EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 52011SC1308
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER Accompanying the22ND ANNUAL REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRUCTURAL FUNDS (2010)
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER Accompanying the22ND ANNUAL REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRUCTURAL FUNDS (2010)
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER Accompanying the22ND ANNUAL REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRUCTURAL FUNDS (2010)
/* SEC/2011/1308 final */
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER Accompanying the22ND ANNUAL REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRUCTURAL FUNDS (2010) /* SEC/2011/1308 final */
Part 1: General analysis of activities
1.
Introduction
As required by Article 45(2) of Council
Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, this report sets out to give an overview of the
implementation of the Structural Funds (2000‑2006) in 2010. 2010 was the eleventh year in which Structural
Funds programmes and projects for the 2000-2006 programming period were
implemented. Altogether 226 Objective 1 and Objective 2, 47 Objective 3, 12
Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG) (outside Objective 1), 81
INTERREG, 71 URBAN, 27 EQUAL, 73 LEADER+ and 181 Innovative Action
programmes were managed in 2010. Even though no further commitments could be
made in 2010, sums were disbursed in respect of 2000-2006 Structural Funds
assistance. Implementation of the 2010 budget was excellent. In terms of
payment appropriations, 100.0 % of the European Regional
Development Fund (ERDF) , 97.0% of the European Social Fund (ESF), 30.7 %
of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF)-Guidance
budget available at the end of 2010 (after a reduction of EUR 13.9 million —
see section 2.1.3 below) and 100.0% of FIFG resources were used
(compared to 100.0 % ERDF,
97.0 % ESF, 97.9 % EAGGF and 69.5 % FIFG in 2009). The low budget execution of EAGGF-Guidance in
2010 was due to the fact that 112 out of a total of 152 programmes had already
reached the 95 % ceiling for interim payments at the beginning of the year. In
these cases, no further payments were possible in 2010 until closure (see
section 2.1.3 below). The Commission proposed in September 2010 the transfer of
another EUR 345.4 million of payment appropriations, but this transfer was ultimately
not accomplished. In 2010, the closure process started for most
2000-2006 ERDF operational programmes. Most of the related closure documents
were submitted by Member States in September 2010. The general framework for
the closure of 2000‑2006 Structural Funds assistance was set out in Commission
Decision C(2006)3424 in 2006, amended by Commission Decisions C(2008)1362
and C(2009)960. In view of the financial crisis and the
recovery package proposed by the Commission, an extension of six (or twelve)
months has been granted on a programme‑by‑programme basis for those Member
States which opted for it. This flexibility allowed Member States and regions
to maximise the absorption of the allocated funds by addressing unexpected
programme implementation challenges and, consequently, achieve the objectives
of the programmes. For those programmes that an extension of the
eligibility period was granted, the deadline for the submission of the closure
documents was also extended to September 2010. Some Greek and Cross-border
programmes were granted a 12-month extension. Their closures documents will
have to be submitted to the Commission by end of March 2011 The Commission has 5 months to asses the Final
Report and the winding up declaration and once declared acceptable it can
proceed to make the final payment. The closure of operational programmes is an
important and time-consuming process involving audit and operational units of
DG Regional Policy, to assess the quality of the results delivered by
programmes and to check the legality and regularity of final expenditure
declared to the Commission for reimbursement (final clearance of all payments
made). The ERDF 2000-2006 closure task force, set up
in autumn 2009, closely monitored the process. As of 31 December 2010, a proposal for closure was sent to Member
States for 25 programmes. The closure of the remaining 354 is a work in
progress and it is expected that the majority of these programmes will be
closed within 2011. As regards the 2000-2006 Regional Innovative
Actions Programmes, 24 were closed in 2010 bringing the total number of
programmes closed so far to 176. Only 5 programmes remain to be closed (2 in
France, 2 in Portugal and 1 in Italy) out of a total of 181 programmes adopted Concerning Cohesion Fund projects, some 348
projects out of a total of 1143 projects were closed by the end of 2010. The
closure process will intensify in 2011-2012 since the deadline for expenditure
on the ground was 31 December 2010. In the light of financial crisis, the
Commission decided in April 2110 to give the possibility to a limited number of
projects to extend their eligibility in 2011 or 2012. For the projects still open, the financial
implementations generally improved throughout 2010. The incidence of high risk
projects (projects with a serious possibility of not being completed within the
currently valid eligibility deadline) was concentrated in a relatively small number of countries. Similar
to 2009, high risk projects continued to be mainly in the environment sector
(16% of high risk projects for environment compared to an average of 13% of all
projects). In addition to the implementation of 2000-2006
Structural Funds programmes and projects and preparation for their closure, in
2010 the Commission was also heavily involved in implementing
434 programmes (317 ERDF, 117 ESF)[1] for the 2007‑2013 period.
In 2010, the Commission completed the ex post
evaluation of ERDF interventions in objective 1 and 2 regions. The synthesis
report of the all work was published and presented to the public in April 2010[2].
The ex post evaluations of the ESF and EQUAL were completed in 2010, and their
results presented to the Member States. The European Agricultural Guidance and
Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) Guidance Section and LEADER+ are evaluated separately. In
2010 the ex post evaluation of LEADER+ was completed and the ex-post evaluation
of 2000-2006 rural development programmes was launched. As for the Financial
Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG), the ex post evaluation was undertaken
in 2009 and is available on the website[3]. Sharing of experience was promoted, notably
through interregional and urban networks and the conference "Regions for
Economic Change: building sustainable growth" on 20th and 21st
May with 755 participants from all 27 countries. At this occasion, three papers
were drafted on: i) Good practice in the use of ICT, ii) Good practice in
promoting energy efficiency and iii) Good practice in managing Brownfield sites
and buildings. Also, RegioStars awards were granted for the third time to good
practice innovation projects from the periods 2000-2006 and 2007-2013 in
different categories: ICT (Applications for e-inclusion & for SMEs,
Broadband coverage in less developed regions of rural areas) – CityStars
(Innovative use of brownfield sites in an urban context & Integration of
migrants or marginalised groups in urban areas). The 8th edition of OPEN DAYS ‘European week of
regions and cities’ took place 4-7 October 2010 and brought together 5,900
local, regional, national and European decision makers and experts in the field
of regional and local development (including 330 journalists). In addition to
this 263 local events were organised in 33 countries. The OPEN DAYS, organised
jointly by the Commission and the Committee of the Regions, is an arena for
cooperation and networking, for sharing knowledge and experience, and offers
regions and cities a possibility to showcase their achievements. It also offers
the ideal opportunity to highlight the synergies between cohesion policy and
other EU policies. The Belgian presidency organised a two-day
conference (18 and 19 November 2010) on "The role of the ESF in the fight
against poverty and social exclusion". Work sessions were organised over
two half days. The conclusions, among others, highlighted the role of the ESF
as a policy instrument in the fight against poverty and social exclusion.
The focus of the ESF on the development of competences with a
special attention to those furthest away from the labour market was also
underlined as well as the need for the ESF to continue to pay attention to gender
equality and equal opportunities as transversal points of attention.
2.
Analysis of implementation
2.1.
Budget Implementation
2.1.1.
ERDF
In spite of the financial downturn, 2010 was an
excellent year in terms of budgetary execution. The overall absorption rate
reached 100.0% or EUR 1,694 million reimbursed to operational programmes. While the execution under Objective 2 was
higher than initially voted (EUR 230 million instead of EUR 104
million), payments to Objective 1 and Interreg programmes were lower than
originally foreseen (for Objective 1, EUR 1,348 million instead of EUR 2,077
million and for Interreg EUR 90 million instead of
EUR 202 million), mainly due to a transfer of appropriations during
the global transfer to reinforce the 2007-2013 appropriations. In total for other programmes (Urban,
Innovative actions), EUR 25 millions were paid. DG REGIO is managing previous and current
programming periods in parallel. After a slow start-up of the 2007-2013
programmes, payment claims have been accelerating during 2010. This trend
combined with the fact that most 2000-2006 programmes had reached the 95%
ceiling for interim payments led to a transfer of appropriations from the
2000-2006 period to the 2007-2013 period. This allowed for the 100.0% execution
of payment appropriations for ERDF programmes financed under both programming periods.
Closures In 2010, the closure process started for most 2000-2006
ERDF operational programmes. The bulk of the related closure documents were
submitted by Member States in September 2010. This was due to the extension of
six months granted by the Commission for the final date of eligibility of
expenditure. Some Greek and Cross-border programmes were granted a 12-month
extension. Their closures documents will have to be submitted to the Commission
by end of March 2011. Out of 379 programmes, 281 (or 74%)
representing 90% of ERDF funds have chosen to extend their eligibility dates.
As at 31 December 2010, closures documents were received for 356 programmes.
The responsible units are currently analysing the Winding-up Declarations and
Final reports. A proposal for closure had been sent to Member
States for 25 programmes while the remaining 354 will be closed during 2011 and
2012. Programmes closed at end 2010: Objective / Initiative || Country || File Reference || File title || Amount paid Interreg || CB || 2000CB160PC020 || Karelia || 376,306.86 || CB || 2000CB160PC001 || PIC Interreg III || 77,658.23 || CB || 2000CB160PC002 || PIC Interreg III || 214,931.63 || CB || 2000RG160PC020 || Alpine Space || 716,562.38 || CB || 2000RG160PC019 || Wallonie-Lorraine-Lux || 344,477.01 || CB || 2001RG160PC013 || ESPON 2006 || 20,042.19 || CB || 2000RG160PC016 || IT-AT || 1,739,158.10 Objective 1 || DE || 2000DE161PO001 || PO obj. 1 Transport || 83,050,000.00 Objective 2 || AT || 2000AT162DO007 || DOCUP obj. 2 Tirol || 2,332,700.00 || AT || 2000AT162DO004 || DOCUP obj. 2 Salzburg || 926,650.00 || AT || 2000AT162DO002 || DOCUP obj. 2 Niederösterrreich || 9,248,350.00 || AT || 2000AT162DO001 || DOCUP obj. 2 Kärnten || 4,249,550.00 || AT || 2000AT162DO005 || DOCUP obj. 2 Vorarlberg || 861,378.51 || SE || 2000SE162DO001 || DOCUP obj. 2 Öarna || 335,379.85 || GB || 2000GB162DO001 || Gibraltar || 437,180.00 Urban || IT || 2001IT160PC010 || Torino-Italy || 544,647.45 || DE || 2000DE160PC107 || Leipzig || 210,190.72 || DE || 2000DE160PC108 || Luckenwalde || 711,206.41 || DE || 2000DE160PC103 || Dortmund || 163,066.31 || DE || 2000DE160PC100 || Berlin || 755,987.60 || IT || 2001IT160PC001 || Carrara-Italy || 448,855.90 || DE || 2000DE160PC106 || Kiel || 387,156.69 || FR || 2000FR160PC007 || Strasbourg || 14,946.99 || FR || 2000FR160PC006 || Le Havre || 538,488.29 || DE || 2000DE160PC102 || Dessau || 755,987.60 TOTAL || || 25 || || 109,460,858.72 As regards the Regional Programmes of
Innovative Actions, 24 were closed in 2010 bringing the total number of
programmes closed so far to 176. Therefore, only 5 programmes remain to be
closed (2 in France, 2 in Portugal and 1 in Italy) out of a total of 181
programmes adopted. For the entire 2000-2006 period, EUR 123,339
million have been paid to Member States as of 31 December 2010. This
represents an average absorption rate for all Member States of 95.2% of the
EUR 129,600 million overall allocation. Most of the remaining payments
concern payments of balances for the closure of programmes. RAL At the end of 2010, commitments from previous
years on which payments were still to be made (RAL) amounted to EUR 6,751
million for ERDF compared with EUR 8,400 million at end 2009. This
represents 5.2% of the total amount committed for ERDF. A further decrease of
the RAL is foreseen with the payment of final balances in the coming years. ‘n+2’ rule In 2010, as in the previous year, the so-called
‘n+2’ rule did not apply. As a general rule, the last commitment tranche
(i.e. 2006) will be used to execute final payments once the closure of the
programme is agreed between the Member State and the Commission. Accordingly,
the amount to be decommitted will only be calculated at the closure stage of
the operational programme[4].
2.1.2.
ESF
Budget Implementation For the 2000-2006 programming period, the
payment credits consumption during 2010 reached EUR 318 million. This
corresponds to 26, 42 % of the annual payment credits allocation. This is due to the fact that the closure
exercise for 2000-2006 programmes has begun and the first submission deadline
for closure documents was March-2010. Interim payments have been therefore
processed for the programmes that did not reach the 95% treshold before closure
then interim payments execution was rather limited. The under-execution is due to the low
consumption of the OPs from 2000-2006 period. It amounts to EUR 882 million (or
73, 58 % of 2010 payment appropriation), of which EUR 259 million concern C1
payment appropriations and EUR 623 million C2 payments appropriations carried
forward from 2009.. The suspended/interrupted payments, following
the audit results, for 21 out of 38 programmes put into reserve (AAR 2009)
remained blocked and, in those cases, the financial suspension/correction
procedure is foreseen to be merged with the final payments processed in the
context of 2000-2006 closure. The total outstanding commitments (RAL) at the
end of 2010 stood at EUR 3 002 million (compared to EUR 4 700 million in 2009).
This represents 4, 38% of total commitments for the period 2000-2006. The RAL
has been consumed by interim payments, a few final payments and an automatic
de-commitment of the unused RAL has been processed for an amount of EUR 1,461 million under closure exercise. In 2010, as in the previous year, the so-called
‘n+2’ rule did not apply and the concerned RAL has been decreased by de-committments
for the programming period 2000‑2006 at the closure of the operational
programmes according to the provisions set in the Article 105(3) of Regulation
(EC) No 1083/2006. For the whole period, at the end of 2010 EUR 64
118 million have been paid to Member States. This represents an absorption rate
for all Member States of 93, 47% of the EUR 68 600 million overall allocation. Closure There are 239 ESF operational programmes to be
closed within the 2000-2006 programming period. According to the regulation, payments for the
2000-2006 period could continue until the end of 2008. However, in view of the
financial crisis and the recovery package proposed by the Commission, an
extension of six (or twelve) months was granted on a programme-by-programme
basis for the Member States which opted for it. Out of 91 programmes where the
Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities is ‘Chef
de file’, 68 chose to extend their eligibility dates. The Commission has allowed the Member States to
request extension of the programmes up to 30 June 2009 following the financial
and economic crisis as long as the request was substantiated and sent to the
Commission before 31/12/2008. In the event that the deadline for eligibility
of expenditure wa extended, the deadline for submission of the closure
documents was extended accordingly. Therefore the following submission deadlines
have become effective: 31/03/2010, 21/07/2010, 30/09/2010, 31/03/2011 and
30/09/2011under regulation in force. All submitted closure documents have been
received in due time as per the following Table 1. In total for 229 programmes under closure in
2010 all closure documents have been submitted in the required deadline. Table 1: Number
of programmes to be submitted under submission deadlines and and closure
progress of ESF programmes for 2000-2006 programming period For 10 programmes from submission deadline
31/03/2010 a total closure has been completed and accepted by the Member
States. This represents: 7 payments, 1 balance 0 and 2 recoveries, see
following Table 2. Table 2: Closure
progress of ESF programmes for 2000-2006 programming period Under closure process for 2000-2006 programmes
the Commission has five months[5] from the receipt of the
final report in which to advise the Member State if it is not satisfied with
the final report, including the coherence of financial information, and the
reasons for its dissatisfaction, failing which the final report will be deemed
to have been accepted. It is noted that the Structural Funds
Regulations indicates only one deadline for the analysis of the documents –
five months for the final report – whereas no deadline is stipulated for the
winding-up declaration or the certified statement of final expenditure. The
assessment of the latter two closure documents have to be realised within a
"reasonable period" according to the interpretation of the
Legal Service (note JUR (2008) 15308 LF of 22 May 2008). The closure process and its implementation on
the gound was closely monitored in DG EMPL by the ESF 2000-2006 closure task
force, set up in early begining of 2009. In 2010, in addition to provided guidelines
refferring to the general framework for the closure of 2000‑2006 Structural
Funds assistance set out in Commission Decision C(2006)3424 in 2006,
amended by Commission Decisions C(2008)1362 and C(2009)960; DG EMPL approved
the guidance package for ESF 2000-2006 closures including establishment of the
Closure Monitoring Group and the Closure Working Group. Both groups are important platforms to deal
with the closure of the ESF 2000-2006 programming period to speed up the
process and ensure consistency and transparency of treatment of closure files. The closure of the remaining 229 programmes is
a work in progress and it is expected that the a major part of these programmes
will be closed by the end of 2011.
