly with Call for Proposals already launched and the evaluation process already completed for some of them. It is to be hoped that this will lead to more rapid implementation. The contracting of so many of the 2001 projects at the late stage in 2001 will pose considerbale strains on the implementing agencies given the very short time left to complete the projects.

Impact

In the medium and long-term, all Programmes within this Sector are expected to have some positive impact provided that the individual activities can be implemented in time. However, most of the expected impact is unlikely to materialise within the lifetime of the given Programmes. Any results coming from the 2001 ‘Institution Building’ Twinning will appear late and beyond the date of accession, and this was not what was intended. Institutional support should have been provided well in advance of the date of accession so that the administrative structures were well prepared for accession and for the use of the Structural and Cohesion Funds. The monitoring system for ERDF/ESF should have been operational by now and all relevant Ministries and agencies conversant with the system and its requirements. As it is, the system is being installed under extreme time pressures and it is debatable whetehre the ambitious targets can be met.

The impact of the projects under Regional Development and Business Support- Investment is likely to be in the provision of basic business infrastructure, which will undoubtedly contribute to the enhancement of the business environment in the regions concerned. However it is unrealistic to expect such investments to reduce unemployment – at best they will contribute to the creation of  some new jobs, but this is not the same as reducing unemployment. Nor will they necessarily contribute to increased productivity.

In relation to the Grant Schemes, those directly targeted at SMEs are likely to contribute to their objectives of increasing productivity and competitiveness of those firms assisted under the schemes. In relation to those targeted at tourism development, however, the objectives of trying to ensure the effective use of EU Structural Funds in the field of tourism seem to be wholly inappropriate. The object of the exercise should be tourism development, to which the Structural Funds may be able to contribute.  In relation to those Grant Schemes targeted at local and regional administrations in order to develop their capacities for implementing the ROP, judging from the number of grant applications received it is likely that some enhanced capacity will be achieved.

With regard to  ‘Social Affairs and Human Resources Development’, the experience in managing Grant Schemes should provide valuable experience for the future utilisation of the Structural Funds  provided that the agencies responsible acquire the skills necessary to manage them and local and regional institutions play a proactive role. The projects should also go some way to alleviating both short and long term unemployment provided the policies introduced are synchronised with direct intervention to improve employment prospects.

With regard to the CBC Programme, the small projects under the JSPF referred to as ‘people to people’ activities will have much more direct impact on co-operation with neighbouring countries provided the RDSA carefully monitors the implementation process to ensure that the planned individual objectives are achieved. The investment projects will have an indirect impact but there are concerns that  the Phare funds are used mainly as a source to cover Slovak needs in transport and environment areas.

Sustainability

Projections for sustainability are in general sufficient and possibly good, but only if the beneficiaries demonstrate ownership and commitment. In the long-term this will require a continuous commitment on the recipient side and/ or other investors to continue with the Phare initiated activities. Further funding from the Government side will also be essential if the projects are to maintain their momentum and make an on-going contribution to the process of accession.

Conclusions

All of the evaluated projects were in general relevant or even highly relevant, but programming appeared to be poor, thus substantially contributing to the problems within this Sector. Management, co-ordination and inter-institutional communication has been inadequate. Effectiveness for most of the Components is difficult to predict as implementation is at an early stage or contracting has yet to start. Provided that the individual activities can be implemented in time, projections for impact and sustainability can be regarded as adequate. The overall rating for this cluster is ‘Unsatisfactory’

Criterion

Project	Relevance	Efficiency	Effectiveness	Impact	Sustainability	Verbal
overall
rating	
Preparation for Structural Funds – Institution Building	
SR-0107.01 	2 	-1 	-1 	-1 	0 	U	
2002/000-610.11	2 	0 	0 	0 	0 	S	
Regional Development and Business Support – Investment	
SR-0107.03 	-1 	-2 	0 	1 	1 	U	
SR-0107.04 	-1 	-1	0	1 	1 	S	
SR-0107.06 	-1 	-1 	0 	1 	1 	S	
SR-0107.07 	-1 	-2	0 	1 	1 	U	
Cross Border Co-operation	
SR-0113 	0 	-2 	1 	0	0 	U	
2002/000-642.01-.03 	1 	-2 	0 	0 	0 	U	
SR-0102 	-2 	-2 	-2 	-1 	-1 	HU	
2002/000-603.01-.02 	1 	-2	0 	0 	0 	U	
2003/004.616.01	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
2003/004.616.02	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
SR-0101 	-2 	-2 	-2	-1	-1 	HU	
2002/000-635.01-.03 	1 	-2	0 	0 	0 	U	
2003/004.995.03.12	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
Social Affairs and Human Resources Development	
SR-0107.02 	1 	-1 	0 	1 	1 	S	
Economic and Social Cohesion – 2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes	
2002/000-610.12 	2 	1 	1 	1 	1 	S	
2003/004.995.03.09	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
2002/000-610.13 	2 	1 	1	1	1 	S	
2003/004.995.03.08	1	0	0	0	0	S	
2002/000-610.14 	1 	1 	1 	1	1 	S	
2003/004.995.03.10	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
2002/000-610.15 	2	0	0	0	0	S	
2003/004.995.03.11	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
Taking into account the contextual constraints on the evaluation, the sector overall is rated to be “UNSATISFACTORY”.	
Total for the Sector 	1	-1	0	0	0	U	

Recommendations

On the basis of the evaluation results above and conclusions, a number of important recommendations need to be made:

•	The Ministry of Construction and Regional Development (Section for Regional Development) should review and improve the process for programming and project design and should strengthen and formalise the communication flows and feedback with the RDSA and other relevant Ministries. Emphasis should be placed on developing  a pool of  eligible projects, that can been considered  to be  sufficiently mature for funding from EC sources. Before the actual start of any Phare 2002 or 2003 investments, a detailed assessment of the actual status of these projects should be undertaken to ensure that all documentation is correct and up to date and that the requisite licences, permits etc. are in place.

•	The Regional Development Support Agency should :

(i)	work closely with the Ministries and Agencies responsible for the implementation of the Grant Schemes to ensure that the conclusion of the evaluation process leads to more rapid project implementation.
(ii)	review the drafting of its implementation agreement with beneficiaries of the investment projects in order to strengthen its effectiveness, which is very limited at present.
(iii)	ensure that it has adequate financial management and control systems in place for the verification of claims under its grant schemes.

•	The National Agency for the Development of Small and Medium Enterprises should ensure that it has adequate financial management and control systems in place for the verification of grant claim expenditure.

•	NADSME should also ensure that the evaluation processes for the Grant Schemes under its control are completed on time and that the whole process is carried out in a transparent way and that the evaluation committees previously agreed with the ECD are respected.

•	With regard to the 2002 Institutional Building Programme, the Ministry of Construction and Regional Development/ Section for EU Assistance Management, should ensure that the activities of the new twinning project for 2002 are synchronised with those of the 2001 project and the TA Capacity Building Programme to ensure consistency in approach and to avoid possible duplication and the overlapping of activities. There should also be efforts to push ahead with the work to compensate for the prolonged delays; and to resolve the issue of the Cohesion Fund expert as soon as possible so that the PAA can play an active role in assisting the administration with the preparation for Cohesion Funds.

•	Every effort should be made to ensure that the Monitoring system for ERDF and ESF is developed on time ( April and June deadlines respected ) and that all Ministries and Agencies receive the appropriate level of training to ensure that they are familiar with the system and its applications and can comply with its requirements.

•	There is a need for the  Ministry of Education and the MoLFSA to acquire the skills necessary to manage the Grant Schemes under their control and to impart project management skills to the beneficiaries in the regions.

•	Efforts need to be made to prevent the dilution of resources at the Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family to enable it to manage the Grant Schemes under its control; and to reinforce the technical capacities of the Local Labour Offices.

•	With regard to the documentation being provided to key decision makers, efforts should be made to make these more user friendly so that key information can be easily accessed.

Main Report
1. SECTORAL BACKGROUND AND SCOPE OF EVALUATION
1.1.	Sectoral Background

1.	Economic and Social Cohesion (ESC) represents the largest (in terms of total allocations) of the four sectors of Phare assistance in Slovakia. The individual Programmes under ESC relate to the adoption and application of the acquis communautaire in the areas of regional policy; small and medium enterprises (SME) development; Cross Border Cooperation and social affairs and employment. Individual parts of the assistance are in line with the National Plan for Regional Development of the Slovak Republic (NDP) and will contribute directly to the capacity to further develop and manage the NDP in various areas, including a number of related Sector Operational Programmes (SOP) and/or Regional Operational Programmes (ROP). Cross
Border Co-operation (CBC) programmes and their priorities are defined in the respective Joint Programming Documents with each neighbouring state.

1.2.	Scope of Evaluation

2.	This Interim Evaluation (IE) covers Phare assistance under the Financing Memoranda (FM) 2001, 2002 and 2003 thus covering a large proportion of the national allocations granted to Slovakia. The focus of the assistance is oriented towards the preparation for future Structural Fund assistance, regional development, SME initiatives and business support, CBC interventions and Human Resources Development (HRD). Overall, for the purpose of this evaluation, the ESC Sector consists of the following Components:

Financial and Contractual Information for the Components under Evaluation
Programme/Component Title	Allocated
(M€)
	Committed
(M€)*
	Disbursed
(M€)*	
Preparation for Structural Funds - Institution Building 	7.20 	6.59	0.84	
Regional Development and Business Support – Investment 	11.90 	8.29 	0	
Cross Border Co-operation 	27.4 	8.30	0.59	
Social Affairs and Human Resources Development 	3.0 	2.99 	0	
ESC – 2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes 	29.10 	0.200	0.12	
Total 	78.60 	26.38	1.55	

*Perseus to cut-off date 31st December 2003

The above table shows an overall budget of 78.6 MEUR for 2001, 2002 and 2003. Overall commitments amount to 26.38 MEUR ( 34% ) and disbursements to 1.55 MEUR ( 2% ).

1.2.1 Performance of Activities

Component 1: Preparation for Structural Funds - Institution Building (IB)SR-0107.01 Development of the Institutional Framework and Administrative Capacity for Programming and Implementation of Structural Funds; and 2002/000-610.11 ‘Consolidating the Institutional Framework and Enhancing Administrative Capacity for Programming, Implementation and Monitoring of Structural Funds’ 

Activities and Outputs
3.	This Component is aimed at the creation of an effective operational framework for the management of the Structural Funds when Slovakia becomes a Member State of the European Union. It is being carried out through 2 Programmes. In the first ( SR-0107.01 ), emphasis is being placed on reinforcing the key Managing Authorities responsible for administration of the Structural Funds (SF); developing a monitoring system for ERDF and ESF; and strengthening the Paying Authorities. In the second, ( 2002/000.610-11 ), the focus is on the strengthening of the Managing Authorities responsible for the Operational Programmes and the Cohesion Funds. There is also further support for the development of the Monitoring system. Assistance has been provided through Twinning and Technical Assistance.

Effects
4.	After considerable delays, the Twinning Covenant for the 2001 programme was eventually signed on the 5th February 2003 with a French Consortium. 3 PAAs took up their positions at the Ministry of Labour, the Ministry of Construction and Regional Development and at the Ministry of Finance later in that month. Unfortunately, the performance of 1 of the PAAs was not satisfactory and there was a conflict of personalites for one of the others.The contracts for 2 of the PAAs were terminated in July 2003. Replacements were not in place until November/December 2003. As a result, a considerable vacuum was left at the MoL and MoF and much of the work foreseen for the PAAs had to be done by the Slovak administrations themselves without the technical assistance envisaged.The loss of 2 PAAs also made the work of the remaining PAA at the MoCRD extremely difficult since she was effectively without a Team Leader and colleagues.The new PAAs are now in place and there has been a positive reaction to their competencies.

With regard to the 2002 project, the Twinning Covenant was eventually signed on the 25th September 2003 and the Technical Assistance contract signed on the 28th November 2003. 3 German experts are now in place at the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Economy and the Ministry of Construction and Regional Development and proposals have been made to provide expert(s)  on the Cohesion Fund. 

