Guidance notes (EN) 14

14	MONITORING

14.1 Monitoring at Programme level

Monitoring the Programme is a legal requirement to ensure an effective deployment of the Structural Funds. The Monitoring Committee and the Managing Authority hold joint responsibility for carrying it out. Through progress assessments the monitoring ensures the quality and effectiveness of implementation towards the Programme’s objectives. This helps to identify and assess both potential problems and success. The progress made regarding the implementation of the Programme is reported to the European Commission once a year.

14.2 Monitoring at project level

Part of the responsibility for monitoring is passed on to our projects through the submission of regular Progress Reports and Payment Claims (see Note 17). This ensures a regular tracking of the progress made. Monitoring at project level is crucial for delivering high quality results because it highlights needs for improvement regarding the design or the implementation of a project.

Monitoring is a task that needs to be carried out throughout the lifetime of your project. It must be planned as an integral part of your day-to-day management. From the first stages of project development, you should think about the way you are going to monitor your activities. Inputs, outputs, results and impacts should be regularly and systematically reviewed not only in financial terms but also for content.

14.3 Indicators

14.3.1 Definition: What is an indicator?

An indicator can be defined as the measurement of an objective to be met, a resource mobilised, an effect obtained, a gauge of quality or a context variable. An indicator should be made up by a definition, a value and a measurement unit.

Two sets of indicators have been developed for monitoring purposes at Programme and project level. On the one hand, quantitative indicators for the project must be provided by you in the Application Form. These will be followed up in the Progress Reports where you will not only have to report on the activities you have carried out, but also on what you have achieved so far in relation to your aim and objectives. On the other hand, qualitative indicators also have to be provided in the Progress Reports.

All indicators collected at project level are aggregated annually at Programme level as part of the general Programme monitoring. This monitoring process does not only deliver outputs, results and impacts of a Programme but influences the knowledge, working methods, social competences, etc., of the project partners.

The function of such indicators is to provide systematic, objective and accurate data, which will subsequently be evaluated by the Secretariat, on changes/improvements in the behaviour, capacity or performance of projects/beneficiaries.

Obtaining reliable and comparable data makes particularly important the adoption of a common interpretation and the careful filling of the tables of indicators. For any doubt on the interpretation of the indicators, please contact the Secretariat.

14.3.2 Quantitative indicators

In the Application Form, in Progress Reports and in the final Progress Report, projects are requested to assess their progress in quantitative terms by means of providing reasonable targets and values attained. Two sets of quantitative indicators have been developed: general indicators, which apply to all projects, and those specific to each priority. Each project is required to consider the general indicators plus the specific indicators just for the Priority to which they are applying, not the other three Priorities.

Among the priority-specific indicators, a further distinction is made between output and result indicators. The difference between those is presented below.

Output indicators relate to activity. They refer to the direct outcomes of the project and are measured in physical units (e.g. number of actions or schemes/solutions/applications implemented).
Result indicators relate to the direct and immediate effect of those outcomes. They provide information on changes to, for example, the behaviour, capacity or performance of beneficiaries. Such indicators are of a physical nature (e.g. number of enterprises or jobs created, number of institutions and organisations with improved innovation capacity, etc.).

The diagram below, on which this distinction is based, illustrates the nature of output and result indicators.

Diagram: Logical framework
[Source: based on EC 2006, p.9]

14.3.3 Qualitative indicators

In every second Progress Report and in the final Progress Report, projects are requested to assess their progress in qualitative terms by means of providing an indicative value and a description which links the indicators to project activities. The score of the qualitative indicators will be estimated in a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high). (Example: Level of cooperation and partnership building, Involvement of private sector, Building on results of previous projects etc.).

Lead Partners are encouraged to discuss with their partners the scores and comments for these indicators, in order to provide the views of the whole partnership. The table below provides an indicative description of the scores for each qualitative indicator.

Level of cooperation and partnership building (experience/knowledge transfer, trust, confidence, learning)
5	The partners have a strong inter-active cooperation and the level of knowledge transfer is high. The input by other partners is essential to develop outputs and gives true added value to the partnership. Frequent meetings and email/phone/face-to-face contacts among all partners are common standard. It is expected that the partners will continue to cooperate beyond the project lifetime in another project or in other ways.
3	The partnership works fluently and there is a significant level of cooperation and knowledge transfer. Yet, communication and trust/confidence still hinder the cohesion of the partnership; the development of joint outputs requires extra coordination support by the project management or Lead Partner.
1	Significant cooperation problems exists (cultural or language differences, lack of trust, separate agendas). Email/phone/face-to-face contacts are few. Actions are implemented separately and the envisaged joint actions are not smoothly achieved.
Project clustering activities (synergies with other projects, networks development, institutional linkages)
5	The project has achieved a high level of cooperation with other projects (also from other Programmes), including the establishment of institutional links or networks. These linkages are expected to develop into new projects or activities. Joint actions/outputs are being developed, such as declarations or investments.
3	The project is aware of the activities of other related projects and occasionally establishes contacts with them, e.g. on events or meetings. This includes information exchange and the presentation of results. Consistent linkages and joint activities have not been initiated.
1	The project has not developed linkages/contacts with other projects and an establishment of linkages is not envisaged.
New ways of doing, thinking, working / new technologies
5	The project implementation stimulates innovative and new working practices, methods or technologies which significantly have a positive impact on the performance of organisations / institutions / regions.
3	The project implementation uses existing practices, methods or technologies but redesigns them in a modern approach to achieve more efficiency and positive impacts.
1	The project implementation reproduces existing practices, methods or technologies and does not develop significant innovative solutions.
Involvement of civil society, community, ethnic, rural/urban groups
5	Civil society and social groups are an essential part during the whole project lifetime and their participation clearly defines the outputs of the project. In addition to regular information exchange, these stakeholders are actively involved when giving feedback to the main outputs.
3	Civil society and social groups are regularly informed about the project and considered necessary for implementation. They participate on project meetings or conferences to give an input to the project; yet, they do not play a leading role in project implementation.
1	Civil society and social groups do not participate in project implementation and are not being informed about the project as well.
Involvement of private sector
5	The private sector is an essential part during the whole project lifetime and its participation clearly defines the outputs of the project. Apart from regular information exchange, these stakeholders are actively involved when giving feedback to the main outputs.
3	The private sector is regularly informed about the project and considered necessary for implementation. Relevant actors participate on project meetings or conferences to give an input to the project; yet, they do not play a leading role in project implementation and are not part of the partnership.
1	The private sector does not participate in project implementation and is not being informed about the project as well.
Building on results of previous projects
5	The project develops a significant contribution to its topic by clearly complementing previous project results. Without the previous results the project could not have been implemented in the same quality.
3	The project does acknowledge and take into account the results of previous projects but does not exploit them fully. The project could be implemented without the previous results.
1	The project does not build on nor take into account the results of previous projects.

COMMUNICATION

KEY DOCUMENTS

Strategic Initiatives

ANNUAL EVENTS

F.A.Q.

Guidance notes (EN) 14

14

MONITORING