2.1.3.
EAGGF
The total amount paid in 2010 was EUR 168.3
million or 30.7% of the budget available at the end of the year (an amount
of EUR 13.9 million was transferred during the year to other budget lines
outside the EAGGF). The execution rate as regards the initial budget for
payment appropriations would be 29.9%. In absolute terms, the amount paid in 2010 is
far below the amount paid in 2009 (EUR 300 million less). Three main reasons
are behind this reduction: –
The rural development programmes financed by
EAGGF-Guidance have followed a very high rhythm of implementation in previous
years. At the end of 2009, 94% of the EAGGF-Guidance contribution programmed
for the whole period had already been paid, and a substantial number of
programmes (112 out of a total of 152), had already reached the 95 % ceiling
for interim payments. In these cases, no further payments were possible in 2010
until closure. –
In 2010 the closure of 2000 – 2006
EAGGF-Guidance programmes started and by the end of the year 19 programmes (out
of a total of 152 programmes), were closed. –
The low EAGGF-Guidance expenditure in 2010 was
very largely compensated by EUR 11.12 billion of EAFRD expenditure under the
rural development programming 2007-2013 (which is EUR 2.91 billion more than in
the year 2009). The EAGGF-Guidance outstanding commitments
(RAL) at the end of 2010 amounted to EUR 1,183.3 million, equivalent to 5.3%
of the whole allocation 2000-2006. This amount is EUR 171.3 million lower than
the EUR 1,354.6 billion RAL at the end of 2009.
2.1.4.
FIFG
The overall absorption rate for payments was 100 %,
with EUR 10 million being disbursed to Member States. Concerning the execution level of payment
appropriations, EUR 10 million was paid under Objective 1, no payment was made
outside Objective 1. The total RAL for the FIFG at the end of 2010
reached EUR 296,44 million (compared with EUR 306,41 million in 2009). This
represents 7.5 % of total commitments for the period 2000-2006. For the whole period, as at the end of 2010,
EUR 3 639 million have been paid to Member States. This represents an
absorption rate for all Member States of 92.5 % of the EUR 3 935
million overall allocation.
2.2.
Programme Implementation
2.2.1.
Objective 1
Expenditure on Objective 1 programmes followed
much the same path as in 2009 (for details, see part 5). Objective 1 programmes
focused on basic infrastructure projects (40.2 %), with almost half of all
investment in this category spent on transport infrastructure (49.9 %).
More than a third (34.9 %) of Objective 1 resources was invested in
the productive environment, where the focus continues to be on assisting SMEs
and the craft sector (26.6 %). Projects geared to human resources account
for 22.5 % of resources in Objective 1 regions. The main areas of
assistance in this field are almost equally split between labour market
policies (30.6 %) and education, and vocational training (31.2 %).
2.2.2.
Objective 2
The main focus of programmes in Objective 2
regions continues to be on productive investments, with over half of all
financial resources devoted to this category (55.4 %). Within this field,
assistance to SMEs and the craft sector is the most dominant (55.6 %). The
second most supported field is basic infrastructure, with 29.2 % of all
Objective 2 resources. Unlike Objective 1 programmes, the most important areas
in financial terms are planning and rehabilitation of areas (45.6 %).
In the category of human resources (10.5 % of all investment in
Objective 2 regions), workforce flexibility, entrepreneurial activity,
innovation, information and communication technologies are the main fields of
investment (31.6 %).
2.2.3.
Objective 3
ESF programme implementation in 2010 continued
to be focused on the European Employment Strategy, particularly on the measures
aimed at improving employability in the labour market (30,9 % of certified
expenditure), lifelong learning (activities developing educational and
vocational training represented 31;2 % of certified expenditure), social
inclusion (13;3 % of certified expenditure), equal opportunities
(5.2 % of certified expenditure) and entrepreneurial activities, workforce
flexibility, innovation, information and communication technologies (19,05%)
2.2.4.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
Expenditure of the FIFG programmes outside
Objective 1 focused on the processing, marketing and promoting of fisheries
products (26.7 %). The second most important measure was adjustment of the
fishing effort (17.8 %), followed by the renewal and modernisation of the
fishing fleet (17.5 %), fishing port facilities (16.9 %) and actions
by professionals (vocational training, small coastal fishing) (12.8 %).
2.2.5.
Community Initiatives
2.2.5.1.
INTERREG
INTERREG supports cross-border, transnational
and interregional cooperation to encourage the harmonious, balanced and
sustainable development of the EU. By the end of 2010 the 81 INTERREG
III/Neighbourhood programmes had selected about 19 000 projects and networks
aimed at reducing the effects of national borders, language barriers and
cultural differences and developing border areas, supporting strategic
development and territorial integration across larger zones of the EU and
better integration with its neighbours. Effectiveness of regional development
policies and instruments was also supported by sharing of good practice and
exchange of experience. The first 54 INTERREG III programmes were
adopted in 2001 and were followed by 15 programmes in 2002 and 3 in 2003.
Enlargement increased the overall number of EU borders and resulted in nine new
programmes being adopted in 2004, many of which are Neighbourhood Programmes.
In 2004 most programmes were modified to take account of the mid-term
evaluations and the distribution of indexation funds. For some programmes changes were also necessary
due to enlargement and/or integration of the Neighbourhood Programme concept.
Some ‘n+2’ decommitments and results of the updates of the mid-term evaluations
contributed to further programme modifications in the following years. By the
end of 2010, the payment absorption rate was about 92 %. Due to the more
specific and challenging nature of cooperation programmes, project
decommitments due to the ‘n+2’ rule could not be avoided for some programmes.
In total EUR 135.0 million was decommitted during the programming period due to
the automatic decommitment rule. In 2010, the closure process for 81 INTERREG
III/Neighbourhood programmes has been started. By the end of reporting year 64
programmes have been submitted to the Commission. The Commission services
worked in close cooperation with the authorities responsible for programme
implementation in order to conclude the closing procedure. Within 2010, closure
of 3 programmes has been finalised. The remaining 17 programmes, due to
extended final dater of eligibility of expenditure affected by the financial
crisis and prolonged eligibility for the Technical assistance priority are
expected to enter the closure procedure by 31 March 2011. Due to their international nature, financial
control and audit are challenging for INTERREG programmes. Audit findings have
called for some programmes to develop action plans on how to improve their
financial control and audit systems. The implementation of these action plans
has been closely monitored.
2.2.5.2.
EQUAL
The EQUAL Community Initiative focused on
supporting innovative, transnational projects aimed at tackling discrimination
and disadvantage in the labour market. These projects were created to generate
and test new ideas with the aim of finding new ways of fighting all forms of
discrimination and inequality within and beyond the labour market. The principles underpinning EQUAL projects were
the following: Partnership, Innovation, Empowerment, Transnational cooperation
and Mainstreaming EQUAL was structured according to thematic
fields defined within the four pillars of the European Employment Strategy
(EES): Employability, Entrepreneurship, Adaptability and Equal opportunities.
In addition to these pillars, the programme supported a further theme of
activities to help the integration of asylum seekers. It was implemented by all Member States,
following common guidelines established by the Commission. The programme stood
for €3 bn investment of the ESF in labour market development and social
inclusion and has helped to make the ESF a more effective, efficient and
relevant instrument for contributing to the Lisbon reform strategy to create
more and better jobs. EQUAL has provided evidence for innovative and adaptable
policy strategies and delivery mechanisms that bring greater inclusiveness to
Europe’s diverse labour markets, based on the efforts and achievements of 3,480
development partnerships with more than 20,000 partners, reaching over 200,000
persons in Europe. The EQUAL Community Initiative programmes were
administratively closed in 2008 in most Member States. Only a few asked for an
extension of the final date of eligibility into 2009 in order to achieve a higher
absorption rate and to continue mainstreaming actions. In 2010 the
administartive closure process was continued and by the end of the year 4
closures of EQUAL Operational programmes were completed.
2.2.5.3.
URBAN
In 2010, URBACT I programme has been closed. The
URBACT Programme reported a total eligible cost of 25 043 714€ of
which a total of 15 386 591€ ERDF was claimed, this represents an ERDF
under-spend of 2 644 526€ or 14.67%. The URBACT II programme, the Urban Development
Network Programme under the European Territorial Cooperation Objective, is an
exchange and learning programme for cities based on the good experiences with
the URBACT I programme. In 2010, work on the management of the URBACT II
programme continued by way of monitoring committees and reporting procedures. After having launched the first call for
proposals in 2007, in total, 19 thematic networks and 6 working groups were
launched. In 2010, five working group closed their projects. All the partners
produced and submitted their Local Action Plans. The remaining one working
group and the 19 thematic networks got close to the end of their implementation
phase. They consolidated their work in the implementation phase by elaborating
and starting to implement Local Action Plans in close cooperation with Local
Support Groups. In 2009, a second call for proposals was
launched and another thirteen thematic networks and three working groups
started the development phase. In 2010 they all finished this first phase and
applied for the implementation phase. Due to not having met the eligibility
criteria for the implementation phase, only nine thematic networks were able to
start the implementation phase in 2010. So far 30 thematic networks and seven working
groups (in 2009 there was an additional call for the establishment of a working
group to facilitate the implementation of integrated sustainable urban
development according to the Leipzig Charter) have been working under the
programme. Together with the two Pilot Fast Track Networks and the working
groups and thematic networks that finished their projects at the end of the
development phase of the second call, the projects have gathered 333 partners
(cities, Member States, regional authorities, universities, NGOs) from 28
countries (26 Member States plus Norway and Switzerland). The creation of strong links between cities and
their managing authorities is the guiding principle of the entire URBACT II
programme. Following the two calls for projects launched under URBACT II, the
Managing Authorities signed letters declaring their intent to cooperation with
240 URBACT partners. The URBACT II programme is one of the main
instruments of the Regions for Economic Change initiative, aiming at faster
implementation of best practice and innovative concepts. In this framework, the
Commission in 2010 actively supported six running Fast Track Networks of the
first call and selected and labelled two networks of the second call. Several
Commission services, led by the Directorate-General for Regional Policy (and
one network led by the Directorate-General for Health and Consumers), are
involved in the Fast Track Network activities and support the project partners
in implementing their Local Action Plans through regional or national
Operational Programmes.
2.2.5.4.
LEADER+
The Community Initiative Leader+ consisted of
three activities: implementation of local development strategies by public
private partnerships, cooperation between rural territories and networking. 73
Leader+ programmes for the EU 15 were approved for the period 2000-2006.
(Recently acceded EU Member States had the option of integrating Leader+ type
measures into their EAGGF Objective 1 programmes.) By the end of 2010, 14 LEADER+ programmes were
closed and 8 closure letters had been sent to Member States
2.2.6.
Innovative Actions
2.2.6.1.
ERDF
The Directorate-General for Regional Policy
also managed 181 Regional Programmes of Innovative Actions (by 31 December
2010, 171 had been closed, 24 of them during 2010). These programmes helped to
promote strategic innovation in the regions, by experimenting with innovative
methods and practices designed to improve the level of innovation and the
quality of EU assistance under three themes: knowledge and technological
innovation, information society and sustainable development. In December 2010,
the European Policy Evaluation Consortium (EPEC) delivered conclusions of a
study on Policy lessons from experience with the Regional Programme for
Innovative Actions in the fields of innovation, sustainable development and
information society.
2.2.6.2.
ESF
The remaining Innovative Actions for 2005 and
2006 projects were completed as planned and closed in 2010.
3.
Consistency and coordination
3.1.
Consistency with other Community policies
Previous reports have given details of
developments to maintain consistency between cohesion policy and other EU policy
priorities such as competition policy, internal market, environment, transport
and gender equality objectives. There were no specific changes in requirements
or expectations on managing authorities as the 2000-2006 programmes entered the
final months of implementation. For the future programming period, thematic
inter services taskforces have been implemented to ensure coherence of
Structural Funds’ policies in following fields: “Smart growth”, “Sustainable
development”, "Education", "Employment and Social
inclusion", “Transport”. (NB in early 2011)
3.2.
Coordination of instruments
3.2.1.
The Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund
Aid granted by the Cohesion Fund provides
financing for transport infrastructure projects in the fields of trans-European
networks and the environment. The Cohesion Fund enables the
beneficiary Member States to channel significant public investment into these
two fields of common interest, while meeting the objectives of reducing the
budget deficits set out in the convergence and stability programmes drawn up as
part of Economic and Monetary Union. Following the enlargement of the European Union
in May 2004, the ten new Member States are covered by the Cohesion Fund. In the
period 2000-2006, before the latest enlargement on 1 January 2007 to include
Romania and Bulgaria, there were 13 beneficiary Member States. As a result of
its economic growth, Ireland has not been eligible for the Fund since 1 January
2004. The principal instrument for coordinating
funding under the Cohesion Fund and the Structural Funds is the national
strategic reference framework (SRF), which covers the whole of the 2000-2006
period. Council Regulation (EC) No 1265/1999 amending Annex II to Regulation
(EC) No 1164/94 provides that ‘Member States shall also provide the results of
the environmental impact assessment in conformity with
Community legislation, and their consistency with a general environmental
or transport strategy at administrative unit or sector level’. The four ‘old’ Member States benefiting from
the Cohesion Fund presented their SRFs for the environment and transport
sectors at the end of 2000. The ten new Member States submitted theirs during
the first half of 2004. Since then, decisions to finance projects by the
Cohesion Fund have been subject to a verification process to avoid duplication
with programmes adopted under the Structural Funds. In addition, SRFs improve
the complementarity between the two instruments. Thus, in certain cases, these SRFs form an
integral part of the programmes approved under the Structural Funds for the
period 2000-2006; this improves coordination between funding under the Cohesion
Fund and the Structural Funds.
3.2.2.
The Structural Funds and the EIB/EIF
Since the implementation of the 2000-2006
period entered the closure phase in 2010, there is nothing to report.
4.
Evaluations
In 2010, the Commission continued to carry out
evaluations to support decision‑making under the Cohesion Policy. ERDF In 2010, the Commission completed the ex post
evaluation of ERDF interventions in objective 1 and 2 regions. The synthesis
report of the all work was published and presented to the public in April 2010.