The TA contract for monitoring was signed at the end of November 2003 after protracted delays with Siemens Business Services. And this is designed to establish a functioning monitoring system for ERDF and ESF with deadlines of the end of April and end of June 2004 for the project components. The 2002 budget was merged with that of 2001 and the State budget to provide a total budget of 1.7 MEUR although the final contract price was lower than this.

Other components include TA for Capacity Building for which a contract was signed at the end of November 2003. Another large project of 850,000 EUR was broken down into a number of smaller Framework contracts most of which were completed in 2003.

This sector also received an additional allocation of 1.2 MEUR from another project which had been cancelled and a further 7 projects were contracted at the end of November 2003. These included the printing of brochures and manuals and the production of CDs for the Information Centre " Structural Funds for Slovakia " (€100,000 ); the supply of IT equipment for the Integrated Information System ( € 100,000 ); Sustainable public information strategy on the Structural Funds-Training ( €200,000 ); the development of an Information portal and web site for " Structural Funds for Slovakia ( €200,000); the Craetion of TV-spots, interactive CDs and DTP works for publicity and communication on the Strcutural Funds (€200,000 ); and the development of Project Pipelines for 2 Operational Programmes -Priority 2-Environmental Infrastructure ( €200,000 ) and Priority 3 -Local Infrastructure ( €200,000 ).

Component 2: Regional Development and Business Support - Investment
SR-0107.03 ‘Tourism Development Zemplinska Sirava’, SR-0107.04 ‘Industrial Park Humenne-Gutmannovo’, SR-0107.05 ‘Industrial Park Roznava’, SR-0107.06 ‘Industrial Park Spisska Nova Ves’, and SR-0107.07 ‘Tourism Development Velka Domasa’

Activities and Outputs
5.	This Component intends to strengthen ESC in priority regions of Slovakia and mostly deals with problematic areas in Eastern Slovakia. The individual parts of this Component focus on: (i) stabilisation and further growth of tourism in the Zemplinska Sirava and Velka Domasa regions, and (ii) at the creation of favourable conditions for the inflow of foreign and domestic capital into selected Slovak districts. 

Effects
6.	 With respect to the various SR-0107 investments to industrial parks or tourism facilities in Eastern Slovakia, the project for the ‘Industrial Park Roznava’ (SR-0107.05, Phare allocation M€ 2.4) failed due to lack of co-financing on the side of the participating municipality. As a result, the Phare funds were re-allocated. However, for the remaining two investment projects (SR-0107.4 Guttmanovo and SR-0107.06 Spisska Nova Ves), these have now been contracted and there is every expectation that all works will be completed before the end of the disbursement period. Similarly, the two tourism infrastructure projects (SR-0107.07 ‘Velka Domasa’ and SR-0107.03 ‘Zemplinska Sirava’, totalling €M 5.5) have also now been contracted and can be expected to be completed before the end of the disbursement period. It is noted that the RDSA utilised the services of design engineers and its own technical staff to review the proposed project time schedules and budgets presented by the beneficiaries before starting the tendering process in order to ensure that there was the highest likelihood that the projects could in fact be completed on time.

Component 3: Cross-Border Co-operation
CBC Slovakia/ Austria (SR-0113 and 2002/000-642.01-0); CBC Slovakia/ Hungary (SR-0102, SR 2002/000-603.01-02, SR 2003/004.616.01 and SR 2003/004.616.02); CBC Slovakia/ Poland (SR-0101 and 2002/000-635.01-03); Phare External Border Initiative (SR 2003/004.995.03.12)

Activities and Outputs
7.	The aim of this Component is to improve the bi-lateral relations between Slovakia and its neighbouring countries, namely Austria, Hungary and Poland and to develop the immediate border areas by: (i) improving transport and cross-border infrastructure; (ii) fulfilling the EU environmental protection requirements, focusing on the reduction of water and air pollution in bordering regions, and; (iii) developing people-to-people relations within the border areas of ech of the countries.. The CBC programmes can be divided into two groups: 1) large scale infrastructure projects, with Phare participation up to 75% and maximum budget of 2 MEUR; and 2. Joint Small Projects Fund, which is also called “people to people” projects, which contribute to the development of dialogue and co-operation among the inhabitants of the border region by means of small projects with a Phare contribution up to 90% and a maximum budget of €50,000.

Effects
8.	The CBC programme has produced a number of positive results including (a) the development of co-operation between Slovakia and neighbouring countries not only between the respective authorities, but also between the inhabitants of the border regions; (b) skill enhancement through the process of preparing hundreds of applications for JSPF projects. These include skills in programming, the preparation of technical and financial dossiers, and Application Forms; (c) assisting the national and local authorities as well as inhabitants of the border regions to manage Structural Funds, in particular projects for the INTERREG programmes, and bilateral Joint programming documents specifying common strategies and priorities. Despite this, there have been major weaknesses in the CBC programme due to programming deficiencies which resulted in some projects being cancelled or threatened with cancellation. This includes, for example, the Podbiel Road which has faced stiff opposition from local inhabitants. Some projects were financially overestimated to an alarming degree causing severe delays in contracting.

As a consequence only 68% of Phare funds allocated to the 2001 CBC Programme were contracted which represents a loss more than 3.9 MEUR from the Phare budget for Slovakia. The weaknesses related to the preparation of tender dossiers led to the situation where more than 80% of projects were contracted in the last possible week of November 2003. Major tender dossiers for investment projects needed more than one year to be adequately revised. In one case the dossier was only in Slovak. 

Component 4: Social Affairs and Human Resource Development (HRD)
SR-0107.02 ‘HRD through Preventive and Individual Active Measures for the Unemployed’

Activities and Outputs
9.	The 2001 ‘HRD’ Programme aims to build on the work of the HRD 2000 Grant Scheme which concentrated on Slovakia East and intends to strengthen ESC in other regions of Slovakia ( Slovakia South West and North West) through the facilitation of access to the labour market for the unemployed by providing them with individual active labour market measures tailored to their specific needs. The MoU for this project was signed in August 2003 and the Call for Proposals launched on the 21st of August 2003. 430 applications were received by the deadline of October 16th. 98 contracts were awarded in November 2003. 

Effects
10.	It is not possible to measure the effects of the project at this stage since the contracts were only signed in November of 2003 and the project is at a very early stage of implementation. Nevertheless, there was a general consensus that the quality of the applications was good and a substantial improvement on those submitted for the 2000 Grant Scheme. There were also far larger numbers of applications made than in the previous year demonstrating a far larger commitment to the project and the build up of expertise in proposal preparation. It also demonstrated the effectiveness of the public awareness campaign launched by the NLO with strong commitment from the ECD.
 
Component 5: Economic and Social Cohesion (ESC) – 2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes (GS)
2002/000-610.12 Industry Development Grant Scheme; , 2002/000-610.13 Local and Regional Development Grant Scheme; 2002/000-610.14 Tourism Development Grant Scheme; 2002/000-610.15 Human Resource Development Grant Scheme; 2003/004-995-03-08 Support to Local and Regional Development Grant Scheme; 2003/004 Support to Innovative SMEs (SISME); 2003/004-995-03-10 Tourism Development Grant Scheme.

Activities and Outputs
11.	The Component focuses on: (i) increased value-added content of the Slovak industry through enhanced product offerings and process technologies; (ii) support to the local and regional administrative structures and procedures needed for implementation of ROPs; (iii) increasing the competitiveness of the Slovak tourism sector and on strengthening the administrative capacities of the central and regional structures in order to manage and implement EU Structural Funds, as well as; (iv) enhancing absorption capacity needed to implement the SOP-HRD at local and regional level. 

Effects

12.	2002/000-610.12 Industry Development Grant Scheme

NADSME, with the assistance of a TA team, completed all the necessary grant shceme documentation and issued the first call for proposals in September 2003, one month ahead of what was foreseen in the EMS Interim Report. With a closing date of 3 November 2003, the call resulted in a total of 307 applications. At the time of this evaluation, the administrative compliance check had just been completed and while the final number being put forward for the technical evaluation was not made available the expectation was a figure of some 50-60%. NADSME had expected to complete the technical evaluations by the beginning of March 2004 and planned to have all contracts with the EC Delegation for endorsement by 1 May 2004. Due to the large number of applications received and delays in the evaluation process a second deadline of 16 January 2004 was cancelled and while it is expected that all the allocation for Component 1 (SMEs) will be utilised under the first call,  Component 2 (NGOs) will still be open for a second call later in the year. 

Implementation of this project, however, will be dependent upon the speed with which the Evaluation Committees are established and their effectiveness. Problems have arisen since the the new Minister of Economy has requested a change in the composition of the Evaluation Committees which is contrary to what wa soriginally agreed with the ECD.

 13.	2002/000-610.13 Local and Regional Development Grant Scheme.
The call for proposals for strands A, B and C was issued in September 2003 with a closing date of 27 November 2003. A total of 768 applications was received and at the time of this evaluation the distribution between the three strands was not made known.  Due to limited resources, the assessment of administrative compliance was delayed and problems over the remuneration of assessors led to further delays with the technical and financial evaluation. As a result, the assessment of adminstrative compliance was not completed until the end of February. The technical evaluation commenced at the beginning of March 2004..

14.	2002/000-610.14 Tourism Development Grant Scheme.
This project was implemented by NADSME in parallel with the Industrial Development Grant Scheme (IDGS) with a call for proposals in September 2003 and 868 applications received before the closing date of 3 November 2003. As with the IDGS, final figures for successful applications were not available at the time of the evaluation. However it is expected that all the available funds will be used and a second call for proposals is not anticipated.

As with the IDGS, implementation has also been delayed due to problems with the composition of the Evaluation Committees and this matter needs to be resolved quickly so that the evaluation process can begin and the projects selected for implementation.

15.	2003/004-995-03-08 Support to Local and Regional Development Grant Scheme 
This project is a continuation of strand C of the 2002 Local and Regional Development Grant Scheme and it is not intended to launch any call for proposals for this until an assessment is made of the success of the call under strand C.

16.	2003/004-995-03-09 Support to Innovative SMEs (SISME)
2003/004-995-03-10 Tourism Development Grant Scheme
Activities have not yet started. However, NADSME proposes to establish 2 project teams composed of the Senior Project Manager, Project Manager and the Executive Administrator for the programmes administration. MoE initiated translation of the project fiches. A meeting between MoE and NADSME concerning the conditions for implementation of FM2003 is planned. 

17.	2002/000.610.15 HRD Grant Scheme
2003-004-995-03-11 Grant Scheme on Equal Opportunities and Social Inclusion Support

For the SR 2002/000.610-15 project, the Call for Proposals for Activity 1 managed by the Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and  Family was launched on the 19th December 2003; for Activity 3, managed by the MoE, this was launched on the 7th January 2004 with a deadline of 25th February. For Activity 2, which is under the control of the MoLFSA, delays have been caused by their request  to have direct contracts  with the Higher Territorial Units which would be outside the scope of the Grant Scheme. There has been little progress on the launching of the 2003 Grant Scheme as yet although the TOR for the TA component was sent to the ECD in December 2003.

1.2.2 Corrective Actions already undertaken for each Component

18.	The last Sectoral Monitoring Report (MR) requested immediate action in several fields: Regarding the ‘Regional Development and Business Support – Investment’ Component, The 2001 infrastructure investments were all suffering from unresolved land ownership, building permit issuance and/or municipal co-financing, which were in need of immediate corrective actions. but with the exception of the project at Roznava ( which has now been cancelled ) these issues have all been resolved and the projects contracted. All Cross Border Co-operation sub-components had been mostly characterised by poor Indicators of Achievements and the correction of this element was allocated to the Regional Development Support Agency (RDSA) with regard to 2003 Programming. 

19.	With regard to‘Social Affairs and Human Resource Development’ Component, for the 2001 ‘HRD’, the need for the establishment of regular monthly meetings with all key players to improve communication and co-ordination of activities was noted.in the last Monitoring Report. This matter appears to have been resolved and there is regular participation in the Monthly Meetings.No corrective actions have been identified for any 2002 (including 2002 Grant Schemes) Programmes under evaluation, since these projects have only just started. There was also a request to improve the level of staffing at the MoLFSA and this also is in the process of being resolved. 

