Pilot test
ROP ERDF
Marche 2007 – 2013
Alessandro Valenza (evaluator )
Lucio Pesetti (Managing Authority)
Outline
•
Evolution of the Indicator system
•
ROP 2007-2013 Strategy
•
Revision of indicators
•
Key findings of the Pilot test
•
Pilot test in Priority 1
Evolution of the indicator
system
94-99
• Indicators already provide a picture of
the context
2000-2006
• Increase of the number of indicators
and statistical sources
2007-2013
• Tight correlation between the context
and the impact/outcome to achieve
Source: Analysis of Indicator between the period 94-99 and 2007-2013
Outline
•
Evolution of the Indicator system
•
ROP 2007-2013 Strategy
•
Revision of indicators
•
Key findings of the Pilot test
•
Pilot test in Priority 1
ROP 2007-2013 Strategy
Source: Annual Execution Report ROP ERDF 2007-2013
43%
12%
13%
15%
17%
Financial Allocation per priority
Innovation
ICT
Energy
Accessibility
territorial development
Priorities
Outline
•
Evolution of the Indicator system
•
ROP 2007-2013 Strategy
•
Revision of indicators
•
Key findings of the Pilot test
•
Pilot test in Priority 1
Revision of indicators:
guiding criteria
•
New definition
of result adopting the formualtion of
Draft Paper DG REGIO and High Level Group Paper
(1)
•
Re-use
logic and attention to costs and feaseability
•
“Policy-indicator” clear connection:
link theory
of change - OP priority – to expected result indicator
(1) Draft Paper DG REGIO corresponds to A“Concepts and Ideas. Monitoring and Evaluation in the practice of European Cohesion Policy 2014 - European Regional Development Fund and Cohesion Fund”. High Level Group Paper corresponds to
“Outcome indicators and targets– Towards a new system of monitoring and evaluation in the Eu Cohesion Policy” (June, 2011)”
Outline
•
Evolution of the Indicator system
•
ROP 2007-2013 Strategy
•
Revision of indicators
•
Key findings of the Pilot test
•
Pilot test in Priority 1
Key findings of the Pilot test
Result indicators: all priorities
•
(from 36 to 18)
reduction
of 50%
•
Totally new indicators: 9
•
All the new indicator are for
Key findings of the Pilot test
Output indicators: all priorities
- From 52 to 42
reduction
of 19%
Outline
•
Evolution of the Indicator system
•
ROP 2007-2013 Strategy
•
Revision of indicators
•
Key findings of the Pilot test
•
Pilot test in Priority 1
Focusing on Priority 1:
•
Financial priority relevance:
it is the main
priority in terms of financial allocation (43%)
•
Policy priority relevance:
it is a relevant priority
because of the centrality of innovation and research
(Lisbon Strategy and Eu 2020)
•
High level of innovation in the pilot test
at the
level of:
Strategic articulation of the priority (as for Priority 5).
Our approach identifies 3 objectives under Priority 1
corresponding to 3 theories of change
Priority 1: present situation
Objective
Result (impact) indicators
Output indicators
Priority 1
•R&D employees per 1000 inhabitants (impact)•Firms R&D expenditure (impact) •…………
•………… •………… •…………
•Firms created in research spin-off •Firms included in R&D activities •…………
•…………
•Investment amount
•Firms receiving guarantee funds •………..
•N. of technological transfer projects •N. of product innovation projects •………….
•N. of R&D projects
•N. of R&D projects involving networks of firms
•…………. •………….
•Number of projects adopting new financial tools
•N. of Projects related to the regional collateral system
•……….
The priority 1 has several goals: innovation, R&S and credit
assistance
New strategic articulation:
Objective
Result (impact) indicator s
Output indicators
1)Enhance the
technological
transfer to SME
•R&D employees per 1000 inhabitants (impact)
•Firms R&D expenditure (impact) •…………
•………… •………… •…………
•N. of technological transfer projects •N. of product innovation projects
2)Promote R&D
•Firms created in research spin-off •Firms included in R&D activities •…………•…………
•N. of R&D projects
•N. of R&D projects involving networks of firms
3) Promote
accessibility to
credit
•Investment amount
•Firms receiving guarantee funds •………..
•Number of projects adopting new financial tools
•N. of Projects related to the regional collateral system
Objective
Impact/ Outcome indicator
Outputs
1)Enhance
the the
technological
transfer to
SME
•R&D employees per 1000 inhabitants (impact)
•Firms R&D expenditure (impact)
•N. of technological transfer projects •N. of product innovation projects •………….
•ms •…………. •………….
2)Promote
R&D
Firms created in research spin-off•N. of R&D projects
•N. of R&D projects involving networks of firms
•Firms included in R&D activities
3) Promote
accessibility
to credit
•Investment amount
•Firms receiving guarantee funds •Number of projects adopting new financial tools
Polishing the set
Focusing on result indicator
Adopting a theory of change approach
Objective
Result indicators
1)Enhance the
technological
transfer to SME
•% regional firms introducing product and process innovations (new)
2)Promote R&D
•N. academic regional spin off •Firms R&D expenditure (% GDP)•Regional employment rate of graduated
3) Promote
accessibility to
credit
•Credit intensity •Financing capacityLevel of
innovation within
the SME beyond
R&D
SME negotiating
capacity wth
Bank system
The System
capacity:
University + SME
+ Public Actor
Theories of changes
back
Objective
Outputs indicators
1)Enhance the
technological
transfer to SME
•N. of
financed firms
for technological transfer•Total expenditure for technological transfer (Rop Erdf+ privat contributions)
2)Promote R&D
•Number of Spin-off•N of technical graduates
•N. of
financed firms
in R&D projects•Total expenditure for R&D (Rop Erdf+ privat contributions)
3) Promote
accessibility to
credit
•Total grant funds investments •Total grants funds
•
N. of granted firms
Output indicator
Objective
Result indicators
Outputs indicators
1)Enhance the
technological
transfer to SME
•% regional firms introducing product and process innovations (new)
•N. of financed firms for technological transfer
•Total expenditure for technological transfer (Rop Erdf+ privat
contributions)
2)Promote R&D
•N. academic regional spin off •Firms R&D expenditure (% GDP)•Regional employment rate of graduated
•Number of Spin-off
•N of technical graduates
•N. of financed firms in R&D projects •Total expenditure for R&D (Rop Erdf+ privat contributions)
3) Promote
accessibility to
credit
•Regional credit intensity •Financing capacity
•Total grant funds investments •Total grants funds
•N. of granted firms
Pilot test in Priority 1:
Outline
•
Evolution of the Indicator system
•
ROP 2007-2013 Strategy
•
Revision of indicators
•
Key findings of the Pilot test
•
Pilot test in Priority 1
Conclusions
•
The present indicator system has already evolved in
triggering results and context (evolution not
revolution).
•
The most important innovation was the re – shape of
priority’s ariticulation for achieving a sharper
connection between indicator and policy change
•
To desing ….
•
More concentration and more simplification of
indicators
Thank you!
www.t33.it