The ex post evaluations of the Community
Initiatives URBAN and Interreg were also completed in 2010. The ex post evaluation of the URBAN Community
Initiative provided evidence of the added value of this aspect of the
policy and supported the proposals by the Commission for a stronger urban
agenda in the future policy. Successful projects were characterised by local
leadership (80% of URBAN programmes) and local ownership. They were selected in
line with local perceptions of need, with commitment from local players and
delivered in partnership with local people. Unsuccessful projects were usually
imposed from above, with little local ownership and involvement. The ex post evaluation of the INTERREG III
Community Initiative concluded that it was about
much more than mutual learning, although this too was important. Financially
larger programmes generated significant investments and achieved lasting
tangible impacts, while smaller programmes achieved mostly intangible impacts
on territorial development. INTERREG generated
important soft leverage effects – actor mobilisation, an increased
inter-cultural understanding and development of social capital. In addition other evaluations were launched in
2010 and are currently underway. Three of them are studies on Counterfactual
Impact Evaluation of Cohesion Policy: · Examples from enterprise support, with
the aim to assemble and use support and outcome data for assistance to
enterprise in Member States. The study will use econometric analysis to
estimate the impact of ERDF enterprise assistance · Examples from support to innovation and research: aiming to document the process of combining beneficiary data, firm-level
economic data and innovation and research data for the purposes of
counterfactual impact evaluation, to see where it is possible and to give a
practical guide to the kind of issues which arise. · Data-linking and impact evaluation in N. Ireland: looking to document work currently underway preparing and linking
various datasets in Northern Ireland, as well as to perform an impact
evaluation using these datasets. Two thematic studies were also launched. The
first one concerns local development, in order to assess the
contribution of local development to the effective delivery of Cohesion Policy
and to provide lessons for the future and on territories with specific. The
second one concerns regions with specific geographic features, with a
view to examine the extent to which cohesion policy interventions are and have
been appropriate in mountainous, islands and sparsely populated regions Another study launched in 2010 concerns the
evaluation of Innovation activities, to provide a state of the art of
the evaluation of innovation in Member States and an analysis of the advantages
and limits of available methodologies for assessing different kinds of
innovation activities, to conduct a series of case studies on good quality
evaluations, as well as to draft guidance for managing authorities to support
their evaluation activities. ESF The ex post evaluation of the ESF
(2000-2006) was completed in 2010. It consists of 1 preparatory study, 2
thematic studies (a - ESF support to the Open Method of Coordination in social
protection and social inclusion; b - The impact of the ESF on the functionning
of the labour market and investment in human capital infrastructure through
support to systems and structures), and 2 main evaluations on the ESF and
EQUAL. All the evaluation reports have been published1. Besides the ex post evaluation, the
following evaluations and studies were completed in 2010 or beginning of 2011: - Evaluation of the ESF contribution to the
European Employment Strategy.
The evaluation confirmed that the ESF is an essential instrument to implement
and disseminate concepts and reforms linked to the EES; - Evaluation of the capacity of the ESF
delivery system to attract and support operational programme target groups.
The evaluation found that in some cases the delivery systems put in place by
Member States have a limited capacity to attract and support certain OP target
groups. This is especially true for target groups that face multiple barriers
to enter the labour market; - Evaluation of ESF support to the
integration of the ethnic minorities and migrants in the labour market. A
key conclusion of this evaluation was that there is an increased attention to promoting
the labour market and social inclusion of migrants and minorities in ESF in the
2007-2013 period compared with 2000-2006; - Evaluation of ESF support to Gender
Equality. The evaluation confirmed the European
Added Value in the ESF's support to gender equality policy, which is mostly
visible in terms of capacity building and support for the creation of a
recognised and autonomous policy space for gender equality; - ESF implementation in the 2007-2013 period
- template for EC reporting and 2008 outline report. The study has developed a template to report on the use and
performance of the European Social Fund (ESF) since the beginning of the
current programming period in 2007, as notified by Member States to the
Commission through the SFC 2007 platform. It also proposes a limited set of
aggregated common indicators. In addition, the following evaluations and
studies were launched in 2010 and are currently underway: - Developing logics of intervention and
related common indicators for the next ESF operational programmes. The
purpose of the study is threefold: (1) to develop methodologies for establishing
logics of intervention at the most suitable level for the ESF; (2) to develop
logics of intervention by way of example for three selected policy areas:
access to employment; social inclusion and poverty; institutional capacity and
governance; (3) to develop common indicators relevant for all ESF policy fields; - Evaluation of ESF support to Lifelong
Learning. This evaluation focuses on how ESF Lifelong Learning activities
could better support the sustainable integration of young job seekers, low-skilled
workers and older workers into the labour market; - Evaluation of the reaction of the ESF to
the economic and financial crisis. The purpose is to assess if the economic
crisis has had an impact on the ESF spending, at which level it had an impact,
if the ESF is sufficiently flexible to react to such challenges and at which
stage of the crisis is the ESF best placed to intervene. Furthermore, DG Employment launched an ESF
Evaluation expert network The purpose of the network is to aggregate and
synthesise the ESF evaluations carried out by the Member States, as well as to
deliver policy analysis and evidence on the performance of ESF. In 2010, DG Employment continued to hold ESF
Evaluation Partnership meetings to which it invited all Member States’ evaluation
functions. The main objective of these meetings is to steer and capitalise on
evaluation of actions supported by the ESF. In 2010, the Evaluation
Partnership met three times EAGGF Ex-post evaluation of LEADER+ The ex post evaluation of Leader+ was completed
in 2010. This evaluation covers the Leader+ programmes, as specified by Council
Regulation (EC) No 1260/99, and the Leader+-type measures included in
transitional rural development programmes for the period 2004-2006 (EU-10). The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the
effectiveness, efficiency, relevance and sustainability of Leader+ programmes
and Leader+-type measures as implemented in the EU-15 and EU-10 respectively. The evaluation
concluded that Leader+ was an important complement to mainstream policies and
has contributed to economic diversification, quality of life and enhancement of
the natural and built environment of rural areas. Its flexibility and
sensitivity to local needs distinguished Leader+ from other interventions, and
exploited potential unreachable through more conventional channels. It
successfully promoted multi-sectoral integrated development and contributed to
strengthening the local economy and social capital in rural areas. Leader+ had
significant positive effects on local governance capacity. LAG autonomy was
considered an important factor in the effectiveness of the policy. The recommendations of the report included
increasing the focus on long-term development, increasing resilience and
adaptive capacity as compared to short-term job creation and productivity
gains; increasing the autonomy of LAGs; taking additional account of the needs
of minority or marginalised groups; encouraging further networking and
cooperation between LAGs; increasing capacity building and ensuring continuity
between programming periods. Ex-post evaluation of 2000-2006 Rural
Development Programmes In 2010 the Commission launched the ex-post
evaluation of 2000-2006 rural development programmes. This evaluation consists
of a synthesis of individual programme-specific ex-post evaluation reports for
EAGGF-Guarantee co-financed EU15 RDPs, and for EU10 2004-2006 Transitional
Rural Development Instrument programmes, together with the evaluation of
EAGGF-Guidance co-finanded rural development measures implemented throughout
Objective 1 regions and EAGGF-Guarantee co-financed rural development measures
implemetned within Objective 2 regions in France. All of these were implemetnd
within the framework of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/99. It will be completed
during 2011. The evaluation will assess the relevance,
coherence, effectiveness and efficiency of the different measures and
programmes. It will seek to identify examples of good practice and to make
recomendations for future policy design. It will consist of documentary
analysis, surveys of Mananging Authorities and Monitoring Committee members and
case studies of selected programming areas. The findings and conclusions will
be structured according to eight themes: relevance of the policy objectives; coherence
between the measures and policy objectives; complementarity between rural
development and other support instruments; coverage, content and consistency of
programmes; results, impact, effectiveness and efficiency of support; delivery
systems; monitoring and evaluation; and impact achieved in relation to new
priorities.
5.
Controls
5.1.
ERDF
Audit work Assurance on 2000-2006 ERDF (mainstream and
INTERREG) programmes has been built up gradually over the years. First, the effective functioning of the Member
States' management and control systems has been the subject of wide-ranging
audits since 2004 covering key elements of management and control. In terms of coverage, the programmes audited
represent 43% of the number of the mainstream programmes and 76% of the decided
ERDF contribution. As regards INTERREG, a separate audit enquiry launched in
2006 was concluded in 2010 for the 23 programmes examined (28% of total
programmes) representing 54 % of the decided contribution. Second, an extensive preparatory enquiry was
carried out from 2007 to 2010 to review the winding-up bodies (WUB) in order to
verify the assurance which can be placed on their closure work underpinning the
winding-up declarations (WUD), to verify the preparation of Member States for
closure and to identify and mitigate related risks. The objective was to reach
conclusions as to whether the audit work of the national bodies can be relied
on as a main source of assurance for the remainder of the programming period
and whether the winding up declaration will be based on adequate audit work and
will be a reliable source of assurance at programme closure. The 42 audits
carried out under this enquiry, together with audit missions done on the
winding-up body as part of regular systems audits which started in 2004,
resulted in a coverage of winding-up bodies in charge of approximately 85% of
the decided amount of the 2000-2006 programmes at the end of 2010. Third, an extensive
preparatory enquiry was carried out from 2007 to review the Winding-Up Bodies (WUB)
in order to verify the assurance which can be placed on their closure work
underpinning the winding-up declarations, to verify the preparation of Member
States for closure and to identify and mitigate related risks. The 42 audits
(including three in 2010) carried out under this enquiry, together with work
done on the WUB as part of systems audits, resulted in coverage of WUB in
charge of approximately 85% of the decided amount of the 2000-2006 programmes
at the end of 2010. Finally, during 2010, four audit missions were
carried out to follow up previous ERDF systems audits (mainly implementation of
remedial action plans following the detection of systems deficiencies) in three
countries: in Spain (1), Germany (1) and Italy (2). Other audit work carried out in 2010 for the
2000-2006 programming period included the examination of the 86 systems audit
reports received from national auditors, eleven annual control reports received
under Article 13 of Regulation No. 438/2001 (2009 was the last year where submission
of annual control report summarising all audit work carried out in the year was
obligatory, before submission of the closure documents by Member States for
most programmes in 2010). Assessment letters were sent to all the Member States
with observations and, where necessary, requests for additional information in
order to be able to draw as much assurance as possible from the results of
national audit work. The closure process of programmes started in
2010 with the submission to the Commission of closure documents for most
programmes (final implementation report, final declaration of expenditure and
winding-up declaration summarising the audit findings over the programming
period). The analysis of winding-up
declarations (WUDs) received from Member States started in 2010. The total
number of ERDF programmes to close for 2000-2006 period is 379. There were 350
WUDs due and received by end 2010, the remaining 29 being due by March 2011
(one received in advance by end 2010). The analysis of WUD also takes into
account any overall analysis or statement of assurance supplied in the annual
summaries, where available. By end 2010, 279 WUDs had been analysed: 165 (47%)
WUD have been accepted and for 114 (33%) WUD the analysis was interrupted in
order to request additional clarifications or audit work from the Member
States. The analysis was ongoing for the remaining 71 (20%) WUD. The Winding-Up Bodies classified their audit
opinions as: unqualified, qualified, and adverse or disclaimer in line with the
closure guidance. DG Regional
Policy undertook an in depth analysis and further classified the reported
qualified opinions into "reasonable assurance with moderate impact"
or "limited assurance", depending on the seriousness of
qualifications reported by the WUB. The categorisation is provisional as
outstanding issues will be cleared in the coming months. DG Regional Policy
agreed with the opinions expressed in the WUDs in 261 cases (74%)[6]
and reclassified the opinion in 92 cases (26%). For the latter programmes, this
means that DG Regional Policy considered that it could not entirely rely on the
work or opinion of the Winding-Up Body to draw its assurance or took into
account additional audit information at its disposal (for one programme). Finally, in order to complete all the above
audit work, an enquiry on the closure of ERDF assistance for 2000-2006 is
planned in 2011. Following an analysis of the residual risk for closure, on the
basis of the audit work carried throughout the programming period and the result
of the assessment of the WUDs, DG Regional Policy plans to carry out closure
audits in 2011 in nine Member States (CZ, DE, ES, IE, EL, IT, PT, SK and the
UK). In 2010, for INTERREG., following the
reservations expressed in Annual Activity Report 2009 on 15 INTERREG III
programmes, following an extensive audit enquiry carried out between 2006 and
2009 for 23 programmes representing 54% of the ERDF amounts committed,
appropriate action was taken to address the remaining risks. In its Annual Activity Report 2010, DG REGIO maintains a reservation until
closure of programmes for nine
programmes. Impact of controls In exercising its supervisory role, the
Directorate-General for Regional Policy had established a policy in 2008[7]
to ensure more rapid adoption of decisions to suspend payment and make
financial corrections when serious systems weaknesses are detected which
endanger the reimbursements of Funds made to Member States. The more rigorous approach continued in 2010 even though no
additional suspension was decided in 2010 (since 1994-1999 programmes are now
closed and most 2000-2006 programmes reached the 95% threshold for payments ,
meaning no Commission payment necessary before closure and where necessary,
financial corrections decisions will be taken at closure). Three suspension
decisions (for two German and one Interreg 2000-2006 programmes) remained in
force at year end as the identified deficiencies (management verifications and
audit function) were not solved and the closure procedure is interrupted (DE).