1.2.3 Anticipated actions for the next Interim Evaluation

20.	Further work relevant under Preparation for Structural Funds – Institution Building will include reviewing the degree to which the activities of the two Twinning Programmes have been adequately synchronised and targetted at the requirements for the management of the Structural Funds; assessing the performance of the replacement Twinning team and the new members of the 2002 Twinning team; appraising the degree to which know how transfer has taken place; and assessing the effectiveness of the new monitoring system being developed under considerable time constraints.

21.	As for Regional Development and Business Support – Investment, 

The key issues for the investment projects will be to ensure that they are in fact on track for completion as planned by November 2004. The RDSA must maintain a close monitoring role for all of these projects.  In relation to the Grant Schemes, the issue for close attention is the develoment of appropriate financial management and control systems for verification of grant claim expenditure.

22. 	As for CBC, the projects being developed must have a clear land ownership, construction permits, bill of quantities and and evidence of co-financing sources. The co-financing must be in cash, not in kind, and the contracts must cover both the Phare and the co-financing parts, the deadline to finalise the implementation must be valid also for the co-financing part. The implementating agreements must convert in contract, that not only give but also demand.

23.	Regarding Social Affairs and Human Resources Development, it will be important that the 2001 GS start to be implemented quickly and that the Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and the Family have sufficient resources to manage the project both at the central and regional levels. The transfer of the technical competencies from the regional Labour Offices to the Local Labour Offices would also be required to provide for local monitoring. There should also be strong efforts to ensure that the evaluations of the Grant Schemes are carried out in a transparent way and that contracting starts quickly so that implementation can begin in earnest. More work needs to be carried on upgrading the skills in managing grant schemes at the MoED and the MoLFSA. Benficiaries also need to be made aware of their responsibilities with respect to management of their projects and their monitoring requirements.

24.	Given the late contracting of the investment support projects, close attention needs to be directed at ensuring that they are in fact on target to be completed by November 2004. 

2 EVALUATION RESULTS

2.1 Relevance

25.	The vast majority of the ESC Programmes evaluated are in line with the priorities defined in the Accession Partnership, the NPAA and stated government priorities and should contribute to the fulfilment of obligations relating to the accession process, particularly in areas such as the strengthening of administrative capacities for Structural and Cohesion Funds; improving  infrastructure; promoting tourism development; SME and industrial development in priority region; developing enhanced environmental infrastructure and cross-border relations with neighbouring countries (Poland, Austria and Hungary); active labour market policies; enhanced competitiveness of Slovak industry; improved conditions for regional and local implementation of ROPs; effective use of SF and of the European Social Fund (ESF) in preventing unemployment, enhancement of social integration and promotion of labour market flexibility. 

26.	In the area of ‘Preparation of Structural Funds - Institutional Building (IB)’, both  Programmes (SR-0107.01 and 2002/000-610.11) are designed to address the improvement of  administrative capacity in the agencies responsible for the management the SFs and to set in place an effective monitoring system for ERDF and ESF. Both Programmes have been  split into twinning and TA and are managed by the Ministry of Construction and Regional Development (MoCRD), which is the key institution and overall co-ordinator with regard to the preparation for  SF Assistance. One large programme under the 2001 programme was eventually sub-divided into 7 Framework contracts to speed up the rate of implementation and make the projects more targetted and manageable.

Twinning backed by various short and medium-term TA, seems to be an appropriate means for delivering the assistance. Twinning is particularly important since the requisite level of skills in managing Structural and Cohesion Fund Programmes are not readily available in the private sector and many of the procedural aspects relating to the management of SFs lie in the public domain. As regards the 2001 Twinning, three PAAs under one Covenant were provided and attached to the Ministry of Labour, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Construction and Regional Development. In the 2002 IB Programme, three PAAs under one Covenant are in place at the MoCRD, Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Economy ( MoE ) under the formal responsibility of the MoCRD. Delays in starting these projects and problems with the personnel recruited have had an adverse effect on the support that was supposed to be provided to key institutions. Effectively only 5 months of support has been provided and replacements are only just in place, The net effect has been that much of the work that had been targetted for TA support has been effectively carried out by the Slovak Administrations themselves. Given that both sets of Twinning arrangements are now being launched together, it is important that there is no duplication of tasks and that responsibilities have been clearly defined in view of the new time horizon.

27.	In relation to the projects under " Regional Development and Business Support Investment " and the wider objectives of these projects, it has to be said that while reducing unemployment is a worthwhile objective, the likelihood of any of these projects achieving it is slight. At most, they might lead to some direct modest employment creation amongst those SMEs who are able to benefit from the improved infrastructure. But that is not the same thing as reducing unemployment and it is extremely unwise to set such an objective when so many external factors contribute to overall employment and unemployment levels. 

The project purpose in the case of the industrial parks relates to creating favourable conditions for private and foreign investment. While the indicators chosen are reasonable enough – numbers of new jobs created and numbers of new SMEs – there is no evidence to support the targets set for these which range from 240 to 1000 jobs and from 4 to 15 new SMEs, depending on the project. Without some evidence to support these targets, it would be very difficult to determine whether failure to meet them indicates failure of the project in acheiving its purpose or whether the targets were too ambitious and that failing to meet them does not therefore imply failure of the project.

28.	In the case of the tourism development projects, the project purpose is creating conditions for stabilisation and further growth of tourism in the regions concerned. In these cases, the choice of indicators is numbers of tourists and tourism capacity utilisation stabilised. What is not apparent is the basis upon which the targets for tourists has been determined. – There is no baseline analysis nor any evidence to support the figures chosen. Once again, a reasonable indicator is given a target without any justification.  Moreover, the second indicator,  – tourism capacity – is undefined and there is no explanation of how it is to be measured. So the projects make sense from the rational point of view of the upgrading of water and sewerage services to higher quality standards and as such probably need no further justification, other than perhaps a demonstration that these projects were chosen because they offered the best return on investment. It is doubtful if tourism will increase because of improved facilities, rather that improved facilities are necessary to support the increased tourism anticipated as a result of other tourism development measures.

Likewise the activities relating to upgrading of local tourism infrastructure undoubtedly make sense, and for these one could reasonably expect to see some modest improvement in tourism numbers once the works are completed as the toursit sites will be visually more attractive, with more amenities and easier access. But a simple baseline study of current tourist levels would have been necessary to enable any increase to be identified.

29.	As regards the design arrangements for Cross Border Co-operation, the assistance is being delivered mainly through investments and small grants (JSPFs), to the relevant borders (Austria, Hungary, Poland and Ukraine) under FM 2001, 2002 and 2003. The WOs and IOs, oriented towards’ the improvement in transport and cross-border infrastructure, fulfilling the EU environmental protection requirements, focusing on reduction of water and air pollution in bordering regions’ are clearly defined but mainly understood by the Slovak side as an opportunity to cover needs in the areas of environment and transport . The main focus is usually to develop waste water treatment plans, sewerage systems and road reconstruction. In Slovakia there is a need for such modernisation throughout the country and not only in bordering regions. It is, therefore, very difficult to understand the specific cross border nature of some selected projects. From the know-how transfer viewpoint, the JSPFs are potentially much more useful as a learning exercise in project drafting, submission and implementation according to EU rules, increasing awareness of the EU funding in the regions, strengthening cross-border cohesion and the development of structures capable to absorb future SF. 

As a positive exception it is worthwhile mentioning the ‘Innovation and Technology Development GS’ under the 2002 CBC with Austria, which aims to support more sophisticated economic development in the respective border region, taking into account the upcoming INTERREG partnership with Austria. Again the design of major CBC investments was in most cases poor. A number of projects lacked acceptable technical documentation, construction permits and/or co-financing. Due to serious difficulties a substantial part of the 2001 funds were not commited on time and therefore lost. Defined indicators of acievement of objectives are often not quantified and quantifiable

30..	For the 2001 ‘HRD’ interventions, their intention to develop training schemes for disadvantaged groups in active labour policy measures (regional approach) and vocational training (sectoral approach) is relevant. The ‘targeted or disadvantaged’ groups are however not well defined. Also, it is evident that some kind of disadvantaged groups (e.g. school graduates, people in pre-retirement period or structurally unemployed people) can be classified as disadvantaged also outside East Slovakian regions. It is important, however, that initiatives in this field are not carried out in isolation and that there is a linkage between economic strategies that are geared to job creation. Improvements in job profiles and skill enhancement may do much to raise moral for the unemployed but these activities must ultimately result in a reduction in employment if the project is to have a sustainable effect. Change this.

31.	The ESC – 2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes Component addresses four priority areas: (i) industry development (NADSME/MoE), (ii) tourism development (NADSME/MoE), (iii) regional and local development (MoCRD) and (iv) human resources development (MoCRD/ MoLSAF/ NLO/ Ministry of Education - MoED). The relevance of these programmes is that they are designed to assist authorities and beneficiaries at the local and regional levels in preparing for the advent of the Structural Funds by familiarising them with procedures, by developing project preparation and project management skills and engendering partnership amongst stakeholders. They are designed to be complementary to interventions at the central level through twinning and  training. While the Grant Schemes are an important component in the broad mix of activities designed to stimulate regional expertise and promote local and regional initiatives in an array of areas, the delays in twinning and TA capacity building programmes at the centre may reduce the benefits accruing to these projects

2.2 Efficiency

32.	Overall, the co-ordination of the individual interventions under the ESC Monitoring Sector is dispersed among a wide variety of implementing agencies (RDSA, NADSME, CFCU), line ministries and institutions (MoE, MoCRD, MoLSAF, MoED, NLO) and includes complex networks of local and regional agencies established by the participating authorities (CoLFSA Regional and District Offices; Regional Development Agencies (RDA) - under the auspices of the MoCRD, and Regional Advisory and Information Centres (RAIC), Business Innovation Centres (BIC) and FCPs - governed by the MoE/ NADSME). In the last IE, concerns were raised over the lack of inter-ministerial coordination since this appeared to be somewhat disjointed and not well focused. There still appears to shortcomings in communication and coordination and efforts under the new programmes need to be intensified to ensure a well-coordinated and synchronised approach. 

33..	As far as co-ordination, management and monitoring issues of Preparation for Structural Funds – Institution Building is concerned, the 2001 and 2002 IB implementation has been delegated to the MoCRD and its Section of Management of EU Assistance, which has been nominated as the future Managing Authority of the Community Support Framework (CSF). The 2001 Twinning Covenant was endorsed in February 2003 It had been intended to have the PAAs in place well in advance of the accession date so that procedures and the transfer of skills could have been effected well in advance. Unfortunately, prolonged delays and deficiencies in the quality of the personnel has meant that only now is the full contingent of experts available for support to the Ministries. This has meant that the Slovak Administrations themselves have been forced to develop their own documents and procedures without the external help envisaged. Whilst it could be argued that this has required a drastic acceleration in the learning curve on the part of the local staff, it is now incumbent on the PAAs to check the quality of the work undertaken and ensure that it complies with the requirements of the SFs. There will, however, continue to be a serious question mark as to the level of preparedness for the Structural Funds. It is, however, to be hoped that increased staffing at the MoCRD and more stable structures will enable it to undertake the wide range of complex activities it has to undertake among the recipients of the assistance - including the MoCRD itself, ( ERDF, CSF, SPD-Objective-2), MoLSAF (ESF, SPD-Objective 3) and Ministries of Environment, Agriculture, Economy, Transport (individual SOPs).

As for the 2002 IB Programme, the Twinning Covenant has been signed and 3 of the experts are in place with only the Cohesion Fund expert ( s) not yet provided. Efforts have been made to review their original mandate and to ensure that the activities of the new experts are synchronised with the repacements on the original 2001 programme. It should be stressed that there should be flexibility in approach to ensure that the activities of the Twinning experts are complementary and do not overlap with those of the TA contracts.

34.	The previous IE expressed concerns about the implementation, co-ordination and monitoring of Regional Development and Business Support - Investment. Responsibility for overall co-ordination and implementation has been delegated to the MoCRD/ RDSA (SR-0107 Industrial Parks and Tourism Development activities) and 2002 and 2003 Local and Regional Development Grant Schemes) and NADSME 2002 Industrial Development Grant Scheme, 2002 and 2003 Tourism Development Grant Schemes and 2003 Support to Innovative SMEs ). While efforts have been made to reinforce the staff at the RDSA for monitoring its investment projects, there are still concerns about NADSME's capacity to handle the large number of grant applications and manage the large number of projects emanating from the evaluation process.