(In the case of the Interreg DK/SE programme, payment will be resumed when it
is agreed to implement the necessary financial corrections following audit
results at closure (Interreg DK/SE programme).) This raises the total ERDF financial corrections
decided/ agreed following in 2008-2010 to EUR (2 900 plus X 2010) XX
million and the cumulative corrections in the period 2000-2010 to EUR YY (5 400
million plus Y 2010) for the financial corrections made by the Commission and
by the Member States, as a result of Commission or Court of Auditors audit
activity or OLAF investigations. In 2010, many of the procedures in progress in the
previous years were finalised for ERDF with the application of financial
corrections or the adjustments of the amounts. Furthermore, 2010 was a
transition year for the two programming periods; the conclusion of procedures
for 2000-2006 leading to a decrease of amounts in progress and the initiation
of new procedures (somewhat less at this stage) for 2007-2013. Thus, the amounts
of financial corrections in progress this year are lower compared to the
previous year. At the end of 2010, suspension and
correction procedures were in progress for a total number of approximately 117
ERDF programmes, with an estimated amount of approximately EUR 559 million. Concerning
the ESF, most of the EUR 9 million
of new cases refers to the 2000-2006 programming period as all the operational programmes concerned are
reaching their closure phase. The processing of financial corrections will be
dealt with in the closure process. Nevertheless, half of the on-going procedures concern the 2007-2013
programming period. These were estimated to be at EUR 1 (provisional
amount) as the amount to be corrected still needs to be identified. In addition to the above-mentioned
figure, an amount of EUR 1 437 million has been reported by Member States and
represents potential recoveries following the detection of irregular claims on
structural funds notified to OLAF under regulation No. 1681/94. However the
prospects of recovery in individual cases cannot be assessed with sufficient
accuracy based on the information forwarded by Member States. In addition there
is a risk of overlap with the figures above-disclosed which is difficult to
quantify as Member States are not obliged to distinguish in their reporting
between potential recoveries and those resulting from their own controls. Part 6 of this report provides further
information and details on the financial corrections and recoveries in the
structural funds for 2010 by fund and country, as well as cumulatively up to
the end of 2010. Annual summaries Annual summaries were received for the fourth
consecutive year in February 2011 as per Article 53b(3) of the amended
Financial Regulation and were assessed by the Directorates-General responsible
for structural actions. The European Court of Auditors reported in its
2008 and 2009 Annual Reports that the Commission supervised the annual
summaries exercise well. The Commission revised the guidance for the 2009
Summaries (submitted in February 2010) and reiterated its encouragement to the
Member States to add value to the summaries by providing additional information
which is not communicated in other reports. This can be done by analysing the
functioning of systems, diagnosing problems and their solutions, describing
good practices and providing a declaration as to the degree of assurance the
Member States derive from their systems. The revised guidance note takes on
board some of the recommendations formulated in the study of 5 June 2009 on the
annual summaries commissioned by the European Parliament. Finally, the
Commission, as recommended by the European Parliament in its 2008 discharge
resolution, commissioned an external study to take stock of the added value of
annual summaries after three consecutive exercises and to envisage the possible
contribution of annual summaries to the assurance building process,
particularly in view of the revision of the Financial Regulation. The external, independent analysis done by the
consultancy firm on the Member States' annual summaries submitted from 2007 to
2009 was based on desk reviews of submitted documents, on meetings with
European Commission audit representatives and with a sample of Member State
audit authorities and on the review of national declarations and annual control
reports. The study, which was
finalised in April 2011 and made public thereafter,
concluded that the annual summary in its current form
has provided little added value. It also confirmed that whilst there were improvements in the compliance
elements of the summary over the three year process, the same was not true of
voluntary disclosures, which have remained limited. Following the analysis of the annual summaries
received for 2010, the Commission services noted that twenty-six Member States
have complied with the minimum requirements of the Financial Regulation
regarding information to be provided. Where necessary, Member States which have
not completely followed the recommendations in the Commission's guidance note,
have been requested to provide the additional information. For one Member State
(Spain), there were non-compliance issues (major elements of the annual summary
were missing for 2000-2006 programming period), therefore the Commission have
requested a revised annual summary. Sixteen Member States have provided an overall
analysis and eleven Member States have provided a statement of overall level of
assurance, following the Commission recommendations to maximise the value of
the annual summaries. In such cases, the Directorate General has used this to
corroborate its own assessment of the national management and control systems
or to complete information provided to the Commission in the ACR, in some
cases. Namely, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Greece and Romania reported in their
overall analysis similar weaknesses as the ones identified by DG Regional
Policy for programmes put in the reservations, without though providing a
similar level of overall assurance. The other Member States that have programmes
in the 2010 list of reservations did not provide an overall level of assurance. National declarations Four Member States - the Netherlands, the U.K.,
Denmark and Sweden – submitted national declarations on a voluntary basis to
the Commission. The Commission supports these initiatives and encourages these
Member States to share the process they follow in order for the Commission to
be able to optimise the assurance it may draw from their declarations. Public
declarations issued at senior national level make the control process in the
Member States more transparent and help identify changes needed to make the
system more effective. The Commission services elaborated guidance on
national declarations for the use of Member States authorities, made available to
Member States in March 2011. This guidance points the key issues to be solved
in order for national declarations to provide added value to the Commission
assurance process: format, report on ongoing work and audit opinion supporting
the declaration, timing of submission. The guidance, while encouraging Member
States to develop such national declarations that would fulfil the conditions
for adding value to the Commission assurance building process, also concludes
that the Commission proposal on management declarations in the revised
Financial Regulation, signed at the operational level, may constitute a first
more practical and useful step that could later be endorsed at a political
level in the Member States. Communication of follow-up to the action plan to
strengthen the Commission’s supervisory role Following the 2006 Annual report of the
European Court of Auditors (ECA), the Commission adopted in February 2008 and
put in place a comprehensive Action Plan to strengthen
the Commission's supervisory role in the system of shared management of the
Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund. The overall aim was to reduce the level
of error in expenditure claims certified to the Commission for co-financing
under structural actions. The actions should also prevent loss to the EU budget
through the application of financial corrections. The Action Plan set out 37
actions, under 10 main headings. As regards the 2000-2006 programming period
the main objectives were to focus audit resources on high-risk bodies so as to
reduce the potential residual risk, to follow-up Member States' action plans to
remedy deficiencies in management and control systems and to bring to
conclusion suspension and financial correction procedures. Preventive actions
for the 2007-2013 programming period comprised the review of compliance
assessment reports and opinions, the review of national audit strategies,
actions on simplification and review and clarification on eligibility issues as
well as awareness-raising in relation to public procurement rules. The Commission published in February 2010 a
report[8] to assess the first impact of the Action Plan. The report was
presented to the Budgetary Control Committee of the European Parliament and to
the Structural Funds working group of the European Council. The implementation of the
actions had an overall positive impact. The Commission has now a strengthened
position to supervise the management of the Structural and Cohesion Funds. There are three areas which provide evidence of the tangible impact
of the actions implemented: Reduced level of error in expenditure
claims certified to the Commission: the results of a Commission audit enquiry
performed in 2009 on the 2007-2013 programmes provide an indication that the
enhanced control provisions for the 2007-2013 regulatory framework and the
preventive measures taken by the Commission have started to produce results on
the error rate. The results presented by the Court in its Annual Report for
2009 came to confirm this indication: the least error rate reported for 2009 is
at 3%, compared to 11% in 2008 and 2007; The improved supervisory role of the
Commission increases the effectiveness of the multi-annual control systems and
reduces the residual risk of error after closure of the programmes. The results
of the audit closure enquiry on 1994-1999 programmes showed that for those
programmes the residual risk at closure was substantially reduced; Reduced risk of loss to the EU budget
by financial corrections: The value of financial corrections for the 1994-1999
and 2000-2006 periods substantially increased in the years 2008 and 2009,
compared to the years 2000-2007. The level of financial corrections shows the
rigorous Commission response to the detection of significant systems
deficiencies in the Member States. The Joint Audit Strategy of the Commission's
services responsible for Cohesion will continue to build on the achievements of
the Action Plan and provides a solid base in streamlining the overall audit
approach to strengthen the Commission's supervisory role in shared management
of structural actions and focus on high risk Member States and issues. The Commission is maintaining the momentum
generated by the Action Plan by continuing its rigorous actions and, in a
system of shared management, by ensuring that the Member States continue to
demonstrate their accountability and take responsibility for the use of EU
funds. The Commission considers it essential that Member States add value to
the current arrangements to maximize the assurance available, in the absence of
a mandatory statement of management assurance.
5.2.
ESF
Results of the
audit activities concerning the programming period 2000-2006
5.2.1.
Audit coverage 2000-2006 period
During the 2000-06 programming period, the work
carried out by the audit directorate included the assessment of management and
control system descriptions, analysis of national system audit reports and
annual control reports in the context of annual bilateral coordination
meetings, and three main audit enquiries: –
An enquiry on the verification of effective
functioning of the management and control systems in the Member States, where
the objective was to obtain reasonable assurance that the systems are
functioning effectively to prevent and detect errors and irregularities and
ensure the legality and regularity of the underlying operations and the
accuracy of the expenditure declared to the Commission. –
An enquiry on project expenditure to obtain
reasonable assurance on the compliance with the legislative framework as far as
it concerns the conformity with EC law on legality and regularity of the
expenditure incurred in the Member States. –
An enquiry to review the work of the Winding-up
Bodies in the Member States in preparation for the closure of 2000-06
programmes, where the objective was to obtain reasonable assurance that the
work carried out by the Winding-up Bodies, and the systems and procedures put
in place for the provision of the winding-up declaration were compliant with
the requirements of Regulation 438/2001 and the Closure Guidelines, in order to
be able to conclude whether the systems and procedures set up and the work
carried out provide a reliable source of assurance for the remainder of the
programming period and in the context of programme closure. As a result of the above audit enquiries, at
the end of 2009, the audit units had carried out missions on the spot in Member
states covering 94,88% of the Operational Programmes (Note: Figures to be
updated in line with 2009 country fiches) This audit coverage was considered adequate to
be able to conclude that existing systemic deficiencies presenting a material
risk had been identified at the end of 2009. Accordingly, through the
completion of follow-up work and of action plans with certain Member states,
including the application of financial corrections when required, the
Commission should be able to obtain assurance prior to programme closure that
the risks have been adequately addressed. This also led to the decision not to
carry out any system audit work in 2010 outside certain follow up work. From April 2010 onwards, the audit units have
been involved in the analysis of the Winding up declaration. The results of
this analysis work have, and will continue, to be sent to the geographical
desks as input for their closure activities and as a basis of assurance for the
assessment of the final payment. The analysis work has suffered a slight delay
due to the fact that much of the work was outsourced to an external audit
company. The overall assessment of the winding-up documents was carried out by
DG EMPL auditors. In many cases, the winding-up bodies did not send the
information in the format requested by the Commission, hence requiring longer
analysis work. Secondly, the EMPL auditors are carefully assessing the level of
residual error in the programmes while ensuring an equal treatment across
Operational Programmes and Member States
5.2.2.
. Audit work
in 2010
Considering the stage of implementation of the
2000-2006 programming period's Operational Programmes, no further audits of
management and control systems were organised. Instead, the audit work focused
on the follow up of irregularities and the reservations issued in the AAR 2009.
In this respect, 2 audit missions were carried out. The breakdown of these
audits is as follows: –
System audit of O.P. 2000ES053PO311: Iniciativa
Impresarial – Follow up from the ECA DAS 2008; –
- Follow up of O.P. 2000GR051PO003: Health and
Prevention in Greece. –
As far as the other Operational Programmes under
reservation are concerned, suspension and correction procedures were launched
by the geographical desks.
5.3.
EAGGF
The Directorate-General for Agriculture and
Rural Development followed the same basic approach as the Directorate-General
for Regional Policy and shared the same general objectives. As regards the 1994-1999 period, the planned
ex-post audit programme for this period was already completed in 2006. The last
financial correction procedures were completed in 2009 (the last Commission
Decision adopted in February 2010). As regards programmes financed by EAGGF
Guidance for the 2000-2006 programming period the deadline for payments by
Member States was 31 December 2009 at the latest. In total, at the end of 2010, 103 programmes
out of the 152 were subject to audit (67.8%), covering €21.7 billion (96.4%) of
total programmed expenditure. The total number of programmes which were subject
to a follow-up audit was 44. During 2010 all those audits were closed. Consequently, pre-closure activities have been
started. In accordance with Article 38 (1) (f) of Council Regulation (EC) No
1260/1999 Member States have to submit a declaration drawn up by a person or
department having a function independent of the designated managing authority
summarizing the conclusions of the checks carried out during previous years and
assessing the validity of the application for payment of the final balance and
the legality and regularity of the transactions covered by the final
certificate of expenditure. By 31 December 2010, the examination of those
winding-up declarations submitted by Member States was finalized as regards 78
programmes, representing 51.3% of the total number of programmes.
5.4.
FIFG
As regards the 1994-1999 period, the three FIFG audits carried out in 2010 covered three operational
programmes. For Spain, the audit was focused on the Management and control
systems for specific measures and consequently, the results are not
extrapolated to the whole programme. For the Netherlands the audit was focused
on the effective implementation of the Action plan decided following an audit
in 2008. For Germany (Bremen) the audit was focused on closure and the work of
the Winding-up body. The audits tested key controls in place in the Management
and Control Systems, combined with sample checks of projects by desk review at
the level of the Managing authorities and on-the-spot visits to projects and
beneficiaries. These audits indicated that out of the programmes/systems
audited by DG MARE in 2010, one worked with some improvements needed, one
worked but needed significant improvement and part of one system did not work. In total, 50 projects were checked by desk
reviews and/or on the spot for a total eligible amount checked of €70.2 million
with FIFG participation of €15.3 million. From the project audits no ineligible
amounts were identified. It should be noted that no payments were made
in 2010 in respect of the programmes referred to above, where weaknesses were identified.
The identified weaknesses and the financial risks for the FIFG contribution
paid to the programmes are being addressed in the closure exercise. Since the beginning of the 2000-2006
programming period, DG MARE has carried out a total of 58 audit missions covering
all its mono-fund programmes (18 programmes representing an initial budget
contribution of €3,608.73 million – 87.4% of the total 2000-2006 budget) as
well as 18 multi-fund programmes representing a contribution of €374.58 million
- 9.2% of total 2000-2006 initial budget. In total, DG MARE systems audits have
covered programmes representing 96.6% of the total FIFG initial contribution
for 2000-2006. For the remaining programmes, the assurance is gained from other
Structural Funds DGs' audit work and/or national audits. The work on the closure process of programmes
started in 2010 with the submission, at the end of September 2010, of all the
closure documents for the 60 Operational Programmes except for the Greek
programme where an extension of one year had been granted. By the end of 2010, 17 Winding up declarations
had been analysed: 9 had been accepted, for 8 the analysis was interrupted and
additional information was requested and for the remaining 43 the analysis was
ongoing. From the 9 which have been accepted, the opinion for 8 was unqualified
and for one the opinion was qualified (and for which a financial correction
will be proposed).
5.5.
OLAF
In 2010, OLAF undertook 53 missions in the
Member States relating to measures co-financed by the Structural Funds. During
these missions on-the-spot checks[9] were carried out on 52
economic operators and 6 other types of missions were carried out to gather
information or to assist either national administrations or judicial
authorities. As was the case in previous years, typical problems identified by
OLAF in the course of 2010 included false declarations, false invoicing and
failure to abide by public procurement rules as well as specified instances of
conflict of interest in certain tendering procedures. In 2010, Members States communicated to the
Commission, in accordance with Regulation (EC) N° 1681/94[10]
as amended[11] and Regulation (EC) N°
1828/2006[12] as amended[13],
some 6,910[14] notifications of
irregularities involving € 1.546 billion affecting co-financed measures of the
1994-99, 2000-2006 and 2007-2013 programming periods. 8 notifications concern the 1994-99 programming
period with a financial impact of approximately € 3.2 million. 5,883
notifications concern the 2000-2006 programming period with a financial
impact of approximately € 1,04 billion. For the programming period 2007-2013,
1,019 irregularities were reported, involving an irregular amount of € 416
million. Member States have informed the Commission that
administrative and/or judicial procedures have been concluded at national level
for 4,072 cases and an amount of € 711 million has been recovered. In 2010, both the number of notifications and
the involved amounts increased by around 42% and 26% respectively, as compared
to the year before. The main explanation for this situation seems to be the
preparation of the closure of the programmes for the programming period
2000-2006 and the increase of irregularities in relation to the programming
period 2007-2013, which is now in its full implementation phase. The most frequent types of irregularities
reported is “non-eligible expenditure”, and secondary, “infringement of rules concerned
with public procurement” and “Missing or incomplete supporting documents”. The figures demonstrate an increased awareness
and a better reporting by the Member States in conformity with their Community
law obligations.
6.
Committees assisting the Commission
6.1.
COCOF
There were no COCOF related activities in 2010
concerning the implementation of the 2000 -2006 period.
6.2.
ESF Committee
The ESF Committee, pursuant to Article 163 of
the Treaty, assists the Commission in administrating the Eupen Social Fund. The
Committee is presided over by a Member of the Commission and is composed of
representatives of governments, trade unions and employers’ organisations. In
2010 there were three Plenary Sessions and six Technical Working Group mettins.
In 2010, the Committee was consulted on a
number of issues, including on ESF support for social partners, Budget Review
and 5th Cohesion Report as well as the Future of the ESF. . The ESF Committee
also discussed further the Europe 2020 Strategy, the flagship initiatives
"Agenda for New Skils and Jobs" and "Youth on the move"..
The adhoc group set up by the Committee in 2009 to reflect on the future of the
ESF for the next programming period (2014-2020) continued its work and the Committee
drafted an Opinion on the future of the ESF in the context of the 5th Cohesion
Report and Budget Review.. The ESF Committee Technical Working Group (TWG)
continued discussing, among other issues, the simplification of the General
Regulation, the ESF Regulation and the implementation of the simplified cost
options (flat rates, standard scales of unit costs, lump sums). The Commission
followed up on the new PROGRESS microfinance facility aiming at providing for
microcredit to small businesses and to people who have lost their jobs and want
to start their own small businesses. The Commission presented also the
assessment of the use of EU funds for Roma integration. The ESF TWG pursued its
programme of mutual learning concerning financial engineering, ESF support to
young people, ESF and public tendering, quality of deliverables as well as ESF
and administrative capacity reinforcement. .The ESF TWG concentrated also
during the 2010 meetings on the future of the Cohesion Policy with the 5th
Cohesion Report and Budget review as well as on Europe2020.
6.3.