Both implementing agencies appear to be adequately staffed (17 people at NADSME, with an on-going increase and 26 people at RDSA). It was commented in the previous report that the limited capacity to administer large number of projects results in delays caused by the very poor preparation of programme documents – provided by the MoCRD/ Section for Regional Development - that finally leads to last-minute commitment, and often urgent actions for re-allocation or cancellation of projects.

It is clear that the problems that a badly prepared project can create are not easily overcome by the implementing institution that has had little or no input to the project design. 

35.	However, it is worth noting that the programme approach of the forthcoming operational progammes co-financed from the Structural Funds will, to a large extent, resolve this issue as the responsibility for proper preparation of projects will rest with the applicants and failure to present a completed and high quality application will simply mean that another, better prepared project will be supported instead. The Phare approach of defining specific projects at the Financing Memorandum stage is poor preparation for the realities of Structural Fund progamming where only project eligibility is defined in the Progamme Measures and then it is up to the prospective beneficiaries to put together successful project proposals. In such circumstances, the lack of permits, etc., which caused so many problems with the projects under consideration in this report, would simply mean that the project application was rejected,or more probably, that the application was never made in the first place. This, however, really only applies to the specific investment projects for which RDSA is responsible and in future their role will be one of appraising project applications under various measures rather than trying to ensure the implementation of a specific project for which they do not in fact have any direct responsibility

36.	The contracting and implementation responsibility for the 2001, 2002 and 2003 Cross Border Cooperation Component has been fully delegated the RDSA at the MoCRD. In 2002 the RDSA was put in the difficult situation after being delegated the responsibilities without sufficient human resources (the CBC staff of the ACU had left and no transfer of know-how had happened). The Head of the Implementing Agency was left alone and after some time resigned. Since the beginning of 2003 the newly appointed team, led by an experienced manager of the Implementing Agency,  improved its operations. However, concern remains for the actual performance of the RDSA, which is, responsible for the entire tendering, contracting and monitoring  of Phare 2001, 2002 and 2003.

37.	Meanwhile,  RDSA is faced with another last-minute commitment situation with regard to the 2002 and 2003 programmes. This raises serious doubts about the the institution's  administrative capacity and its efficient use. With regard to the programming of regional development and CBC investments, it is also clear that within the MoCRD the communication between the implementing RDSA and the Section for Regional Development (carrying out programming responsibilities) is clearly insufficient. Whilst the separation of programming and implementation is generally appreciated, in this particular case it has resulted in a number of inter-sectional co-ordination and communication weaknesses. The pressure to go ahead with projects without co-financing, construction permits and even land ownership rights is likely to cause constant problems. The implementing agreements are slightly flexible and looser. The RDSA has now decided to check seriously whether all projects have the relevant documents needed prior to launching the implementation phase. Since there is no  project pipeline,  there is the further threat of losing funds allocated for infrastructure projects.

With regard to the CBC with Austria, Hungary and Poland, no progress can be reported with regard to the 2002 and 2003 CBC programmes and nothing has been achieved yet for 2001 CBC that was contracted with considerable financial losses in November 2003. 

38.	Overall, the co-ordination for Social Affairs and Human Resources Development Component now lies with the MoLSAF/ Section of ESF Management (‘Social Dialogue’) and MoCRD/ NLO  2001 ‘HRD’). . It is hard to assess co-ordination of the 2001 ‘HRD’ Programme, since it is in a very early stage of implementation with the contracts only recently signed.  It should be stressed, however, that the dilution of resources at the former NLO combined with the dissolution of the Regional Labour Offices is likely to pose an unnecessary strain on the CoLFSA which may have an adverse effect on the project.

39.	Efficiency of the ESC – 2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes Component has progressed mainly due to the  RDSA's NADSME’s  efforts in terms of preparing guidelines and application forms. However, delays in reaching agreement on the composition of the evaluation committees for the SME schemes is worrying as there must be some concerns about the transparency of the evaluation process if the government feels it is necessary to impose changes on the composition of the panels.

As for NADSME’s role in implementing its grant schemes, within the constraints of the Phare procedures for SME grant schemes it has undoubtedly done a good job, but it lacks any real awareness of how SME aid schemes operate within Member States. The risk must be that it will continue to apply the restrictive and bureaucratic rules of the Practical Guide which are wholly unsuited for SME aid schemes and which would not be found in any Member State. It needs to ensure that future SME aid schemes supported from the Structural Funds are more user friendly.

With regard to HRD Grant Scheme, the last IE identified vague implementation provisions and lack of coordination between the key players ie. the former NLO, the MoED and the MoLFSA. It also identified shortcomings in the agencies with respect to the administration of the Grant Schemes.Since the last IE, there have been significant changes in the administrative arrangements for the management of the HRD programme. The National Labour Office was dissolved in January 2004 and integrated into the MoLFSA with a new title of the Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family. Within the European Integration Division of the MoED the Implementing Phare Unit has been transformed into a new separate European Affairs and PHARE Department and the Structural Funds Implementing Unit has been tranformed into a new separate ESF Department responsible for the administration of the HRD Grant Scheme. For the 2001 programme responsibility lies with the MoLFSA and the former NLO although the latter is responsible for the management of the programme.

The reorganisation has however placed considerable strain on the former NLO due to the reduction in the number of Labour Offices from 79 to 46 and the loss of the 8 Regional offices where there was a core of technical personnel capable of providing on-going support to the projects. This has placed increasing stress on the central staff in Bratislava where there is a considerable shortfall in the staff available to manage the schemes. The contingent of 10 has been reduced to 2/3. With regard to the MoLFSA, the situation has seen an improvement with 9 staff now in the ESF section. The MoED will have 4 staff available for the administration of the 2 Grant Schemes under their control.

While the former NLO has experience in GS administration, there was a noticeable concern both at the MoED and the MoLFSA with regard to the mangement of Grant Schemes. The MoED has organised training courses in Project Cycle Management (PCM) and seminars are being held for the Evaluators.
 
40	At the ECD, four Task Managers are responsible for overall supervision of all the Programmes under the ESC Monitoring sector and have in the main established a pro-active and supportive relationship with the beneficiaries. They are actively participating at all key project stages starting with support for programming, followed by guiding and monitoring the implementation.

41.	The performance of the Aid Co-ordination Unit (ACU) has improved since mid- 2002, particularly due to more stable staffing. The respective Task Managers participated in several rounds of programming (mainly for the 2002 and 2003 Programmes) and provide coordination and administrative support to the beneficiaries and/or key stakeholders. A new monitoring report template has been introduced and is well received. Also, the ACU has now recognised the need to improve the quality of IAs and to measure these regularly in the individual monitoring reports. Consequently a number of related measures for reviewing the individual IAs within a participatory process are being initiated by the ACU for all Phare Monitoring Sectors in Slovakia. 

42.	The National Fund (NF) plays an important role in co-financing of the Programmes. Though the relevant provisions have been made in the state budget, the procedures for transfer of financial resources remain complicated. Also we can evaluate positively the efforts currently underway to improve the overall co-financing issue in the country, mainly through the means of joint and cash co-financing, which should apply for Phare 2001 onwards. A number of noted difficulties in co-financing provisions are usually connected to the final (municipal) beneficiaries and do not directly concern the responsibilities of the NF.

43.	Overall the financial situation of the entire Sector at the end of the last IE was very disappointing. Since then , there has been a substantial upturn in contracting although much of this was done at the very last minute at the end of the 2001 contracting period. In broad terms, funding for the sector has amounted to 78.6 MEUR for the three year period with commitments amounting to 26.38 MEUR ( 34% ) and disbusements to 1.55 MEUR ( 2 % ). Within the sub-componenst, however, there have been wide variations in performance ie.:

•	The Preparation for SF and Institution Building is 92% contracted although only 12 % has been disbursed.
•	Regional Development and Business Support Investment is 70% contracted although there have been no disbursements yet.
•	The CBC Programme for 2001 made a remarkable recovery at the end of 2001 with 67% of projects now contracted and 4.9% disbursed. Despite this, some 3.9 MEUR was lost amounting to some 32.37 % of the budget. For the 2002 Programme, only 1.54% has been contracted.
•	For the ESC Grant Schemes, only 1 % has been contracted although the launching of the schemes is well underway.

2.3 Effectiveness

44.	In general, there has been a mixed feedback  regarding the effectiveness of the various Components under this ESC Monitoring Sector. 

45.	After the initial unclear situation deriving from the protracted preparation and approval process of the Covenant for the 2001 Twinning support, covered under the Preparation for Structural Funds – Institution Building Component, implementation started in February 2003 with the arrival of 3 PAAs and their attachment to the MoLFSA, MoF and MoCRD. Unfortunately, due to problems of a personality nature and obvious skill in deficiencies, 2 left in the summer and were not replaced until November/December of 2003. This had a very adverse effect on the preparations for the Structural Funds and many of the Tasks designated for assistance from the PAAs had to be undertaken by the Slovak Administrations themselves. The arrival of replacements has improved the situation immeasurably and care is being taken to ensure that their functions and duties are well synchronised with the new Twinning team , which has recently arrived. The efforts to develop an appropriate monitoring system to support the Structural Funds is finally underway and it is forecast that the system will be opertaional by April for Phase 1 and June for Phase 2. Since this will be fundamental to the management of the ERDF and ESF, it is to be hoped that the very ambitious targets will be met and that an effective system is operational and useable by the dates scheduled.

46.	 Regional Development and Business Support - Investment Component. With regard to the IOs for the 2001 investments, some creation of improved tourism capacity and some more favourable condition for foreign and domestic capital inflow in the Slovakia East regions should be achieved albeit to a limited extent due to the very limited relative size of individual interventions 

47.	As far as the effectiveness of the Cross Border Co-operation Component with Austria, Poland and Hungary is concerned, some results linked to improved infrastructure and environmental protection in border regions can be expected but this is dependent on the successful implementation of the committed 2001 CBC Programmes. For the 2002 and 2003 CBC, these are still at a very early stage of their preparation and there has been very little progress. The shortened implementation time for Phare 2001 and expected serious contracting problems related to major 2002 and 2003 CBC investments give grounds for scepticism that the stated IOs can be really achieved in time. There are also potential problems with CBC 2001  due to lost not-committed funds, lower quality of projects of projects that were contracted at the last minute and the  shorter implementation time available (in one case 9 months instead of 25 months planned).

48.	It is hard to identify a significant cross-border impact for the 2000, 2001 and 2002 projects under the Cross Border Co-operation Component. Most of the investment will take the form of waste water treatment plants, waste disposal systems, re-engineering of water channels, etc. Such rather small-scale interventions will certainly have a positive impact on air or water pollution for the immediate affected population and districts. However,  hardly any significant cross-border nature can be identified here. It is also evident that a number of these CBC projects do not have real ‘mirror projects’ on the opposite side of their respective borders. There is more optimism for the  2002 CBC GS  and the 2003 CBC which should provide a platform for more substantial economic development in the border areas with Austria, Hungary and Poland through projects designed to promote SMEs and reduce the rate of unemployment.

49.	Economic and Social Cohesion. For the 2002  Grant Schemes, all of the first calls for proposals have now been held and a high response rate was achieved as noted above. It is not yet known what the total number of scucessful applicants has been but the expectation is that the funds will easily be absorbed before the end of the contracting period and that the beneficairy projects will be competed on time, i.e before the end of November 2005. In all cases the schemes are meeting a clearly identifiable need and it is to be hoped that similar schemes will continue after accession when the experiences of managing them will be highly relevant, subject to the development of more suitable procedures than the Phare ones.

The 2003 Grant Schemes are not yet operational but from the evidence to date it must be expected that the two implementing institutions – RDSA and NADSME – will be able to get the schemes up and running  them satisfactorily and once again there is likely to be considerable uptake of the funds available. However, there is still concern about the validation of expenditure upon which grant claims will be made.

50.	 Social Affairs and Human Resource Development,. For the 2001 Grant Scheme, the completion of the evaluation process and the signature of contracts was very much a close run affair with the Call for Proposals and the Deadline for Submissions being the 21st August and October 16th respectively. Given the large number of applications ( 430 ), the completion of the process and the endorsement of the Evaluation Report by the ECD left little room for manoeuvre with the 97 contracts signed just before the deadline for commitment. There had, however, been a determined attempt to raise the level of awareness in the regions with presentations made in every regional capital with the active participation of the ECD and financial officers.