Committee on Agricultural Structures and Rural
Development (STAR)
The STAR Committee met six
times in 2010 and gave one favourable opinion on the two following decisions: Draft DECISION of the Commission exempting certain cases of irregularity arising from operations co-financed by
the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund for the 2000-2006 programming period
from the special reporting requirements laid down by Article 5(2) of Regulation
(EC) No 1681/94 and by Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/94, and the Draft DECISION of the Commission concerning
the financial consequences for the Union budget exempting certain cases of
irregularity arising from operations co-financed by the Structural Funds and
the Cohesion Fund for the 2000-2006 programming period from the special
reporting requirements laid down by Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1681/94
and by Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/94.
6.4.
Committee on Structures for Fisheries and
Aquaculture (CSFA)
The Committee on Structures for Fisheries and
Aquaculture (CSFA) met twice in 2010. Main points discussed at the meetings
include ex-post evaluation and the closure of the FIFG. Part 2: Analysis by Member State
1.
Belgium
2000-2006 programming period
1.1.
Objectives 1 and 2
For the single Belgian programme (Hainaut)
under Objective 1, an extension of the eligibility period by six months until
June 2009 was granted by the Commission. All 7 Belgian Objective 2 programmes also asked
for a six-month extension of the eligibility period until June 2009, which was
granted by the Commission. Total appropriation for the Belgian ERDF
programmes was EUR 416.3 million. Total appropriation for the Belgian ESF
programmes was EUR 248.7 million. Due to the sixth-month extension of the
eligibility period, in early 2010 all regions kept on working with the
objective of zero losses at closure and the Commission organised technical
meetings in some regions with the objective of fully explaining closure rules.
In late September, all closure documents were transmitted by the three Belgian
authorities and closure procedures started immediately. Following assessment of
the final reports, complementary information has been asked to the managing
authorities. Observations have been made on each final report and responses are
expected before the end of spring. The analysis of all
winding up declarations was interrupted in view of obtaining additional
information or the results of additional audit work. The commitment rate for the ERDF and ESF was
100% for both Objective 1 and Objective 2 regions. The average payments rate
for the ERDF was 94,80% for Objective 1 and Objective 2 regions, or a total of
EUR 393,7 million bringing the balance between the total ERDF committed and the
total ERDF paid to EUR 22.5 million. The EAGGF-Guidance contribution to the
Objective 1 programme (a commitment of some EUR 41.8 million) achieved a final
payment rate of 96.70%. A pre-closure report for the EAGGF Guidance contribution
was sent in March 2011. The average payments rate for the ESF was 95,00
% for Objective 1 and 93,17 % for Objective 2 regions of the total ESF
appropriation.
1.2.
Objective 3
There are five ESF-only operational programmes
covering respectively Flanders, Belgium fédérale, French-speaking Wallonia,
German-speaking Wallonia and Bruxelles Capitale) totalling appropriations of
EUR 796.4 million. An absorption rate of 94.9 % was achieved, representing
EUR 755.8 million. For the Federal Single Programming Document
(SPD), the total ESF budget amounts to EUR 70.1 million. Payments at the end of
2010 amount to EUR 65.3 million (93.1 % of the total ESF appropriation).
The Flemish programme has a total ESF budget of EUR 392.5 million.
The entire budget was allocated to projects. Payments at the end of 2010
amounted to EUR 372.9 million. The Wallonia-French Community programme has a
total ESF budget of EUR 297.9 million (95% of the total ESF appropriation).
Total payments at the end of 2010 amounted to EUR 283 million (95.0 % of
the total budget). The ESF budget for the Brussels region amounts to EUR 24.7
million, 95.0 % of which was paid at the end of 2010. For the four above-mentioned programmes,
closure documents were received end of September and additional information has
been asked to the respective managing authorities and Winding up Bodies. The German-speaking Community has a separate
Objective 3 programme, with a total ESF budget of EUR 11.2 million.. The
implementation of this programme was finalised at the end of 2006. . Closure
documents were received in due time end March and programme was fully closed in
November 2011 with a payment of 100% of the total ESF appropriation.
1.3.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
The total FIFG allocation to the fisheries
programme is EUR 21.3 million. A last payment claim of EUR 3.6 million was sent
to the Commission. Over the whole programming period the Commission paid EUR
19.6 million, with the total reimbursement rate reaching 91.9 %. The closure documents were received on 20 April
2010. The assessment of the documents is ongoing.
1.4.
Community Initiatives
1.4.1.
Equal
The ESF appropriation for the two EQUAL
programmes in Belgium — one for the French and German-speaking community, and
one for the Dutch-speaking Community — amounts to EUR 68.2 million. The
programme covering the French-German speaking community proceeded without any
major difficulty in 2010. In financial terms, the rate of execution of the ESF
part of the programme at the end of 2010 was 95 %. The rate of execution
of the Dutch-speaking EQUAL programme was 83.4 % at the end of 2010. The
two EQUAL programmes supported around 125 projects, mainly in fields such
as employability, adaptability, life-long learning and social economy. Closure
documents were received end of September and additional information has been
asked to the respective managing authorities and Winding up Bodies.
1.4.2.
Leader
Belgium has two
Leader+ programmes: one for Flanders, involving total public expenditure of EUR
7.9 million and one for Wallonia, involving total public expenditure of EUR
20.7 million. For both programmes, the allocated funds have been fully
committed. Total financial execution came to EUR 13.2 million, i.e. 92.7 %
of total EAGGF-Guidance expenditure earmarked for the period 2000-2006. For the Flemish
programme, closure documents were transmitted before end March 2010 and the
final payment was made in February 2011. For the Walloon programme, due to the sixth-month
extension of the eligibility period, closure documents were transmitted before
the end September 2010 and their analysis was finalized in April 2011.
1.4.3.
Urban
The three URBAN II programmes in Belgium have an
appropriation of EUR 21.4 million and relate to the cities of
Antwerp, Sambreville and Brussels. Each programme originally received EUR 7.2
million from ERDF, but due to the ‘n+2’ rule the contribution was reduced to
EUR 7.1 million for Antwerp and to EUR 7.1 million for Brussels.
Total expenditure for all URBAN programmes was EUR 20.3 million, or 95.0 %
absorption rate, leaving a balance to between committed and paid appropriations
of EUR 44.9 million. Due to the sixth-month extension of the
eligibility period, for all URBAN II programmes, closure documents have been
transmitted before end September and closure procedures started immediately.
Following assessment of the final reports, complementary information has been
asked to the managing authorities. Observations were made on each final report
and responses are expected before the end of spring.
The analysis of the winding up declarations for all Belgian Urban programmes
was interrupted in view of obtaining additional information or the results of
additional audit work.
2.
Cyprus
2.1.
Objective 2
One Objective 2 Single Programming Document
(SPD) was co-financed by the ERDF amounting to some EUR 28 million Community
contribution. The payments made by the ERDF (including the
advance) amount to approximately EUR 26.6 million (absorption rate 95%), which
results to a RAL of some EUR 1.4 million of Community Contribution. During the
year 2010 no payment was executed as the 95% ceiling for payments was already reached
in 2009. Following the 6-month extension of the final
eligibility date to 30 June 2009 in the framework of the financial crisis, the
closure documents were submitted on 29 September 2010 which is within the
15-month deadline of 30 September 2010. The assessments of these documents have
been completed resulting to the acceptance of the documents. The final payment procedure was completed end
March 2011. Taking into consideration, that the final date
of eligibility of expenditure was set on 30 June 2009, no monitoring committee
took place and no annual implementation report had to be submitted. However,
for the utmost preparation of the closure documents, Unit I3 provided during
the year 2010 assistance to the Cypriot services.
2.2.
Objective 3
Following the 6-month extension of the
eligibility period of the Single Programming Document for Objective 3 (up to 30
June 2009), the closure documents were submitted on 28 September 2010 and
procedures for closure started immediately. Following the assessment of all
closure documents, it was concluded that the final payment application as sent
by the Cypriot authorities concerned an amount that was higher than the amount
to be paid because it included the clearing amount. As this is a calculation
error, it will not be included in the final payment request. With regard to
irregularities, there are no pending issues. The Final Report was accepted in December 2010,
and the closure procedure is currently nearing its completion. The final
payment is expected for July 2011. All payments made by the ESF (including the
advance and final payments) have reached the committed amount of EUR 21,945,197
million (absorption rate of 100%). Considering that the final date of eligibility
of expenditure was set for 30 June 2009, no Monitoring Committee meeting took
place in the course of 2010 and no annual implementation report was submitted
for 2010. However, the issue of closure remained on the agenda of the annual
review meeting and of technical meetings with the Cypriot authorities.
2.3.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
The Fisheries Operational Programme for Cyprus (A
Single Programming Document), adopted by the Commission in 2004, arrived
at the and of its implementation. Payments from the Commission to the Member
State had reached the level of 95.0 % of the planned FIFG contribution. Taking into consideration that the final date
of eligibility of expenditures was set on 30 June 2009, no monitoring committee
took place and no annual implementation report had to be submitted. Following the 6-month extension of the final
eligibility date to 30 June 2009 in the framework of the financial crisis, the
closure documents were submitted on 30 september 2010 which is within the
15-month deadline. The assessment of these documents is still on going. The
Commission's services, in close cooperation with the Cypriot relevant
authorities, estimate to be able to complete the closure before the end of
2011.
2.4.
Community Initiatives
2.4.1.
Equal
Following the 6-month extension of the
eligibility periodof the Community Initiative Programme EQUAL for Cyprus, the closure
documents were submitted on 28 September 2010 and procedures for closure
started immediately. Following the assessment of all closure documents, it was
concluded that the final payment application as sent by the Cypriot Authorities
concerned an amount that was higher than the amount to be paid because it
included the clearing amount. As this is a calculation error, it will not be
included in the final payment request. With regard to irregularities, there are
no pending issues (OLAF). The Final Report was accepted in December 2010,
and the closure procedure is currently nearing its completion. The final
payment is expected for July 2011. All ESF payments (including the advance and the
final payments) will reach the amount of EUR 1,807,393 million (absorption rate
of 99.92%). Considering that the final date of eligibility
of expenditure was set for 30 June 2009, no Monitoring Committee meeting took
place in the course of 2010 and no annual implementation report was submitted
for 2010. However, the issue of closure remained on the agenda of the annual
review meeting and of technical meetings with the Cypriot authorities.
3.
Czech Republic
2000-2006 programming period During 2010, the activities of all managing authorities
concentrated on the finalisation of the programme closure. For most operational
programmes, the budget realised on the ground exceeded 100% (due to
overbooking) already in 2009. The payment rate (paid out/decided by the
Commission) corresponds to 95% of the total 2004-2006 budget. The final implementation reports together with
final payment claims and winding-up declarations were submitted for each
operational programme in due time. All of them were deemed admissible. The
closure procedure was then started
3.1.
Objective 1
The Community Support Framework for the
period 2004-2006 covers a total budget of EUR 1 954
million, of which EUR 1 454 million is contributed by the Structural Funds
(63% ERDF, 25% ESF, 11.5% EAGGF and 0.5% FIFG). Five Operational Programmes are
implemented under the CSF. The CSF Managing Authority, at the Ministry for
Regional Development, is responsible for the effectiveness, correct management
and delivery of the support provided by the Structural Funds in the Czech
Republic. No monitoring committee took place in 2010.
Major activities of the Managing Authority focused on assistance to individual
operational programmes for the closure exercise. The Joint Regional Operational Programme
(JROP) is the largest Czech programme with a share
of 31.2 % (EUR 454 million) of the total Objective 1 allocation (28 % ERDF and
3.2 % ESF). In 2010 no monitoring committee was held, the managing authority
focused on finalisation of the programme closure. No payment claim was executed
in 2010 since already in 2008 the ceiling of 95% was reached. All closure
documents were submitted to the Commission in due time by the end of September
2010 with overbooking of the programme. The JROP is the Czech OP with the
highest number of irregularities which is partially consequence of a rather
complex implementation structure. The most successful measures in terms of
absorption were projects of regional transport infrastructure, urban
regeneration and tourism The Human Resource Development Operational
Programme accounts for a share of 21.2 % (EUR 318.8 million ESF
contribution) of the total Objective 1 allocation. No monitoring committee took
place in 2010. One payment claim was executed in 2010 after which the ceiling
of 95% was reached. All closure documents were submitted to the Commission in
due time by the end of September 2010. The final report is acceptable except
the table of irregularities where some further clarifications are required The Operational Programme Industry and
Enterprise is the third largest programme with
17.9% (only ERDF) of the total Objective 1 allocation. No monitoring committee
took place in 2010 as the managing authority concentrated on the finalisation
of the programme closure. No payment claim was executed in 2010 since the
ceiling of 95% was reached already in 2008. All closure documents were
submitted to the Commission in due time. During the whole programming period,
the most popular measures remained schemes supporting small and medium-sized
enterprises, innovation schemes and two loan schemes aimed at starting
entrepreneurs and firms in the initial development stage. The support schemes targeting
energy saving and renewable sources of energy had been lagging behind at the
beginning but caught up in the second part of the programming period. The Operational Programme Infrastructure
(OPI) is the fourth largest OP, with almost 16.9 %
(only ERDF) of the Objective 1 budget allocation. One by mail voting of the
monitoring committee was organized for this programme in 2010. The preparation
for closure took place in 2009. The closure documents were approved by the
monitoring committee on 3 February 2010 during a mail vote. The closure
documents were all submitted on 7 October 2010. This programme fully absorbed
the allocated funds. By the end of the eligibility period, the absorption rate
on the ground reached 115.0 %. The most successful interventions in terms of
absorption and the most popular were transport axes 1 and 2. Axis 1 was for
transport infrastructure projects, whereas axis 2 focused on reducing the
negative impact of transport on the environment. The Operational Programme Rural
Development and Multifunctional Agriculture accounts for a share of 11.5 %
of the total Objective 1 allocation, with a contribution from the EAGGF Guidance
section of EUR 170 million. The main intervention areas were investments in
agricultural holdings and the support for promoting adaptation and development
of rural areas. In 2010, no Monitoring Committee was held and no amount was
paid out by the Commission as 95.0 % of the total programmed amount had
already been paid in July 2008. All closure documents were submitted to the
Commission in due time, by the end of March 2010. Fisheries The implementation of the FIFG in the Czech
Republic finished in 2007 using up the allocations committed up to almost 92.0 %,
with the 2006 allocation reallocated in favour of the EAGGF measures under the
two-fund OP. The last interim payment in 2008 reached the 95.0 % payment
limit during the implementation period. Closure can proceed as this programme
was not extended, with the closure documents for FIFG received in April 2010.
3.2.
Objective 2
The Single Programming Document Objective 2
Prague (SPD2 Prague) receives support of EUR 71.3
million from the Structural Funds. In 2010 no monitoring committee was
organised, the managing authority focused on finalisation of the programme
closure. No payment claim was executed in 2010 since the ceiling of 95% was
reached already in 2009. All closure documents were submitted to the Commission
in due time by the end of September 2010 with slight overbooking of the
programme. The most successful measures in terms of absorption were projects of
regeneration of damaged and unsuitably used area, public infrastructure
improving the quality of life mainly in housing estates and projects improving
the quality of partnership between the public and private sectors, non-profit
sector, science and research
3.3.
Objective 3
The Single Programming Document Prague
Objective 3 receives support of EUR 58.8 million from the
Structural Funds. No monitoring committee took place in 2010 and no payment
claim was executed since already in 2009 the ceiling of 95% was reached. All
closure documents were submitted to the Commission in due time by the end of
September 2010. The final report is acceptable except the table of
irregularities where some further clarifications are required.
3.4.
Community Initiatives
The Community initiative EQUAL has an ESF
allocation of EUR 32.1 million from the Structural Funds (ESF only). No monitoring
committee took place in 2010 and no payment claim was executed since already in
2008 the ceiling of 95% was reached. All closure documents were submitted to
the Commission in due time by the end of September 2010. The final report is
acceptable except the table of irregularities where some further clarifications
are required.
4.
Germany
2000-2006 programming period A total number of 22 programmes submitted their
closure documents in 2010 to the Commission. At year end, 21 of these closure
files are under instruction. The national objective 1 transport programme was
closed in December 2010. The final date for eligibility of expenditure of
Structural Funds interventions, normally set at 31 December 2008, was extended
at Germany’s request to 30 June 2009. This was confirmed by Commission decision
of February 2009. In addition, for the three Federal ESF programmes the final
date for the eligibility of expenditure was extended to 30 April 2009. This
extension gave the regions concerned the possibility of funding projects for an
additional six months, which was intended to mitigate possible impacts of the
unprecedented economic and financial crisis on programme execution. As a result of the exercise, the Commission
expects a positive effect on the overall quality of programme execution, in
physical and financial terms, as measured by key indicators such as jobs
created and investment volume co-financed. As for financial execution, the
overall majority of German programmes were ‘on schedule’. This means that 95.0 %
of their total ERDF contributions, that is the maximum amount of payment which
can be claimed prior to closure, have been paid by the Commission, whereas
three programmes had their contribution limited below the 95.0% threshold
because of open audit issues. For these programmes, however, the expenditure
required for receiving the full ERDF contribution was in most cases declared at
closure. For the ESF contributions, 94.9 % have already been paid out
4.1.
Objective 1
Overall, financial absorption in the German
Objective 1 regions was very satisfactory. For all but one programme, total
payments attained the 95.0 % payment limit for total ERDF and ESF commitments
for the 2000-2006 programming period according to Article 32(4) of Regulation
No 1260/1999. For several reasons the ERDF Objective 1
programme for Berlin did not fully meet the 95.0 % payment limit for the
ERDF. Regarding the final payment claim further information on irregularities
is required. Additionally the European Court of Auditors report on financial
engineering instrument contains findings which may affect the final payment. The overall physical and financial
implementation in the German Objective 1 regions was good and, in general,
the core targets as set in the programmes can be expected to have been globally
attained The payments of the ESF share of the Objective
1 programmes reached the 95.0 % payment limit (including advance
payments). A final absorption rate of about 98.0 % is to be expected. The
closure documents were received in due time. Since the beginning of the period, more than
2.7 million people have participated in ESF measures in Objective 1 regions.
More than 40.0 % were young people (17-24 years) and around 10.0 %
were start-ups. Within the different priorities around 40.0 % were spent
for ‘Active and preventive Labour Market Policy’, 21.0 % for ‘Society
without Exclusion’, 8.0 % for ‘Vocational Training, Systems and
Infrastructure’, 20.0 % for ‘Adaptability and Entrepreneurship’, 10.0 %
for ‘Equal Opportunities’ and around 1.0 % for ‘Local Social Capital’. Six German regions benefit from the EAGGF
Guidance through Objective 1 programmes. All regional operational programmes
have reached the maximum level of 95% of the total Community contribution for
the period 2000-2006, amounting to total payments of EUR 3,246.834 million. Two of these programmes were closed and paid up
in 2010: Berlin, with a final payment amounting to EUR 314 210.50 and
Saxony-Anhalt, with a final payment amounting to EUR 37 825 582.36, i.e. a
total payment from the EAGGF-Guidance of EUR 38 139 792.86. Amounts of EUR 51 739.50
(in respect of Berlin) and EUR 381 197.64 (in respect of Saxony-Anhalt) were decommitted
in 2010. The FIFG Programme for Germany under Objective
1 required two decommitments for a total amount of EUR 12,934,943
for the years 2002 and 2003. By the end of 2010, commitments amounted to
EUR 91.5 million and payments had reached EUR 86.9 million, representing a
payment rate of 95.0 %. During the program 439 projects were implemented.
Nearly half of the FIFG funding was invested in measure 33 (Fishing port
facilities). The closure documentation was submitted on 17 March 2010. Their
analysis is ongoing.
4.2.
Objective 2
At the end of 2010, financial absorption of
ERDF assistance in German Objective 2 regions was satisfactory overall and
totalled more than 94.0 %, marginally less than in Objective 1 regions.
Almost all regions met the target of 95.0 %, but two programmes
(Baden-Württemberg and Saarland) had not been able to absorb 95.0 % of
total commitments by the end of 2010. These are among the smallest programmes
in Germany, so their impact on the overall financial performance in Objective 2
is however low. The evaluation of the final reports has been conducted with
involved DGs working with the structural funds. Overall, the outlook for
programme implementation is positive since no fundamental problems have been
noticed in 2010 and the regions will generally meet the targets set in the
programmes. As for Saarland a payment interruption and a
formal suspension of payments were made as Commission audits identified
significant deficiencies in the areas of systems' audits and checks on
operations. The final evaluation of the results of systems and project
audits is not yet available. In Baden-Württemberg another audit of the
Commission prevented ERDF payments to reach the 95% limit. The follow-up will
be finalized in the preparation of the final payment. For the ESF both financial absorption and
programme implementation were satisfactory as well, with the exception of one
Objective 2 programme. The closure documents were received in due time.
4.3.
Objective 3
The Objective 3 programme is the largest in
Germany, covering ESF support for the West German Länder and Berlin. It is
partly managed at Federal level (Bund) and partly by the Länder. With the
implementation of Labour Market reforms in Germany, an increasing share of the
programme was shifted to the Länder. Unlike most German programmes, the Federal
Objective 3 programme did not apply for eligibility of expenditure to be
extended until 30 June 2009, as an extension until 30 April 2009 was already
agreed upon in 2008. A modification of the programme complement was also made
so that the programme could be fine-tuned before closure. All projects were
closed by the end of 2008. All closure documents were received in due time
4.4.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
By the end of 2010, commitments amounted to
EUR 62.9 million and payments had reached EUR 45.7 million, representing a
payment rate of 72.6 %. Dicommitments took place in the years 2001, 2002,
2003, 2004 2005 for a total sum of EUR 50,557,670. During the program 1.998
projects were implemented. The largest part of investments occurred with 55%
FIFG contribution in the measure 3.4 (processing and marketing), followed by
measure 3.2 (Developing aquaculture). The closure documentation was submitted
on 17 March 2010. Their analysis is ongoing.
4.5.
Community Initiatives
4.5.1.
Equal
The development partnerships’ activities
already came to an end in 2008. In 2009, the focus was on verifying expenditure
declarations and preparing for closure. The final closure documents were
submitted in due time . The total consumption rate is expected to be around
94.1 % at project level, excluding technical assistance, and 90.8 %
including technical assistance.
4.5.2.
Leader
The total consumption of EAGGF resources in all
14 German Leader+ programmes (13 regional programmes and a national network
programme) has reached the maximum level of 95%. In 2010 five of these programmes were closed
and final payments or recoveries made. Payments were made for the following
regional programmes: Schleswig-Holstein (EUR 174 762.38), Saxony (EUR 1 103 646.00),
Saarland (EUR 12 836.24) and Baden-Württemberg (EUR 1 453 451.00), i.e. a total
from the EAGGF of EUR 2 744 692.62. A recovery was made for the German National
Network programme by issuing a debit note amounting to EUR -49 232.64. Decommitments were made in 2010 for the Leader+
programmes of Saxony-Anhalt (EUR 389 072.25), Schleswig-Holstein (EUR 444 936.84),
Saarland (EUR 69 744.76) and for the German National Network for the amount of
EUR 75 000.
4.5.3.
Urban
There were twelve URBAN II programmes in
Germany with a total ERDF contribution of EUR 149.6 million (Berlin,
Bremerhaven, Dessau, Dortmund, Gera, Kassel, Kiel, Leipzig, Luckenwalde,
Mannheim/Ludwigshafen, Neubrandenburg and Saarbrücken). The six programmes in
the new Länder received about EUR 15 million each. The six
programmes in the Western part of Germany each received an ERDF contribution of
about EUR 10 million. The total eligible cost of the twelve programmes is EUR
276.8 million. For nine programmes, the managing authority is at the level of
the ‘Bundesland’ in which they are located. In the case of three cities,
the managing authority has been transferred from the Land to the city during
the programming period. All German and Austrian URBAN II cities met
regularly as part of the German/Austrian URBAN II Network. In 2010, three
Network meetings took place in Bremen, Berlin-Neukölln and Graz. The implementation of the German URBAN II
programmes was very satisfactory, both in terms of implementation and of
management. The main focus was on improving the economic performance of
distressed urban areas. Taking an applied integrated approach towards
sustainable urban development, the economic measures taken were successfully
combined with social, environmental and cultural activities. In addition, new
forms of governance and the active involvement of citizens in the
implementation of the programmes helped to meet the sometimes ambitious
objectives of the programmes. Programme eligibility for nine programmes lasted
until the end of 2008; it was prolonged until June 2009 for three programmes.
In 2010 six programmes were closed and final payments made. Good progress was made
on closure of the remaining six which will be completed in 2011.
4.6.
Closure of the 1994-1999 programming period
4.6.1.
ERDF
For the programming period 1994-1999, DG REGIO
is still following up together with OLAF the financial consequences of
irregularities communicated by Germany. Commission decisions to charge partial
amounts to the Community budget or recovery orders have been issued in 2010.
4.6.2.
ESF
The Commission continued the closures of the
period 1994-99. Out of a total 48 mainstream Operational programmes 2 further German
programmes were fully closed in 2010. 413.780 € were paid out and 8.357.438 €
were decommited. The payments/decommitments included also amounts concerned
after an Art. 5.2 decision on the ESF contribution to unrecoverable amounts.
Payments for an amount of 679.540,90€ and decommitments for an amount of
125.371,84€ have not yet been totally executed in 2010. Two Art. 5.2 procedures for the programming
period 1994-1999 were launched in 2010. Five decisions (all Art. 5.2) about the
contribution of the ESF budget to unrecoverable amounts were taken..
4.6.3.
EAGGF
The last German programmes for the programming
period 1994-1999 were closed in 2006.
5.
Denmark
2000-2006 programming period
5.1.
Objective 2
For the programming period 2000-2006, there was
one Objective 2 Programme for Denmark. The funding for the programme initially
totalled EUR 617 million, of which EUR 192.9 million was from the
Structural Funds (EUR 29 million was for phasing-out regions), EUR 217 million
from the national public sector (an increase of EUR 9 million
compared to the initial allocation) and EUR 194 million from the private sector
(a decrease of EUR 30 million). The programme aimed to create the conditions
for self-sustained growth in the regions of Denmark facing structural problems.
It combined actions under the ERDF (71 %) and the ESF (29 %). The eligible areas consisted of five
geographical sub-regions: Bornholm (Objective 2), Lolland, Falster and Møn
(Objective 2), Nordjylland (Objective 2 and phasing-out), parts of the counties
of Viborg, Århus, Ringkøbing and Sønderjylland (Objective 2 and phasing-out)
and Sydfyn and islands not covered by the above regions (Objective 2). There were no meetings in the Programme (PMC)
in 2010.
5.1.1.
ERDF
By the end of 2010, the Commission had paid out
EUR 133.5 million, equalling an absorption rate of close to 95% for the ERDF. The Member State submitted the closure
documents to the Commission in 2010. A final payment will be made as part of
the closure scheduled to take place in 2011.
5.1.2.
ESF
The final spending for the programming period
2000-2006 was EUR 108.4 million in total cost, financed by EUR 45.4 million in
ESF (total paid in 2009 included). The ESF spending equalled an absorption rate
of approximately 88.41 %. In the programming period, in total, the ESF
supported 828 projects under which 22 738 persons (46.5 % of them
women) participated in competence development. The ESF part of the programme helped to create
new education and training courses and bolstered cooperation between education
institutions in the regions. Furthermore, the ESF projects helped to make
company training planning more systematic and to develop new courses and new
ways of cooperation between education institutions and enterprises.
5.2.
Objective 3
For the programming period 2000-2006, there is
one Objective 3 programme for Denmark. Funding initially totalled EUR 757.9
million, with EUR 378.9 million from the ESF. After allocation of the
performance reserve, the Structural Fund contribution amounted to EUR 394.8
million, plus EUR 294.3 million from the national public sector (an increase of
EUR 9.5 million compared to the initial allocation) and EUR 100.9 million from
the private sector (an increase of EUR 6.7 million). EUR 14.9 million was
decommitted in 2007, thereby decreasing the Structural Fund contribution to EUR
379.9 million. The programme supports active labour market
measures, the labour market integration of vulnerable unemployed persons, the
development of employee competencies and entrepreneurship. The reporting for 2008 was included in the
final implementation report for the programme. The final spending for the
programming period 2000-2006 (with continuation to 2008) amounted to EUR 826.2
million in total cost, financed by EUR 351.7 million from ESF, EUR 321 million
in public and EUR 153.4 million in private contributions. The ESF spending
equalled an absorption rate of approximately 92.6 %. The ESF Objective 3 programme supported 4 111
projects with 154 889 participants, 48.2 % of them women. The
priorities absorbing the largest shares of funding were support for competence development
and support for entrepreneurship.
5.3.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
The total initial FIFG allocation, including
the reserve, to the country-wide Danish fisheries programme was EUR 213.3
million. The programme had a rather low level of implementation. There were
decommitments in 2004, 2005 and 2007 in application of the ‘n+2’ rule. In
total, the programme has so far been reduced by EUR 30.7 million. Out of EUR
182.6 million remaining, the financial execution has reached 90.4 % (EUR
165.1 million). Denmark submitted the closure documents in July 2010. The
closure procedure has reached an advanced phase of analysis. The Danish final
payment claim amounts to EUR 159.4 million for 3414 operations. The main
measures in the programme were scrapping of vessels, processing and marketing,
collective investments and innovative measures.
5.4.
Community Initiatives
5.4.1.
Equal
The Danish EQUAL programme supported 89
projects in total, with 11 088 participants (61.8 % of them women).
The final spending for the programming period 2000-2006 (with continuation to
2008) amounted to EUR 59.7 million in total cost, financed by EUR 28.7 million
in public, EUR 5.4 million in private contribution and EUR 24.6 million from
ESF, which means an absorption rate of 80.9 %. The two most active networks were Integration
of Immigrants and Refugees and Adaptability.
5.4.2.
Leader
Denmark has implemented the Leader+ initiative
through a single national programme. 12 local action groups have received
support, covering 29 per cent of the area and 11 per cent of the total
population of Denmark. At the closure of the programme in 2010
cumulative payments amounted to EUR 16.4 million, accounting for 94.7% of the
total planned EU budget for the programme (EUR 17.3 million). The total
cumulative eligible expenditure declared under the programme amounted to EUR
41.7 million.
5.4.3.
Urban
The Århus URBAN II programme is the only one in
Denmark. The ERDF will contribute a total of EUR 5.4 million to this programme,
for which the total eligible costs amount to EUR 12.1 million. The managing authority for the programme is the
Danish Enterprise and Construction Authority. There were no meetings of the
monitoring committee in 2010. The URBAN programme successfully contributes to
all three dimensions of the Lisbon Strategy. On the economic side, it has
helped to initiate and stimulate entrepreneurial culture, education and IT
development. For the social dimension, the programme contributes to employment
efforts, equality, social protection through citizen involvement, empowerment
and crime prevention. Its environmental contribution is exemplified by the
project — Hasle Bakkelandskab‘. The Commission has paid in total EUR 5.1 million
of the EUR 5.4 million committed. The Member State submitted the closure
documents to the Commission in 2010. A final payment will be made as part of
the closure scheduled to take place in 2011
5.5.
Closure of the period 1994-1999
All programmes were closed before the end of
2004.
6.
Greece
2000-2006 programming period
6.1.
Objective 1
In the 2000–2006 period the thirteen regions of
Greece were all under Objective 1. All regional and sectoral national OPs had
received either half-year extensions (within the frame-work of the European
Economic Recovery Package) or one-year extensions (due to the wildfires of 2007).