51.	Whilst it is not possible to assess the performance of the 2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes, it is nevertheless possible to make some comments on the preparatory work and the efforts to raise public awareness. With regard to the HRD GS, the Call for Proposals for Activity 3 was made on the 7th January with a deadline for submissions on the 25th February. It is anticipated that this will be concluded by the end of March. With regard to publicity, the Call was published in the National Press and the Teaching Newspapers and supported by a Press Conference. There have also been presentations in each of the 8 regions with some 100 participants. While this is laudible, there have been some concerns that there was no ECD involvement in these and there was an absence of financial officers which may affect the quality of the applicants' submissions. For Activity 1, the Call for Proposals was published on the NLO website and in the regional press on the 3rd February 2004. Since the Technical Secretariats at the 8 Regional Labour Offices were still functioning until the end of January 2004, they still played a valuable role at the regional presentations and through numerous financial consultations especially those relating to financial issues.A large number of consultations was also provided by the staff of the COLFSA either personally or by daily phone calls.Given that successful applicants from previous GS are not allowed to apply, the lack of experience and absence of presentation days may have an adverse effect on the quality of the proposals.In contrast to the 2001 HRD Grant Scheme, the 2002 scheme is proceeding at a much faster rate. The Call for Proposals for Activity 2 was launched on the 19th December 2003 and for Activity 3 on January 7th 2004. Activity 1 is still somewhat in abeyance and is waiting for a decision as to whether a direct contract can be awarded. 

2.4 Impact

52.	In the medium and long term all Programmes within this Monitoring Sector are expected to produce at least some positive impact with regard to their predefined WOs, provided that the individual activities can be contracted and thus implemented. However most of the expected impact, particularly related to individual regional development and CBC interventions, is not likely to materialise substantially within the lifetime of the given Programmes.

53.	As for the impact it is still hard to evaluate the achievement of WOs of the Preparation for Structural Funds – Institution Building Component, due to the delays experienced in the 2001 Twinning. and the problems associated with the initial 3 PAAs. While the twinning teams are almost up to full contingency now, the delays have left a considerable vacuum in the level of preparedness for accession and for the use of Structural Funds. The impact of this support will be felt much later than was initially anticipated but should lead to a strengthening of the institutional framework in the Ministries involved. The degree to which the objectives of the projects can be realised will depend very much on the quality of the experts and just as importantly the degree to which the institutions targetted can take on board the recommendations and support provided. 

54.	As noted in the previous report, the impact of most of the projects under Regional Development and Business Support - Investment is likely to be limited to improved business-related infrastructure, improved conditions for tourism-oriented SMEs, and for some inflow of foreign and domestic capital in priority regions The immediate micro-economic impact might mainly serve the involved municipalities and districts, by contributing at least to some stabilisation of the individual regional economic and employment situations. However a more substantial macro-economic impact is not likely to be achieved, given the very limited size of the individual interventions. And as noted above, the targets selected seem not to be based on any identifiable analysis.

55.	It is hard to identify a significant cross-border impact for the 2001, 2002 and 2003 projects under the Cross Border Co-operation Component. Most of the investment will take the form of waste water treatment plants, waste disposal systems, re-engineering of water channels, etc. Such rather small-scale interventions can certainly have a positive impact on air or water pollution for the immediate affected population and districts. However, hardly any significant cross-border nature can be identified here. It is also evident that few of these CBC projects have real ‘mirror projects’ on the opposite side of the respective borders.There is more optimism for the upcoming 2002 CBC GS and the 2003 CBC programme which should provide a platform for more substantial economic development in the border areas with Austria, Hungary and Poland and focus on the development of small and medium enterprises with the aim of minimising the rate of unemployment.

56.	With regard to the Social Affairs and Human Resources Development Component the 2001 ‘HRD’ Programme aimed at increasing employment in the regions of Eastern Slovakia and decreasing the share of unemployment of most vulnerable groups, and decreasing the number of people dependent on social benefits via training based on local labour market needs, some positive pre-conditions might be secured by the assistance. Also valuable experience with GS implementation might be gained and secured for future ESF interventions. The broader impact (unemployment reduction) will be certainly dependent also on the macro-performance of the respective regions in the near future.

57.	As for the ESC – 2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes, these can make a positive contribution to the preparation of the Slovak administrations for Structural Fund support, provided that sufficient resources can be provided to manage the grant schemes at the Central level.These Grant Schemes are seen as key elements in developing local and regional skills vital for the management of future SF support. 

58.	But it is to be emphasised once more that the prospective intermediate bodies must do more to develop more suitable grant application and management procedures than they are currently obliged to use. To this end they should look at how such schemes are currently managed within Member States.

2.5 Sustainability

59.	Overall,  prospects for sustainability are in the main sufficient. However, some uncertainties, which vary from one particular Programme to another, exist with regard to the final sustainability of results achieved.

60.	Sustainable outcomes of the 2001 and 2002 support under the Preparation for Structural Funds - Institution Building Component are likely provided that the individual assistance of twinning partners and TA are well received and absorbed by the respective beneficiary institutions, thus really helping to bring forward the final preparation of managing, paying and implementing institutions for SF at both regional as well as central levels. Considerable efforts need to be made to overcome the protracted delays and problems that have affected these projects and the Slovak Administrations are now under severe time constraints with accession imminent in 4 months. Particularly important will be the development iof the Monitoring System for ERDF and ESF and the accreditation of the various agencies. Given the problems that Slovakia has had in the past and the criticisms that were made by the Commission on the lack of preparation for SF, it is vital that the projects funded here lay the foundations for a solid institutional framework to underpin the SF assistance.

61. 	It must be expected that the successful completion of the investment projects will result in a sustainable improvement in the business and tourism environment. Such projects are essential for the future development of the regions concerned and are should be replicated in other regions with Structrual Funds support in the future.

62.	Similarly, the 2001, 2002 and 2003 Cross Border Co-operation elements again comprise mainly regional investments. Their sustainability is based on the approach of beneficiary municipalities or State authorities. However the sustainability of investment projects is questionable due to substantial losess in the process of contracting and possibly even during the implementation. JSPFs through many people-to-people effects will positively influence cross-border relations, and the experiences gained from individual small-project implementation can be transmitted to the future absorption of the SFs (particularly INTERREG) and if possibly the knowledge gained could be spread to other eligible regions as well.

63.	Sustainability of the results under the Social Affairs and Human Resources Development Component can be achieved.The MoED and the MoLFSA should gain considerable expertise in managing Grant Schemes and this should be invaluable for the future management of the Structural Funds. The Central Office of Labour Social Affairs and Family should also consolidate its expertise provided that its resources are not diluted and it Local Labour Offices are strengthened with technical personnel. Further financial assistance in this area would be a prerequisite for ensuring sustainability after accession.
 
64.	In the case of the ESC – 2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes, the success of any grant scheme is contingent upon the scheme meeting the needs of the business or industry sector and being sufficiently flexible as to make it attractive to the potential beneficiaries. To that end NADSME needs to look at how such schemes are designed in other Member States as the Phare procedures are unsuitable and should not be continued with once Structural Fund programming comes on stream.

3	CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

3.1 Conclusions and Recommendations

65.	We are concerned about the requirement for an 80% advance of grants as this seems to require funds to be given in advance of need which goes against all the principles of sound financial management. A smaller initial advance, to be topped up when it has verifiably been spent, woud seem more prudent.

66.	We are also concerned about the weak drafting of the implementation agreement between RDSA and the beneficiaries of the investment projects. This needs to be propoerly reviewed and revsied by a competent lawyer.

67.	The lack of any apparent financial management and control systems in relation to claims under the grant schemes need to be addressed urgently.
	
68.	Programming work performed by the MoCRD/ Section for Regional Development appeared to be inadequate and due to the lack of quality control, a number of 2001 CBC and regional development investment projects have been forwarded that apparently have been not mature enough for immediate contracting. Although the situation has improved since the beginning of 2003 through the efforts of the new Implementing Agency team, time pressure has meant that only  key corrective measures such as for example demanding more discipline from the side of beneficiaries have been introduced.  Phare’s role with regards to regional development and CBC investments remains rather limited and appears to be that of  being a simple provider of (co-) finance  for basic construction works.

69.	Efficiency of most of the Components under implementation is poor with only some positive exceptions. Assistance to the Sector has been  characterised by an apparent lastminute commitment, resulting from the low quality of technical documents, insufficient interinstitutional (and sometimes intra-institutional) co-ordination and communication  between central and regional levels. There have also been unclear implementation arrangements, deficiencies in the administrative capacity, shortcomings in the timely delivery of co-financing and cumbersome approval procedures. 

 At the time of this Report – despite the last minute contracting of the 2001 projects and the loss of  a substantial amount of the money allocated,  the rest of 2001 CBC investment projects are at high risk due to the short implementation time available. The 2002 and 2003 CBC projects are under the same threat of losing funds due to continuing  difficulties with missing construction permits, unclear land ownership and/ or insufficient municipal co-financing. There is a threat that the lack of alternative projects for the re-allocation of funds  will lead to a further loss of funds. 

Whilst the NADSME and the CoLFSA are performing  satisfactorily, there are concerns that the management of a large number of Grant Schemes may pose  a considerable burden which may affect their future effectivenes.The RDSA and other MoCRD bodies are faced with  substantial  workloads and there is some concern with regard to their administrative and absorption capacities.

70.	The effectiveness for many of the projects  is difficult to forecast at this stage due to delays in commitment and the fact that many of the projects are in their early start up phase. This is particularly the case for the 2001 projects for which many of the contracts were signed in November 2003 at the final date for commitment. A speedy implementation is nevertheless necessary to ensure disbursement in the prescribed period at the end of 2004.

71.	In the medium and long-term all Programmes within this Sector are expected to produce  some positive impact, provided that the 2001 operations will not suffer from further losses due to delayed implementation and that the 2002 and 2003 activities can be contracted and thus consequently realised. The expected macro-impact, particularly related to individual regional development and CBC interventions, has almost no chance to materialise within the lifetime of the given Programmes.

72.	Projections for sustainability for the assistance under the Sector are in general sufficient, in the event that the efficiency problems can be resolved. Particularly in the long-term any sustainability will require a continuous and firm commitment from the recipient side and/ or other public or private investors to continue with the Phare initiated activities.

73.	Insofar as the SME and Tourism Grant Schemes are concerned, such schemes are common in most Member States so it must be expected that similar interventions will continue under the Structural Fund Operational Programmes.However, for their success to be assured,  a much more realistic approach needs to be taken to the rules under which they operate. In particular, the current requirement for the application of public procurement rules to SMEs in receipt of grants under the Phare programme is almost certainly without parallel within the EU and adds a wholly unecessary burden on the SMEs. 

Where support has been provided by way of grants to local authorities for infrastructure investment, once again this sort of assistance is comonplace within the EU and is likely to be found in the operational programme for basic infrastructure. Here, however, it is entirely appropriate that the public procurement rules should apply as the beneficiaries are themselves public entities. As a general guide, only if public expenditure exceeds 50% of project cost should procurement rules apply. It would be an exceptional case whereby aid rates for an SME scheme exceeded 50%.

Conclusion	Recommendation	Output	Reference
/Paragraph	Responsibility	Deadline	Debriefing
Results	
The issue over the recruitment of experts under the 2002 Twinning Programme for Institutional Support has left the provision of the Cohesion Fund expert unresolved.	The MoCRD needs to make an immediate decision on whether to allow the recruitment of 3 short term experts to replace the 1 long term PAA.	Expertise on Cohesion Funds	4, 26,33,45,53	MoCRD	With immediate effect		
The timetable for the development of the Monitoring system for ERDF and ESF seems to be over-ambitious. and may result in delays in establishing a monitoring system.	The MoCRD needs to make contingency plans in case of delays in the development of the system and the development of communication systems between all relevant Ministries.	Functioning Monitoring System	3,4,20,26,33, 45,46,61	MoCRD	With Immediate Effect		
There is a need to ensure a well coordinated and synchronised approach between the TA and the Twinning programmes.	Steps need to be taken to ensure that the Twinning and TA programmes for institution and capacity building are well synchronised.	Procedures for MA/PA	4, 20,33,46,55	MoCRD	With immediate effect		

While the 2002 grant schemes have now been launched successfully, there is concern  over the ability of the impleme nting institutions to monitor the implementatoin of the grant assisted projects and verify expenditure claims. There is also concern about the high levels of advances required ot be paid under the PRAG rules	
The implementing institutions should establish as a matter of urgency an appropriate financial management and control system for verification of payment claims.