In 2010, the closure documents for 14 programmes (those with a half-year
extension) had been received within the deadline. Final payment claims (total
amount of EUR 221,106,448.32) were interrupted following the initial review of
the WUD by the auditors. Additional closure documents for the remaining five
programmes were submitted within the deadline in 2011. In terms of financial management of the
programmes in 2010, interim payment requests were processed on time and
according to regulatory deadlines. In total, 23 payment claims were processed
in 2010, out of which only 2 claims had a financial transaction amounting to
EUR 15,888,921. The remaining claims related to clearing of pre-financing
and/or withdrawal of projects without any financial transaction. In addition, in 2010, financial corrections
totalling EUR 14,107,356.77 were applied by the Greek Authorities to the
operational programmes, in conformity with the Commission Decision C (2005)1731
by which part of the Community assistance (ERDF) for Greece was cancelled. Taking into consideration that the final date
of eligibility of expenditures was set on 30 June 2009 or 31 December 2009, no
monitoring committee took place and no annual implementation report had to be
submitted. Co-financing by the ESF during the 2000-2006
programming period concerned 19 operational programmes under the CSF III. Of
these programmes, 3 had been adopted under the responsibility of the ESF
(operational programmes "Employment and Vocational Training",
"Education and Initial Vocational Training" and "Health"
and Welfare") and 16 under the responsibility of the ERDF (13 Regional
operational programmes, and the operational programmes
"Competitiveness", "Information Society" and "Technical
Assistance"). Due to the 2007 wildfires in Greece 2 ESF and 7
ERDF operational programmes received a one-year extension. On top of this,
these operational programmes received an additional half-year extension within
the framework of the European Economic Revocery Package, therefore final deadline
for submitting their closure documents was set on 31 March 2011. The half-year
extension within the framework of the European Economic Revocery Package was
accorded also to the rest (10) of the ESF co-financed operational programmes,
therefore the final deadline for submitting the closure documents for these
programmes was set on 30 September 2010. The ESF received in 2010, within the deadline,
the closure documents for the 10 programmes and in 2011, also within the
deadline, the closure documents for the 9 programmes. The closing process for the 10 programmes
received in 2010 (total amount of EUR 106,301,431.31), was interrupted
following the initial review of the winding-up declaration (WUD) by the
Auditors and additional information was requested from the Greek authorities.
The additional information was received on 05 April 2011 and the final report
and the analysis of the WUD was completed. No irregularities cases were found
for these 10 programmes, therefore OLAF's agreement is awaited in order to proceed
with the closure of these programmes. Closure is expected to be completed
within deadline. The closing documents for the 9 programmes
received in 2011 (total amount of EUR 132,281,268.30) are currently being
analysed by the responsible services. The payment ceiling of 95% has been reached for
all ESF co-financed programmes The national mono-fund EAGGF Guidance Section
programme for Greece was approved by the Commission on 6 April 2001. The
Community contribution to this programme was EUR 1 233 million for a total
cost of EUR 3 010 million. On 24 November 2004, the Commission
approved the decision for the mid-term revision of this programme, which
included an additional amount of EUR 0.25 million coming from the
programming and performance reserves. An additional modification of the
programme took place on 7 December 2006, without however having any impact on
total EU co-funding. The 13 regional multi-fund programmes approved
during the first half of 2001 and last amended on 7 December 2006 represent a
total EAGGF contribution of EUR 1 069 million. All programming
complements were adopted by the monitoring committees by written procedure. Due to the extensive fires that took place in
Greece in the summer of 2007 which affected — amongst other things — rural
infrastructures, forestry and private investments in rural areas, Greece
submitted to the Commission in autumn 2007 a request to extend to 31 December
2009 the date of eligibility of the national mono-fund EAGGF Guidance
programme, as well as of the four multi-fund regional operational programmes
for the affected areas of Attica, Continental Greece, Peloponnese and Western
Greece mentioned above. The extension of the final date of eligibility of
expenditure until 30 June 2009 was requested in December 2008 for the
remaining nine regional multi-fund operational programmes, due to the impact of
the 2008 financial crisis. In 2009 payments reached EUR 77 million.
Cumulative payments from the EAGGF Guidance Section since the start of the
2000-2006 programming period (EUR 2 422 million) account for
95.0 % of the planned budget. On 30/9/2010 the Closure documents for 9
Regional Operational Programmes and for the national Operational Programmes
were submitted by the Greek authorities to the Commission and are now under
treatment. Implementation of the FIFG Objective 1
‘Fisheries’ Operational Programme for Greece ended in in 2010. Payments from
the Commission to the Member State reached 95.0 % of the FIFG contribution
planned for this operational programme. Taking into consideration that the final date
of eligibility of expenditures was set on 31 December 2009, no monitoring
committee took place and no annual implementation report had to be submitted. Following the above mentionned extension of the
final eligibility date, the closure documents were submitted on January 2011
which is within the 15-month deadline. The assessment of these documents is
still on going. The Commission's services, in close cooperation with the Greek
relevant authorities, estimate to be able to complete the closure before the
end of 2011.
6.2.
Community Initiatives
6.2.1.
Equal
At the end of 2009 the rate of financial
execution of the ESF was 95.0 % of the total budget (EUR 100.6 million).
The extension of the eligibility period to 30 June 2009 allowed full absorption
of the ESF allocation while easing the closure process. All the closure documents have been transmitted
28 September 2010 and closure procedures started immediately. The analysis of
the final report and the WUD finally has been accepted and the final payment
claim (total amount EUR 5,296,691.35) will be paid by July 2011.
6.2.2.
Leader
There is only one Leader+ programme for Greece,
approved on 19 November 2001 with a total cost, following the 2004
indexation exercise, of EUR 368.7 million. Of this, EUR 186.1 million
comes from the EAGGF Guidance Section. The programme was last amended in
November 2006. There was also a request to extend the final date of
eligibility for Leader+ after the extensive fires affecting Greece in the
summer of 2007. For 2009, the payments amount to EUR 4.3 million. Cumulative
EAGGF payments from the start of the 2000-2006 programming period account for
95.0 % of the total EAGGF contribution to the programme. On 30/9/2010 the Closure documents for the
Leader+ programme were submitted by the Greek authorities to the Commission and
are now under treatment.
6.2.3.
Urban
As for the Community initiative URBAN II, the 3
programmes for Greece (Perama, Iraklio and Komotini) have all received a
half-year extension within the framework of the European Economic Recovery
Package. In 2010, closure documents for these 3 programmes had been received
within the deadline. Final payment claims (total amount of EUR 2,843,281,57)
were interrupted following the initial review of the WUD by the auditors. No
monitoring committee took place and no annual implementation report had to be
submitted. No interim payment claims were processed in 2010 for these
programmes
6.3.
Closure of the period 1994-1999
All programmes were closed before the end of
2008.
7.
Spain
2000-2006 programming period
7.1.
Objective 1
The average financial execution for Objective 1
remained positive. The current absorption rate, compared with the amount
programmed for 2000‑2006, is 94.6 % for ERDF, including the advance
payments. The ERDF amount executed has already reached EUR 23 998 million out
of the EUR 25 351 million committed for this Objective in Spain for the
period. The ESF amount executed (including advance
payments) reached EUR 8 453 million of the EUR 9 080
million (93.1 %) committed by the ESF for this objective in Spain for the
period 2000-2006. Concerning decommitment rules, no ‘n+2’ rule
was in place at the end of 2010 as any decommitment will take place at closure.
Following the findings of Commission audits, a financial correction amounting
to EUR 79 091 million was applied to intermediate body Directorate General for
Research, which covered both research infrastructures and projects. Any other
correction will be considered at the moment of the closure. In 2010 there were
no monitoring committees or annual meetings concerning 2009. Further to the extension of the eligibility
period, all closure documents (Final Report, Payment Claim and Winding-up
Declaration) were submitted on time for all ERDF Operational Programs and
Single Programming Documents. Final balance will paid after completion of
assessment procedures. EAGGF All twelve programmes reached the 95.0% payment
limit by the end of 2009. No further interim payment applications have been
sent by the Member State and no payments were made in 2010. The 36 closure documents were submitted on time
(30 September 2010). Checking of the documents started in the last quarter of
2010. EUR 6.9 million have been recovered for the
Castilla y León programme, following a financial correction Decision of
December 2009 (result of a Commission audit mission). Fisheries inside Objective 1 regions The total FIFG allocation to the fisheries
programme is EUR 1 571 million. By the final date of eligibility of
expenditure of 30 June 2009, close to 20.000 operations had been supported. The
final declared expenditure amounts to EUR 1 488 million and no payment claim
was sent as the Commision had already paid EUR 1.492 million. Accordingly, a
revenue forecast was created for the programme (circa 4M€). All the closure documents for the programme
were received by the deadline of 30 September 2010 and analysis of the final
implementation report, the winding-up declaration and the Infosys reports was
ongoing by the end of 2010. Progress on the infosys corrections has been slow
given the high number of individual operations to be checked on their eligibility
and correct implementation. Other closure-related work during the year focused
on verifying that the reporting obligations for some measures were respected
and that all ineligible expenditure related to audit findings had been properly
deducted from the final declared amounts (including the EUR 86 million linked
to a serious deficiency identified in a DG MARE ex-post audit).
7.2.
Objective 2
The average financial execution for Objective 2
is positive as well. For the ERDF, the current absorption rate, compared with
the amount programmed for 2000-2006, is 92.96% (including the advance payment)
and the amount executed has already reached EUR 2 373 million out of the EUR 2,554
million committed for this Objective in Spain for the period For the ESF, the financial absorption rate is
86.4 91,8 % corresponding to EUR 267.9 285 million out of a total
amount of EUR 310.3 million committed for the ESF in Spain under this
objective for the period 2000‑2006.
7.3.
Objective 3
The financial absorption rate for the ESF reached
94.5 %, which amounts to EUR 2 182 million out of a total amount
programmed for 2000-2006 for this objective in Spain of EUR 2 308 million.
7.4.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
The total FIFG allocation to the fisheries
programme is EUR 216.6 million. By the final date of eligibility of expenditure
of 30 June 2009, 5.853 operations had been supported. The final declared
expenditure amounts to EUR 201.9 million and no payment claim was sent as the
Commision had already paid EUR 205.7 million. Accordingly, a revenue forecast
was created for the programme (circa EUR 3.8 million). All the closure documents were received by the
deadline of 30 September 2010 and analysis of the final implementation report,
the winding-up declaration and the Infosys reports was ongoing by the end of
2010. Other closure-related work during the year focused on verifying that the
reporting obligations for some measures were respected and that all ineligible
expenditure related to audit findings had been properly deducted from the final
declared amounts. Morocco Specific Action (fisheries) For the Morocco specific action — the EU aid
package to compensate vessel owners and crews whose activities were dependant
until 1999 on the fishing agreement with Morocco (R[EC] 2561/2001) — the
Community granted EUR 186.3 million to Spain. The Community aid executed
amounts to EUR 163.7 million (achievement rate of 87.8 %). In 2010 a
reviewed final payment claim of EUR 5.49 million was received to account for a
series of corrections and deductions done. Although the specific Morocco action
ended in 2004, closure was still in progress in 2010 as some final
clarifications and documents had to be requested from the Spanish authorities before
the Commission could come up with the closure proposal which might bring about
financial corrections.
7.5.
Community Initiatives
7.5.1.
Equal
The EQUAL amount executed reached EUR 468
million of the EUR 511 million (91.5 %) committed under this
initiative in Spain for the period 2000-2006.
7.5.2.
Leader
All 54 closure documents were submitted on time
(31 March for 12 programmes, 30 September for the 6 others). Checking of the
documents was begun, requests for supplementary information were sent to the
Member State and corrections to the documents were delivered. For 5 programmes,
the pre-closure letter was prepared and 1 final payment was executed, after
agreement by the Member State, on the balance calculation mentioned in the
letter (LEADER+ Valenciana). The LEADER+ Aragón programme was affected by a
financial correction following a Commission audit mission (EUR 0.6 million
recovered).
7.5.3.
Urban
There are 10 Community Initiative Programmes in
Spain with an EU contribution of EUR 114.2 million, which represents 15 %
of the total URBAN II budget for the period 2000-2006. The Spanish URBAN II CI programmes are being
implemented steadily according to the original programming — the absorption
rate at the end of 2010 was 89.53%. The managing authority for the programmes is
the Ministry of Finance. Management and implementation has been delegated to the
local authorities. No ‘n+2’ rule was in place at the end of 2010,
as any decommitment will take place at closure. Overall comments for the 2000-2006 period The focus on a single area has produced a very
targeted approach. The strong local partnership and presence of several
agencies in the decision-making procedure has ensured the smooth running and
sustainability of URBAN projects.
7.6.
Closure of the 1994-1999 programming period
At the end of 2010, the RAL was already zero,
as the last open document SPD 5b País Vasco (RAL: EUR 0.1 million) had been
closed in 2009. As for the ESF, the remaining outstanding
commitments of EUR 5.1 million were awaiting a ruling by the Spanish courts.
This concerns the three programmes of INEM Objective 3, Catalonia Objective 2 and
Catalonia Objective 3, which were suspended by decisions under Article 24 of
Regulation (EC) No 4253/88. A financial correction Decision of February
2010 enabled de-commitment of the last four outstanding amounts relating to
1994-1999 programmes (their final payments or recoveries were made in 2007 or
before). In the arbitration exercise on cases reported
by the Member State to OLAF (in application of Commission Regulation (EC) No
1681/94), three cases still need to be given a final solution.
8.
Estonia
2000-2006 programming period
8.1.
Objective 1
Estonia is implementing a Single Programming
Document with an ERDF participation of EUR 232.8 million and ESF participation
of EUR 69.3 million out of EUR 371.4 million in total. Payments from the
Commission already reached the 95.0 % payment limit in 2008. The
eligibility end date of the programme was extended to 30 June 2009 in
response to the crisis. The SPD aimed for ‘fast socially and regionally
balanced sustainable economic development’ mainly by shifting into higher
value-added production. The SPD strategy is based on four priorities (excluding
technical assistance): (i) Human Resource Development, (ii) Enterprise
Competitiveness, (iii) Agriculture, Fisheries and Rural Development and (iv)
Infrastructure and Local Development. Final Monitoring Committee meeting for
approving the final report was held in September 2010. All closure documents
were submitted on time. Additional information was requested regarding the
final report and the winding-up declaration. According to the report, the levels of
indicators set to measure the achievements were largely met and exceeded. Where
the targeted level of indicator was not met, additional explanations have been
provided. 3,281 ERDF projects were finished within the
programme. The programme results include: 1,650
enterprises received SF support, 7,850 gross jobs were created, (4040 of these
can be considered sustained net jobs 12 months after project), 835 new
enterprises were created, 95 km of roads were built or rehabilitated, 12,300
student places in vocational education were upgraded and 2 major hospitals were
modernized. 266 irregularities have been reported to AFCOS
in relation to the programme, 193 irregularities were included below the
reporting ceiling. In total 459 irregularities were identified. One OLAF
investigation was carried out and it concluded that for three projects
implemented by the same beneficiary, there were certain irregularities related
to the public procurement rules. The cohesion policy has facilitated the
transfer to a more knowledge-intensive economy and has provided the necessary
infrastructure for the economy. In addition, the programmes have had an effect
on softer issues such as: introduction of evaluation culture, audit quality
(evidenced also through the signing of the contract of confidence between the
Commission and the Estonian authorities), increased management and project
planning capacity, increased levels of administrative capacity at sub-national
level. According to the final report 99.34% of ERDF
resources have been used, 99.41 % of ESF, 99.1% of
EAGGF and 88.9% of FIFG. The FIFG share in the
Single Programming Document for Estonia represents 3.4% (i.e. EUR 12.5 million). The 95.0 % payment limit for
Commission reimbursement was reached in April 2008. As it is not possible to
continue any further reimbursement before the programme is closed, there were
no payments by the Commission in 2009 and 2010. During
the whole programming period 275 applications were approved; from that 248 were
successfully completed. Modernisation and renewal of the fishing fleet was the
most popular and had 65 projects approved. Other important measures were investments in aquaculture and fishing ports, and socio-economic
measures for fishermen. There have been no
de-commitments of the initial allocation and the programme implementation in
Estonia has not seen any major problems. The closure documents were submitted
by 30 September 2010. The assessment of the documents is in the final stage of
analysis. As the final absorption of FIFG remains below 95%, Estonia will have
to reimburse Commission approximately EUR 539 000. The total EAGGF allocation for Estonia amounts
to 56.798.282 €. By the end of the programming period 56.258.497 € was paid
out. Eligible expenditure was 56.189.598 €. The difference of 68.900 € is
irrecoverable expenditure which is expected to be shared by Estonia and the
Commission. In total 4028 EAGGF project applications were accepted and 3657
implemented. The last EAGGF interim payment of up to 95.0 % was made in
March 2008
8.2.