Advances should only be made in case of demonstrable need, and then only in smaller amounts, to be topped up as necessary against verified expenditure.	Improved
programming
quality
	28, 54, 55	MoCRD/ Section
for Regional
Development,
RDSA
	With
immediate
effect		
While the 2002 investment projects have been contracted, the implementing agreement between RDSA and the beneficiaries is ineffective and needs to be redradfted for use in any future projects of this nature.

	The implementing agreement needs to be reviewed and rewritten by a competent lawyer.	Improved
efficiency and
effectiveness
Ability of the implementing institution  to cancel agreement or reclaim funds paid if necessary	30, 40, 55,
56
	MoCRD/ RDSA 	With
immediate
effect		
There is some concern with regard to the  administrative capabilities and absorption capacity of the MoLFSA and the Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family. Also 
	Steps need to be taken to augment the resources of the Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and  Family to enable it to manage the Grant Schemes under its jurisdiction.  Training should also be provide to the above as well as to the MoED which have very little experience in managing Grant Schemes.	Improved
efficiency and
effectiveness

	29, 30, 39,
40, 55	MoED,
MoLSAF,
NLO,
RDSA
	With
immediate
effect		
 Poor project design and  deficiencies in project documentation and eligibility criteria have led to protracted delays in contracting. Inflated prices have also been a problem.	Improved project preparation skills to be developed at the RDSA and in the regions. There should also be an immediate review of the status of projects to check their eligibility and a apipeline of projects to be prepared.	Improved project preparation skills	8, 22, 29, 37, 47, 48	MoCRD/RDSA			

3.2 Performance rating 

Criterion

Project	Relevance	Efficiency	Effectiveness	Impact	Sustainability	Verbal
overall
rating	
Preparation for Structural Funds – Institution Building	
SR-0107.01 	2 	-1 	-1 	-1 	0 	U	
2002/000-610.11	2 	0 	0 	0 	0 	S	
Regional Development and Business Support – Investment	
SR-0107.03 	-1 	-2 	0 	1 	1 	U	
SR-0107.04 	-1 	-1	0	1 	1 	S	
SR-0107.06 	-1 	-1 	0 	1 	1 	S	
SR-0107.07 	-1 	-2	0 	1 	1 	U	
Cross Border Co-operation	
SR-0113 	0 	-2 	1 	0	0 	U	
2002/000-642.01-.03 	1 	-2 	0 	0 	0 	U	
SR-0102 	-2 	-2 	-2 	-1 	-1 	HU	
2002/000-603.01-.02 	1 	-2	0 	0 	0 	U	
2003/004.616.01	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
2003/004.616.02	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
SR-0101 	-2 	-2 	-2	-1	-1 	HU	
2002/000-635.01-.03 	1 	-2	0 	0 	0 	U	
2003/004.995.03.12	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
Social Affairs and Human Resources Development	
SR-0107.02 	1 	-1 	0 	1 	1 	S	
Economic and Social Cohesion – 2002 and 2003 Grant Schemes	
2002/000-610.12 	2 	1 	1 	1 	1 	S	
2003/004.995.03.09	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
2002/000-610.13 	2 	1 	1	1	1 	S	
2003/004.995.03.08	1	0	0	0	0	S	
2002/000-610.14 	1 	1 	1 	1	1 	S	
2003/004.995.03.10	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
2002/000-610.15 	2	0	0	0	0	S	
2003/004.995.03.11	1	0	0	0	0	N/A	
Taking into account the contextual constraints on the evaluation, the sector overall is rated to be “UNSATISFACTORY”.	
Total for the Sector 	1	-1	0	0	0	U	

Unacceptable	Poor	Sufficient	Good	Excellent	
-2 	-1 	0 	1 	2	
Highly Unsatisfactory 	Unsatisfactory 	No rating possible 	Satisfactory 	Highly Satisfactory	
HU 	U 	N/A 	S 	HS	

ANNEXES

ANNEX 1. Indicators of Achievement OF SECTOR OBJECTIVES AND EVALUATION CRITERIA

Indicators of Achievement 	Valid as Indicator	Remarks 	Reference to evaluation
criteria	
SR-0107.01
				
More than 95 percent allocated funds committed
	No	Indicator not specified accordingly as well as target date against which a progress should be measured.
	Effectiveness
	
Decentralised system fully applied	No	Indicator not specified accordingly as well as target date against which a progress should be measured.
	Effectiveness	
SR-2002/000610.11				
Qualifications of trained staff 	No	Indicator not applicable, related to the Programme, however activity oriented, without any tools allowing its measurability as well as target date against which a progress should be measured.
	Effectiveness	
No and quality of advice given and reports/guidance notes/documents produced by trained staff in relation to EC funded programmes in the area of ESC.	No	Indicator valid but not useful as a progress tool; not measurable neither qualitatively nor quantitatively.
	Effectiveness	
SK-0107.03				
500 000 served tourists per season 	No	Indicator is in general applicable, however influenced also by macro developments in the country, target date against which the progress is to be measured is missing
 	Effectiveness	
Tourism Capacity utilisation stabilised 	No	Indicator is in general valid, however not specified and measurable	Effectiveness	
SR-0107.04				
240 new or secured jobs 	No	The Indicator has been quantified, but without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured;
	Effectiveness, impact	
Creation of 4-5 SMEs in the region 	No	The Indicator has been quantified, but without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured;	Effectiveness, impact	
SR-0107.05				
1000 new or secured jobs 	No	The Indicator has been quantified, but without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured;	Effectiveness, impact	
Creation of 15 new SMEs in the region 	No	The Indicator has been quantified, but without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured;	Effectiveness, impact	
SR-0107.06				
Economic growth 	No	Not applicable; the Indicator has not been quantified with a specific target and
completion date against which progress could be measured; also the qualitative specification of an Indicator is missing. Not applicable for practical use	Impact	
Reduction of unemployment level 	No	Not applicable; the Indicator has not been quantified with a specific target and
completion date against which progress could be measured; also the qualitative specification of an Indicator is missing. Not applicable for practical use	Impact	
Increased number of SMEs 	No	Not applicable; the Indicator has not been quantified with a specific target and
completion date against which progress could be measured; also the qualitative specification of an Indicator is missing. Not applicable for practical use	Impact	
SR-0107.07				
400 000 served tourists/potential visitors per year
	No	Indicator is in general applicable, however influenced also by macro developments in the country, target date against which the progress is to be measured is missing	Efficiency, Impact	
Number of Tourists/nights in existing facilities	No	Indicator is in general valid, however not specified and measurable Efficiency, 	Impact	
SR-0113.01				
•	The completion of motorway D61 4.475 - 8.342 km 
•	Number of flora and fauna species in the corridors the same	No	The Indicator has been quantified, but without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured;	Efficiency, Impact	
SR-0113.02				
•	Pollution of the river Morava in the concerned profile better than BOD 10.6 mg/l and SS 18.0 mg/l 
•	Number of SME in tourism and production sector increased	No	The Indicator has been quantified, but without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured;	Efficiency, Impact	
SR-0113.03				
•	Unemployment rate reduced at the end of project 
•	Number of SMEś in the district increased 
•	Number of faded SME decreased	No	The Indicator has been quantified, but without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured;	Efficiency, Impact	
2002/000-642.01				
2-3 technology incubators established; venture capital window created; 
Number of common projects among research institutions/universities and SME sector started at the end of the project; 
Number of new patents developed	No	Missing specification and measurability instruments. 	Effectiveness, Impact	
2002/000-642.02				
Improved accessibility at the border crossing 	No	Missing specification and measurability instruments. 	Effectiveness	
2002/000-642.03				
Cross-border links intensified, number of
cross-border activities increased; opinion of inhabitants living in the border part of the border.	No	Missing specification and measurability instruments. 	Effectiveness, Impact	
SR-0102.01				
•	Increasing the number of the crossing transits at the Slovak-Hungarian border 
•	Increased GDP of the region	No	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness, Impact	
SR-0102.02				
•	Regional GDP/capita and rate of employment grows faster than national average 
•	Increase of the number of inhabitants wishing to stay in the area in the  next 5 years	No	The Indicator has been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness, Impact	
2002/000-603.01				
Increase (%) in informal contacts (2) ad hoc forums (3) co-operation agreements (4) crossborder structures between environmental organisations. 
Increased number of households served by new wastewater installations.	No	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness	
2002/000-603.02				
Increased local/regional capacities to design and implement development programmes and projects for those successfully completed the training programmes. 
Increased number of qualified institutions 
Increased number of cross-border applications per available fund Number of cross border economic actions Increased.	No	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured
	Effectiveness, Impact	
SR-0101.01				
•	Increased number of the crossing transit 
•	Increased amount of goods exchange	No	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness, Impact	
SR-0101.02				
•	Values of BOD, COD and SS in the rivers 
•	Number of new / survived SME in the tourism	No	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness, Impact	
SR-0101.03				
Sustainability of projects implemented by cyclical events as well as cross border co-operation agreements (at least 50% of projects are sustained)	No	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness, Impact	
2003/004-616.01				
Common actions to solve common concerns with the utilisation of local innovative and human potentials (5)	No	The Indicator has been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Impact	
				
2003/004-616.02				
•	Regional GDP/capita and rate of employment  grows faster than national average
•	Increase of  the number of inhabitants wishing  to stay in the area in the next 5 years.	No	The Indicator has been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured
	Impact	
				
2002/000-635.01				
Increased number of border crossing at the Slovak-Polish border. Transport capacity used as forecast in prefeasibility
study. 
Accident rate as assumed in pre-feasibility study.	No	Missing specification and measurability instruments. 	Impact	
2002/000-635.02				
Pollution of the river Poprad improved to
BOD 3.96 mg/1 
Pollution of the river Dunajec improved to BOD 2.62 mg/1 
90 per cent of population in the region connected to the sewerage system (current situation 30 per cent)	No 	The Indicator has been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured
	Impact	
2002/000-635.03				
At least 15 cross border co-operation agreements signed (within the field of local bodies and economic development)
At least 5 events from those financed through SPF are organised for the first time and are of cyclical character	No 	The Indicator has been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured
	Effectiveness	
2003/004.995.03.12				
Social and economic activities of a cross-border nature at the future external EU border with Ukraine	No 	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness, Impact	
SR-0107.02				
•	Number of unemployed entering preventive measures cycle
•	Number of persons trained
•	Number of placements in job market	No	Missing specification and measurability instruments.	Effectiveness, Impact	
2002/000-610.15				
Rate of absorption of the Grant Scheme 
Successful testing of all procedures of the
programme cycle	No	Missing specification and measurability instruments. 	Effectiveness	
2002/000-610.13				
Successful testing of management systems for EU funding. Procedures established at each stage of the program cycle.
Rate of absorption on the grant scheme	No 	Indicator not applicable; missing specification and measurability instruments. 	Effectiveness	
2002/000-610.14				
Qualitative and quantitative performance of grant disbursements under Phare 2002 Programme measured against the SPP Priority
Benchmarks	No 	Indicator not applicable for measurement; missing specification and
measurability instruments.	Effectiveness	
2003/004.995.03.11				
Grant scheme on equal opportunities and social inclusion support				
•	Degree to which socially excluded groups have access to opportunities
•	Enhanced opportunities on labour market for socially excluded groups	No	Missing specification and measurability instruments. 	Effectiveness	
2003/004.995.03.10				
Tourism development grant scheme				
•	Incremental convergence of pre-accession Phare procedures with the practices and norms of EU SF
•	Performance of grant scheme (from quantitative and qualitative point of view) disbursement compared to PTDGS of SPP and TGS under Phare 2002
•	MoE ‘s surveys regarding satisfaction of tourists are carried out

•	Number and structure of tourism facilities
•	Specific indicators of performance improvement are established
•	Improved data retrieval and monitoring analysis
•	Number of awarded grants for investment and non-investment projects	No

No

No

No
No

No
Yes	Lacking measurability

Lacking measurability and targets

The results of the surveys might be relevant but just carrying them  out isn’t a measurable indicator
Needs to be related ot the grant scheme
Not an indicator

Not an indicator
Lacking targets	Impact/Effectiveness

Effectiveness

Effectiveness

Efficiency

Efficiency	
2003/004.995.03.08				
Support to local and regional project development grant scheme				
•	Projects & programmes which successfully address regional development priorities of Slovakia
•	Rate of absorption of ERDF
•	Percentage of successful applicants
•	Rate of absorption on the grant scheme
•	No. of feasibility studies and tender dossiers for projects which will be supported in future from pre-accession or structural funds
•	No of land use decisions / permission for building granted
•	No of grant applications submitted electronically 
	No

Yes 
Yes 
Yes
No

Yes
Yes 	Lacking measurability

Valid indicator but no target set
Valid indicator but no target set
Valid indicator but no target set
Intended as results/output indicator but future support cannot be determined

Valid indicator but no target set
Valid indicator but no target set	Impact

Impact
Effectiveness
Efficiency
Effectiveness

Efficiency/Effectiveness
Efficiency 	
2003/004.995.03.09				
Support to innovative SMEs				
•	Added value in ERDF supported industries

•	Enhanced turnover and performance of Slovak companies by 2006

•	Full budget utilisation
•	30 investments in innovation companies 

•	Increased awareness of MOE/EU activities
•	90 new products, technologies and services developed or existing range upgraded

•	300 eligible grant applications received 

•	150 eligible applications for equity financing

	Yes

No

No
Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes	Technically a valid indicator but no certainty that the data can be obtained, nor is there a target nor a timescale
Indicator not restricted to beneficiary companies and it would  be almost impossible to assess the impact of this scheme on Slovak industry generally.
This is a target, not an indicator
No indication of the basis upon which the target of 30 was chosen
Lacking measurability

No indication of the basis upon which the targets were chosen

No indication of the basis upon which the targets were chosen
No indication of the basis upon which the targets were chosen
	Impact

Impact

Effectiveness
Effectiveness
Effectiveness

Effectiveness

Efficiency

Efficiency	
2003/005-704.01				
•	Decreased environmental pollution
•	Increased environmental awareness of population
•	Number of regional plans and strategies prepared and evaluated	No	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness, Impact	
2003/005-704.03				
•	Improved socio-economic quality of life in the border region
•	Number of local actors involvement in Phare activities
•	number of specialist involved in designing and implementing CBC projects	No	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness, Impact	
2003/005-704.02				
•	Number of joint projects supported by CBC Phare/INTERREG programme
•	Network of Impulse Centers established	No	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness, Impact	
2003/005.665.01				
Reduction of differences in the business-related infrastructure between the neighbouring countries	No	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness, Impact	
2003/005.665.02				
Sustainability of projects implemented by cyclical events as well as cross border co-operation agreements (at least 50% of projects are sustained)	No	The Indicator has not been quantified, without a specific target and completion date against which progress could be measured	Effectiveness, Impact	
2002/000-610.12				
80-100 successfully implemented projects achieving their projected objectives on time and within budget.
Rate of absorption of ERDF
Full Budget utilisation	No 	Indicator not applicable; missing specification and measurability instruments. 	Effectiveness	

ANNEX 2. LIST OF INTERVIEWS

INSTITUTION 	INTERVIEWEE 	DATE	
EMS Consortium	Mr. Dietmar Aigner
EMS evaluator
	21/01/2004	
Central Finance and Contracting Unit
Ministry of Finance of SR
Stefanovicova 5
 817 82 Bratislava	Mr. Boris Bujalka
Programme Manager
	14/01/2004	
Delegation of the European Commission
Panska 3
SK-811 01 Bratislava	Mr. Dusan Dobrovodsky
Task Manager
	16/01/2004	
Delegation of the European Commission
Panska 3
SK-811 01 Bratislava	Ms. Michel Doumont
Deputy
Phare/ISPA Section
	16/01/2004	
Small Carphatian Wineroute
900 01 Modra	Ms. Jarmila Dudova
Project administrator	21/01/2004	
Delegation of the European Commission
Panska 3
SK-811 01 Bratislava	Mr. Pierre Egloff
Task Manager
	16/01/2004	
Office of the Government of the SR
Aid Co-ordination Unit
Namestie slobody 1
SK-813 70 Bratislava	Ms.Iveta Faberova
Task Manager
	14/01/2004	
Ministry of Transport, Posts and Telecommunications of the Slovak Republic
Namestie Slobody 6
810 05 Bratislava 15	Mr. Jozef Gonda
Foreign Aid Department	14/01/2004	
Delegation of the European Commission
Panska 3
SK-811 01 Bratislava	Ms. Monika Hanzelova
Task Manager
	16/01/2004	
Kingdom of Matus
Piestany	Ms. Anna Hladka
Project administrator	21/01/2004	
Kingdom of Matus
Piestany	Mr. Juraj Hladky
Project manager	21/01/2004	
Slovak Road Administration
Mileticova 19
SK-82619 Bratislava	Mr. Jozef Hlavac
Director of Implementing Agency
	19/01/2004	
Ministry of Education
EU Integration Division
Stromova 1
SK-813 30 Bratislava	Ms.Miriam Kovacikova
Director of ESF Department
	14/01/2004	
Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family
EU Policy and Programmes Department
Zupne nam. 5-6
SK-812 67 Bratislava	Ms Maria Sebova
Project Manager	15/01/2004	
Ministry of Labour Social Affairs and
Family/ Section of ESF Management
Spitalska 6
SK-81643	Ms Nagyova
Pavol Juhas
Ms Eva Lovasikova
Robert Horinek
Ms Marcela Bezdickova	15/01/2004	
Delegation of the European Commission
Panska 3
SK-811 01 Bratislava	Ms. Daniela Kerestesova
Task Manager
	16/01/2004	
Ministry of Transport, Posts and Telecommunications of the Slovak Republic
Namestie Slobody 6
810 05 Bratislava 15	Mr. Kvetoslav Kmec
Director of Foreign Aid Department	19/01/2004	
Ministry of Construction and Regional
Development, Agency for Regional
Development Support Agency
Spitalska 8	Ms. Annamaria Macurova
Lawyer
Ms Anna Hroncakova
Task Manager
Ms Elena Kushierova
Task Manager
Allila Jambor
Monitoring Expert	15/01/2004	
National Agency for Small and Medium
Enterprises
Prievozska 30
SR-821 05 Bratislava	Mr. Juraj Majtan
General Director
	14/01/2004	
Office of the Government of the SR
Aid Co-ordination Unit
Namestie slobody 1
SK-813 70 Bratislava	Ivan Fecenko
Director
Ms. Miloslava Molnarova
Task Manager
	12/2003	
Delegation of the European Commission
Panska 3
SK-811 01 Bratislava	Ms. Martina Moravcikova

	12/2003	
Ministry of Finance of the Slovak Republic
Stefanovicova 5
817 82 Bratislava 15	Ms. Petra Pazerini
Head of Phare department
National Fund	20/01/2004

	
Ministry of Transport, Posts and Telecommunications of the Slovak Republic
Namestie Slobody 6
810 05 Bratislava 15	Mr. Dusan Rizek
Director General of the Section of European Integration and International Relations	19/01/2004	
Ministry of Transport, Posts and Telecommunications of the Slovak Republic
Namestie Slobody 6
810 05 Bratislava 15	Ms. Zuzana Sarekova
Foreign Aid Department	19/01/2004	
Association of municipalities of  Upper Zitny Ostrov in the waste management
Hlavna 37
931 01 Samorin	Mr. Ondrej Sarkany
Project director	21/01/2004	
Small Carphatian Wineroute
900 01 Modra	Mr. Frantisek Slezak
Project manager	21/01/2004	
Ministry of Construction and Regional
Development, Agency for Regional
Development Support Agency
Spitalska 8
SK-816 44 Bratislava	Mr. Julius Slovak
General Director
	18/01/2004	
Ministry of Construction and Regional
Development, Regional Development
Support Agency
Spitalska 8
SK-816 44 Bratislava	Ms. Alena Soltysova
Director of Implementation	18/01/2004	
Small Carphatian Wineroute
Europrojekt Ltd.
Majakovskeho 9
811 04 Bratislava	Mr. Juraj Studenik
Project co-ordinator	21/01/2004	
Office of the Government of the SR
Aid Co-ordination Unit
Namestie slobody 1
SK-813 70 Bratislava	Ms. Martina Svitkova
Task Manager
	20/01/2004	
Kingdom of Matus
Piestany	Ms. Maria Zuzanakova
Project co-ordinator	21/01/2004	
Telephone interviews are indicated with * and e-mail/fax correspondence with **	

ANNEX 3. LIST OF Documents Referred to in the INTERIM EVALUATION

Name of Originator	Date	Title of Document	
Office of the Government 	2001 	National Programme for Adoption of the Acquis	
Office of the Government	18th November 2002	Monitoring Report: M/SK/SOC/02002	
Office of the Government	14th October 2002	Monitoring Report: M/SR/ESC/02002	
Office of the Government	15th April 2003	Monitoring Report: M/SR/ESC/02003	
Office of the Government 	27th November 2003	Monitoring Report M/SR/ESC/03005	
EMS Consortium 	April 30, 2002 	IE/R/SK/CBC/02.120, Cross Border Co-operation	
EMS Consortium 	June 11th, 2003
	Interim Evaluation No: R/SK/ ESC/03.046	
EMS Consortium	December 12th 2003	Country Phare Evaluation Review: R/SK/CPER/03.112	
Ministry of Finance 	January 2004	Co financing Data	
Government of the Slovak
Republic/ European Commission
	2001	
•	Financing Proposal for Slovak National Programme 2001
•	Financing Memorandum for Slovak National Programme 2001
•	Project Fiche SR 0107.01
•	Project Fiche SR 0107.02
•	Project Fiche SR 0107.03
•	Project Fiche SR 0107.04
•	Project Fiche SR 0107.05
•	Project Fiche SR 0107.06
•	Project Fiche SR 0107.07
•	Financing Memorandum for Cross Border Cooperation Programme between the Slovak Republic and Hungary ( SR 0102 )
•	Project Fiche SR 0102.01
•	Project Fiche SR 0102.02
•	Financing Memorandum for Cross Border Cooperation between the Slovak Republic and Poland ( SR 0101 )
•	Project Fiche SR 0101.01
•	Project Fiche SK 0101.02
•	Project Fiche SK 0101.03
•	Financing Memorandum for Cross Border Cooperation between the Slovak Republic and Austria ( SR 0113 )
•	Project Fiche SR 0113.01
•	Project Fiche SR 0113.02
•	Project Fiche SR 0113.03
•	Project Fiche SR 0113.04
•	Financial Performance Data at 28th November 2003
•	Project Contracting Data
	
Government of the Slovak
Republic/ European Commission
	2002 	2002

•	Financing Memorandum for the Slovak National Programme for 2002
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.610-11
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.610-12
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.610-13
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.610-14
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.610-15
•	Financing Memorandum for CBC between SK and Austria
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.642.01
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.642.02
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.642.03
•	Financing Memorandum for CBC between SK and Hungary
•	Project Fiche 2002/000-603-01
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.604.01
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.603.02
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.604.02
•	Financing Memorandum for CBC between SK and Poland
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.635.01
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.635.02
•	Project Fiche 2002/000.635.03
•	Financing Memorandum for EDIS (2002/000-585 )
	
Government of the Slovak
Republic/ European Commission
	2003 	•	Financing Memorandum for the Slovak National Programme for 2003
•	Financial Proposal for the Slovak National Programme for 2003
•	Project Fiche 2003-004-995-03-08
•	Project Fiche 2003-004-995-03-09
•	Project Fiche 2003-004-995-03-10
•	Project Fiche 2003-004-995-03-11
•	Financing Memorandum for CBC between SK and Hungary
•	Project Fiche 2003-004-616-01
•	Project Fiche 2003-004-616-02	
Government of the Slovak Republic	December 2003	Minutes of Sectoral Monitoring Committee, Economic and Social Cohesion	

Documents requested but not made available (with reasons):
None.

ANNEX 4 - NATIONAL PROGRAMME FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE ACQUIS Communautaire (NPPA)
(only if necessary)
[title]	…	…	…	…	…	
…	…	…	…	…	…	

The main points related to the sector in the NPAA should be condensed in this table that includes:
•	“Acquis Communautaire”, legal act
•	priority action code
•	activity/measure
•	implementation: responsible body, date, cost estimate

ANNEX 5 - Recommendations FROM previous ASSESSMENT / Interim Evaluation AND follow-up
Assessment / Interim Evaluation Report No. R/SK/ECS/03.046 dated June 11, 2003

Sectoral Component: Regional Development

Recommendation	Applied (Yes/No)	Responsibility for Follow-up	Deadline	Details of Action/ Remarks	Update	
RDSA should immediately speed up the process of implementing the 2002 Grant Schemes, if necessary in close cooperation with NADSME, possessing more experience in fulfilment of technicalities connected to the implementation of Programmes of a similar nature.	Yes	RDSA	With immediate effect	Implementation of 2002 Grant Schemes is under preparation. Whole process should be accelerated.	Prepare an Operational Manual and improve an implementation system Deadline September 2003.
In co-operation with the Technical assistant RDSA will prepare a scheme “Implementing arrangement”.	
RDSA, following the model of NADSME, should use the established network of Regional Development Agencies in order to enhance public awareness, to assist grant applicants in project preparation and in this way to help building up regional capacity in order to absorb future EU assistance.
	Yes	MoCRD/RDSA	With immediate effect	Ms Hrčková ( RDSA) informed that a Regional Develompent Agency for each region had been chosen. Their tasks will also include enhancement of public awareness in order to increase EU assistance absorption capacity. Morover, MoCDR has prepared a communication strategy on EU assistence and its utilization.	Prepare an contract for technical secretariats and speed up an effective co-operation between RDSA and Technical secretariats
Deadline September 2003
RDSA in co-operation with the Technical assistant is preparing a workshop to give an effective information about technical secretariats’ tasks and implementing arrangements of the grant scheme	
There is an urgent need to define the individual responsibilities of institutions involved in the 2002 ‘HRD’ Grant Scheme. Also with regard to the 2002 ‘HRD’ Grant Scheme,.Ministry of Education ( MoED) should immediately assess and remedy its rather poor administrative capacities so far made available for Grant Schemes, and should closely co-operate with RDSA, MoLSAF and NLO to ensure transfer of know-how necessary for successful implementation.	Yes	MoED,
MoLSAF,
NLO,
RDSA	With immediate effect	Ms Smatanova (MoED) informed that a new organisational structure, comprising also PHARE Department, had been in place since May 2003. Recruitment of new staff envisaged for August 2003.

Involvement of MoED in preparation of HRD Grant Scheme and a closer co-operation in this respect are applied.	Prepare an Memorandum of understanding to define the individual responsibilities of institutions involved in the 2002 ‘HRD’ Grant Scheme
Deadline September 2003
RDSA in close co-operation will prepare MoU between MoED, MoLSAF, NLO, and RDSA for ECD endorsement.	
As regards the 2002 Institutional Building Programme, the upcoming EU Twinning experts, together with MoCRD /Section for EU Assistance Management, should carefully consider the activities and / or achievements of the on-going 2001 Institutional Building Twinning and should ensure close co-ordination between these two Twinning projects and other similar assistance projects currently on-going	Yes		Inception phase of the 2002 Twinning	Despite being invited, nobody from Section for EU Assistance Management and Section for Regional Development was present to provide clarification.
The ACU will address a letter to relevant official at MoCRD in order to clarify the issue.	The coordination meeting of all stakeholders will be organised after the starting of the twinning project 2002 	

To ensure effective use of the grants for higher quality projects to be submitted by future grant applicants, all key stakeholders of 2002 Grant Schemes, namely RDSA, NADSME, MoLSAF, Ministry of Economy and Ministry of Education (MoED), should consider the development of a standardised strategy focused on raising public awareness, using all means of information dissemination as well as the wide variety of regionally present agencies.	Yes	MoCRD/ RDSA, NADSME, MoLSAF, MoE and MoED	With immediate effect	Meetings with potential grant applicants are organised, call for proposals are advertised in newspapers and internet.

Moreover, as recorded above, MCRD has prepared a communication strategy that intends to harmonise activities of all key stakeholders aimed at raising public awareness. 	Dissemination of information on GS has been realised through:
Regular Phare monthly meetings
Meetings with other agencies, which implement projects from FM 2002
Workshops for intermediaries
Information and training days assigned for the people involved in the grant scheme as well as RAICs/BICs/FCPs
media (internet, newspapers, radio)
IDGS Marketing Strategy (prepared by TA for IDGS)
IDGS Brochure Text (prepared by TA for IDGS)
TDG Brochure Text (prepared by TA for TDGS)	

Sectoral Component:	Cross Border Cooperation

Recommendation number	Applied
(Yes/No)	Responsibility for Follow-up	Deadline	Details of action / Remarks	Update	
RDSA should immediately act towards re-allocation of the cancelled 2001 regional development and CBC investment projects in order to secure these respective funds.	Yes	MoCRD/ RDSA	With immediate effect	Reallocations discussed and agreed during the JMC meeting of 19 June 2003.
However, securing the funds from project SR0101.01 Reallocation of Road I/59 Podbiel Bypass (1.8 MEUR) does not seen feasible due to the non-existence of reserve project and limited time available for reallocation.		
RDSA should immediately speed up the process of implementing the 2002 Grant Schemes, if necessary in close co-operation with NADSME, possessing more experience in fulfilment of technicalities connected to the implementation of Programmes of a similar nature.	Yes	MoCRD/ RDSA	With immediate effect	Implementation of 2002 Grant Schemes is under preparation. Whole process should be accelerated.	Prepare an Operational Manual and improve an implementation system Deadline September 2003.
In co-operation with the Technical assistant RDSA will prepare a scheme “Implementing arrangement”.	
RDSA, following the model of NADSME, should use the established network of Regional Development Agencies in order to enhance public awareness, to assist grant applicants in project preparation and in this way to help building up regional capacity in order to absorb future EU assistance.	Yes	MoCRD
RDSA	With immediate effect	Ms Hrčková (RDSA) informed that a Regional Development Agency for each region had been chosen. Their tasks will also include enhancement of public awareness in order to increase EU assistance absorption capacity. Moreover, MoCRD has prepared a communication strategy on EU assistance and its utilisation.	Prepare an contract for technical secretariats and speed up an effective co-operation between RDSA and Technical secretariats
Deadline September 2003
RDSA in co-operation with the Technical assistant is preparing a workshop to give an effective information about technical secretariats’ tasks and implementing arrangements of the grant scheme	
To ensure effective use of the grants for higher quality projects to be submitted by future grant applicants, all key stakeholders of 2002 Grant Schemes, namely RDSA, NADSME, MoLSAF, Ministry of Economy and Ministry of Education (MoED), should consider the development of a standardised strategy focused on raising public awareness, using all means of information dissemination as well as the wide variety of regionally present agencies.	Yes	MoCRD/ RDSA, NADSME, MoLSAF, Ministry of Economy and MoED	With immediate effect	Meetings with potential grant applicants are organised, call for proposals are advertised in newspapers and internet.

Moreover, as recorded above, MoCRD has prepared a communication strategy that intends to harmonise activities of all key stakeholders aimed at raising public awareness. 	The RDSA staff is planning more info meetings for applicant with purpose to enhance consciousness regarding pre accessions instruments as well as Structural Funds.
The MCRD prepared new web page with information for public with constantly new information’s. The RDSA attended meetings to spread information on future possibilities All Info - meetings was and will be realize in future in relevant regions	

Sectoral Component:	Social Affairs and Human resource Development

Recommendation number	Applied	Responsibility for
Follow-up	Deadline	Details of action/
Remarks	
To ensure effective use of the grants for higher quality projects to be submitted by future grant applicants, all key stakeholders of 2002 Grant Schemes, namely RDSA, NADSME, MoLSAF, Ministry of Economy and Ministry of Education (MoED), should consider the development of a standardised strategy focused on raising public awareness, using all means of information dissemination as well as the wide variety of regionally present agencies.	Y	MoCRD/ RDSA, NADSME, MoLSAF, Ministry of Economy and MoED	With immediate effect	Meetings with potential grant applicants are organised, call for proposals are advertised in newspapers and internet. 21st August, 2003  the call for proposal of the Grant Scheme was published and 8 regional promotion presentations were organised through the Slovakia and 8 technical secretariats providing  consultancy services were created.

Moreover, as recorded above, MoCRD has prepared a communication strategy that intends to harmonise activities of all key stakeholders aimed at raising public awareness. 	
Ministry of Labour, Family and Social Affairs (MoLSAF) should immediately review the managerial arrangements for Phare projects at the Ministry with a view to determine clear and transparent responsibilities and competences. Moreover, the Ministry’s Unit for European Social Fund should participate actively in the 2001 and 2002 Phare ‘HRD’ Programmes, with a view to benefit for their entire preparation activities.	Y	MoLSAF/ Managing Section of the European Social Fund	With immediate effect	The  new ESF Section Director General was recruited as well as the new staff. One of the section units is involved in the 2001 and 2002 Phare HRD Programmes. 	
There is an urgent need to define the individual responsibilities of institutions involved in the 2002 ‘HRD’ Grant Scheme.  Also with regard to the 2002 ‘HRD’ Grant Scheme, Ministry of Education (MoED) should immediately assess and remedy its rather poor administrative capacities so far made available for Grant Schemes, and should closely co-operate with RDSA, MoLSAF and NLO to ensure transfer of know-how necessary for successful implementation.	Y	MoED,
MoLSAF,
NLO,
RDSA	With immediate effect	MoED has been involved in preparation of 2002 HRD Grant Scheme – will be responsible for one component concerning the education of the unemployed. New staff has been recruited and the regional structures are being established. The Memorandum of Understanding at the report cutt-off date was under preparation	

The Follow-up Table approved by all parties involved in the previous Interim Evaluation should include the full text of each recommendation with the description of the remedial action taken (who, when, how). Remarks should contain comments on any differences noted between actions agreed in the previous Interim Evaluation and actions actually taken during the period under consideration.

ANNEX 6 - DISSENTING VIEWS

ANNEX 6. DISSENTING VIEWS
A number of comments were made by the Aid Coordination Unit (ACU) and these include the following:

i)	A number of the FM 2003 projects have not been included in the Interim Evaluation and these include the Cross Border Co-operation projects for the Slovak Republic/Poland and the Slovak Republic/Austria. It was agreed during the kick-off meeting on 12 December 2003 that 2001, 2002 and 2003 Phare projects would be the subject of the evaluation. This has been also recorded in the minutes of the meeting. None of the list of the project that would exclude any of the ongoing 2003 projects has been approved by the ACU. Retrospectively, it is unfortune that no inception report where the ACU could confirm the list of ongoing projects has been provided to the ACU.

The evaluators responded that they included all the projects provided on the list by the ECD and these were discussed in detail with the ECD Task managers and other agencies. However, the list of projects for evaluation should be consulted with the ACU Task Managers alike. It should be added that there had been almost  no progress on the projects at the time of the IE.

ii)	The evaluators did not provide new proposals for indicators to be measured quantitatively and qualitatively in Annex 1.

The evaluators considered this to be outside the scope of their TOR. However, they have included indicators for those projects omitted in Annex 1.

The Ministry of Education also highlighted another project which had not been included in the Interim Evaluation. This was 2002/000.610-02 UIB HRD-Legislation in the field of education and its eligibility for ESF funding.

Once again, the evaluators responded that this had not been included in the list provided by the ECD and all other relevant Ministries. Nevertheless, in their subsequent discussions with the EC Representation, it was apparent that this had not been contracted at the time of the IE and the TOR and Request for Services were still in preparation at May 1st 2004.

ANNEX 7 - ANNEX TO CHAPTER 1 
(Sectoral Background and Evaluation Scope)

(ONLY IF NECESSARY)

The reason for this Annex is that Chapter 1 contains all necessary information in a compact form so that this annex is not necessary