Community Initiatives
8.2.1.
Equal
The ESF contribution to the EQUAL programme
amounted to EUR 4.1 million. The final date of eligibility for this programme
was 31 December 2008. By the end of the eligibility period, 91.0 % of the
programme funds were spent.. .Closure documents were submitted in time by the
end of march 2010. The Final report demnostrates that the programme met its
objective, which was to develop innovative ideas for lowering unequal treatment
in the labour market. The programme was closed in the first quarter 2011.
8.2.2.
Leader
Estonia implemented the Leader approach through
the measure ‘Local initiative based development projects — LEADER’ within the
framework of the Estonian National Development Plan 2004–2006 (Single
Programming Document 2004‑2006). The measure was implemented by two options:
acquisition of skills (local development strategies were prepared) and
integrated rural area development strategy (the strategies were implemented). Local Action Groups (LAGs) applied for support
under the Leader measure at the end of 2006. By the beginning of 2007, 24 LAGs
were chosen. Most of the LAGs received support for preparing local development
strategies, three LAGs started to implement their existing strategies. Two more
LAGs were established and supported from the Rural Development Programme 2007-2013.
By 20010 LAGs covered approximately 99.5 % of the total rural area. As a support structure for the LAGs a Leader
Information Centre was established in June 2005. The Estonian National Rural
Network Unit within the Rural Economy Research Centre has been coordinating the
LAGs' activities: organising meetings and training courses; being responsible
for networking; managing websites and databases; disseminating information and
experience related to rural development. The implementation of Leader under the
Single Programming Document ended in summer 2008 and continues under the Rural
Development Programme 2007-2013.
9.
France
2000-2006 programming period 2000-2006 programming period
9.1.
Objective 1 and 2
Objective 1 covers the four French outermost
regions[15], Corsica and three districts of the
North/Pas de Calais region. Objective 2 concerns 21 of the 22 regions of
metropolitan France. There are four national programmes on technical
assistance and IT management in addition to the 27 regional programmes. Due to the sixth-month extension of the
eligibility period, in early 2010 all regions kept on working with the
objective of zero losses at closure and the Commission organised technical meetings
in some regions with the objective of fully explaining closure rules. In late
September, all closure documents were transmitted by the French authorities and
closure procedures started immediately. Following assessment of the final
reports, complementary information has been asked to the managing authorities.
The winding up documentation was considered acceptable for the whole of the
French programmes. The commitment rate for the ERDF was 100% for
both Objective 1 and Objective 2 regions. The average payments rates for the ERDF were
94.6% for Objective 1 regions and 95.1% for Objective 2 regions. For the EAGGF the rate was 95 %. At the end of 2010, 92.3 % (EUR 874.4
million) of the ESF programming amounts had been paid out under Objective 1 and
93.6 % (EUR 748.9 million) under Objective 2. At the end of 2010, the final execution of the
FIFG in the Objective 1 regions were satisfactory (la Réunion, Martinique,
Guyana and Corsica having reached the reimboursement ceiling of 95,00%), except
for Guadeloupe, where the level remained at 88,26%. The closure documents of the FIFG intervention
were received in due time (September 30th) and all the final reports
have been accepted, except for Martinique. The quality analyses of the final
reports have been launched as well as the Infosys and winding-up declarations
analyses. Results of the quality analysis of the final report and of the
Infosys report have been sent to La Réunion before the end of the year.
9.2.
Objective 3
The 2000-2006 ESF Objective 3 programme covers
metropolitan France and benefitted from a six-month extension of the
eligibility period over the first half of 2009. The extension was used to
maximise expenditure under the 2000-2006 programme and to prepare the
operational programme for closure. At the end of 2010, 94.1 % (EUR 4.6
million) of the programming amounts had been paid out by the Commission under
Objective 3. The 2010 annual meeting between the Commission
and the French managing authority (Délégation Générale à l’Emploi et à la
Formation Professionnelle) took place on a April and on 16 November 2010.
9.3.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
The total FIFG allocation to the fisheries
programme is EUR 243.8 million. The most important measures are operations by
members of the trade, scrapping, fishing port facilities, processing and
marketing. No changes in 2010, as the payment limit of 95.0 % was already
reached at the end of 2009. The closure documents of the FIFG intervention
were received in due time (September 30th). The final report was
admissible but its quality analysis as well as the Infosys analysis were not
finished at the end of 2010. The winding-up declaration analysis was launched.
9.4.
Community Initiatives
9.4.1.
Urban
The URBAN II programme in France consists of
nine programmes being carried out in the following cities/group of cities:
Bastia, Bordeaux/Cenon/Floirac, Clichy‑sous‑Bois/Montfermeuil, Grenoble,
Grigny/Viry-Chatillon, Le Havre, Le Mantois, Les Mureaux/Val-de-Seine,
Strasbourg. Four of the nine programmes (Clichy, Le Mantois, Grigny and Val-de-Seine)
are located in the Ile de France region, with an ERDF contribution of EUR 51
million. In total, nine programmes received an amount of EUR 294.6 million, of
which EUR 102.5 million was from the ERDF. For all URBAN II programmes, closure documents
have been transmitted before end September and closure procedures started
immediately. Two URBAN programmes (Le Havre and Strasbourg) did not ask for an
extension of the eligibility period and the programmes have been closed
definitely in 2010. For the seven other French Urban programmes, following assessment of the final reports, complementary information
has been asked to the managing authorities. The winding up documentation was
considered acceptable for the whole of the French Urban programmes. The commitment rate for the ERDF was 100% and
the average payments rate for the ERDF was 95.6%.
9.4.2.
Equal
Following several decommitments since 2001, the
total appropriation for EQUAL is now EUR 287.4 million. 94.9 % (EUR 273
million)of this budget had been paid out by the Commission at the end of 2010.
9.4.3.
Leader
The French National Programme on Community
Initiative Leader+ was adopted on 7 August 2001 (C(2001)2094), taking the
form of a global grant. The National Centre for Setting-up of Farming
Structures (CNASEA) was designated as the managing authority. The total Community contribution initially
amounting to EUR 272.8 million was finally fixed at EUR 259.9 million by
Commission Decision C(2007) 3542 of 17 July 2007. The implementation of this programme is carried
out by 140 Local Action Groups (LAGs), selected in 2002. Their action plans
were set up in 2003, after signing bilateral conventions with CNASEA. Global execution at the end of 2010 amounted to
EUR 246.9 million, which represents 95.0 % of the EAGGF Community
contribution to the programme.
9.5.
Closure of the 1994-1999 programming period
All EAGGF (Guidance) programmes are closed.
10.
Italy
2000-2006 programming period
10.1.
Objective 1
For the 2000-2006 programming period, in
Objective 1 regions, Italy has succeeded in committing the full amount
allocated. In terms of financial execution, all Objective 1 ERDF programmes
attained the 95% threshold thanks, also, to the extension of the eligibility
date up to 30 June 2009. All Programmes timely submitted their closure
documents. No Objectve 1 Programme was closed in 2010. In 2010, a single annual meeting between the
Commission and the National and Regional Authorities was held in Cagliari in
October for both Objectives 1 and 2 and for the 2000-2006 and 2007-2013
programming periods. For the 2000-2006 programming period, the agenda focused
primarily on closure procedures (Final Implementation Reports, practical
arrangements for the financial follow-up and the treatment of irregularities). Monitoring committee meetings for almost all
programmes took place once during the year in order to discuss and approve the
Final Implementation Reports and fine-tune closure proceedings, in relation in
particular to the treatment of irregularities. As regards the EAGGF Guidance Section, the payment
rate reached 93 %. For ESF the final certifications presented by the
different OPs lead to a maximum amount of possible payments equal to 97.5% of
the 2000-2006 overall budget. The actual amount will be determined on the basis
of the ongoging closure procedures. For FIFG the absorption rate was 88.3 %.
In the EAGGF Guidance section, three programmes
reached the 95.0 % payment limit (Calabria, Puglia and Molise). According
to the payment data at the end of 2009, the best performing EAGGF programmes are
the regional programmes of Calabria (95.0 %), Puglia and Molise (95.0 %);
in contrast, the poorest performing programme is Sardegna (89.5 %). As far as the FIFG is concerned, at the end of
2010, financial implementation of the national fisheries programme (PON) reached
92.7 % in terms of payments on total eligible expenditure. At the regional
level, the best performing programmes in terms of payments are Molise and
Calabria (which reached the 95.0 % payment limit) as well as Campania
(92.9 %). The programmes performing least well in financial terms
were the regional programmes Sicilia (81.3 %), Puglia (87.5 %) and more
severly Sardegna (68.0 %). As for ESF, according to the final
certification of expenditure, the maximum possible payments range from 94.03%
for the OP Campania to 100% of the OPs Ricerca, Molise, Sicilia, Basilicata,
and Scuola. In average the National OPs performed slightly better than regional
ones. In addition to that, the closure procedure will
take into account for the actual final payments the problems of some of the
regional OPs, in particular Sicily, Puglia and Calabria, mainly linked to the
high error rates detected during audits.
10.2.
Objective 2
In line with Objective 1 Regions, in Objective
2 regions too, Italy has succeeded in committing the full amount allocated.
Likewise, in terms of financial execution, all Objective 2 ERDF programmes but
one attained the 95 % threshold thanks, also, in this case too, to the
extension of the eligibility date up to 30 June 2009 with the only exception of
Region Valle D'Aosta which had not asked for the extension. The only Region
where financial execution did not reach the 95% theshold is Abruzzo which, due
to the earthquake which hit the Region in April 2009, only reached 91.2 % of
total payments despite the extension of the final eligibility date up to 30
June 2010 granted to the Region by decision of 11 May 2009. All Programmes submitted their closure
documents as scheduled by 30 September 2010 with the exceptions of Abruzzo
which, following the extension of its final eligibility date up to 30 June
2010, will need to submit its closure documents by 30 September 2011. As already indicated for Objective 1, in 2010,
a single annual meeting was held in Cagliari in October for both Objectives 1
and 2 regions and for the 2000-2006 and 2007-2013 programming periods. For the
2000-2006 programming periods, the agenda focused on the same items for both
objectives. Monitoring committee meetings for almost all
programmes took place once during the year in order to discuss and approve
Final Implementation Reports as well as examine and fine-tune closure issues,
in relation in particular to the treatment of irregularities.
10.3.
Objective 3
All OPs submitted the closure documents by 30
September 2010, with the exception of the Abruzzo OP, which, following the
earthquake which hit the Region, was granted an extension up to 30 June
2010 and whose deadline for the submission of the closure document is 30
September 2011. The final certifications presented by the
different OPs lead to a maximum amount of possible payments equal to 97.97% of
the 2000-2006 overall budget (not taking into account the figures of the
Abruzzo OP). The actual amount of payments will be determined on the basis of
the ongoing closure procedures. Most of the OPs (10) presented a final
certification of expenditure of 100% (or more) of the total budget. For three
OPs (Toscana, Lazio and Azioni di sistema) the figure is above 95% while the Veneto
OP attained 87.81%. In the case of the OP Trento, which did not ask
for the extension of the eligible date for expenditure and submitted the
closure documents already by 31 March 2010, the closing procedure was concluded
in 2010, with the payment of 100% of the foreseen budget.
10.4.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
According to the monitoring data provided by
the Italian authorities on 31 December 2010, the financial implementation of
the FIFG mono-fund Single Programming Document (SPD-DOCUP) had in practice
reached 100 % in terms of commitments of total eligible expenditure and
95.0 % in terms of payments on total eligible expenditure, which is 100.0 %
of the amount that the Commission can reimburse before closure.
10.5.
Community Initiatives
10.5.1.
Equal
The final certification of expenditure,
presented by 30 September 2010, amounts to 384 920 106.83 €, that is 95.9% of
the total budget. The actual amount of payments will be determined on the basis
of the ongoing closure procedure. .
10.5.2.
Leader
There are 22 Leader+ programmes in Italy: 21
regional programmes and one national programme for the LEADER network,
amounting to a Community contribution of EUR 28161 million for the period
2000-2006. According to financial execution on 31 December
20010, the payment rate amounted to 93.35 % of the total eligible
expenditure. Three Final Payments have been already finalized (Piemonte, Trento
and Valle d'Aosta. In 2010 we have
received the three closure documents for all remaining programmes with the
exception of the programme of Abruzzo (Deadline is 31/03/2011 because of the
earthquake in 2009).
10.5.3.
Urban
There are ten Urban II Community Initiative
Programmes in Italy (Carrara, Caserta, Crotone, Genova, Milano, Misterbianco,
Mola di Bari, Pescara, Taranto, Torino) for an overall ERDF contribution of EUR
114.0 million. Financial execution has been on average
satisfactory. All but one programme reached the
95% payment theshold. The exception is the Taranto Programme which only reached
79.8% primarily due to administrative problems (the municipality of Taranto was
declared insolvent in 2006), affecting the implementation of the programme. All URBAN II Programmes timely submitted their
closure documents by the scheduled date. Two of them - Urban Torino and Urban
Carrara - were fully closed in 2010: by paying the full outstanding requested
amount.
10.6.
Closure of the 1994-1999 programming period
Out of the 106 programmes relating to the
1994-1999 programming periods, three are still not fully closed (Leader II
Lazio, Leader II Puglia and GG FICEI). In 2010, no new closure proposals were
sent as the Member State confirmed that the three cases have not yet completed
all the legal stages of the ongoing judicial and administrative
proceedings. In the case of GG FICEI, the closure letter
proposal was sent to the national authorities in order to recover an unduly
paid amount of EUR 0.1 million and decommit the unspent commitment amount. In
early 2010, however, Italy confirmed the existence of delays in the ongoing
administrative proceedings. At 31 December 2010, the outstanding open
commitment equals approximately EUR 2.1 million for three 1994-1999 programmes
and one 1989-1993 programme (Leader I Italy), for which a certain amount was
kept committed as it is linked to projects subject to judiciary proceedings. It is to be noted that these cases cannot be
followed by a decommitment procedure ex Article 24 (2),(3) of Council
Regulation (CE) n.4253/88 as the administrative and judicial proceedings are
still ongoing and might not come to an end in the near future. The closure of these cases should be carried
out in close cooperation with the competent Authorities in the Member State and
taking into account of the Legal Service support for further action necessary
to safeguard the principle of loyal cooperation set by the TFEU All 59 ESF files were processed. Currently, the
RAL (outstanding commitments) amounts to approximately EUR 40 million and is
entirely due to legal and/or administrative disputes at national level, which
also considerably delayed the winding-up process. It will be possible to reduce
this RAL gradually as soon as the legal action is resolved. As regards EAGGF programmes, all 1994-1999
programmes have been closed.
11.
Ireland
2000-2006
programming period
11.1.
Objective 1
The ERDF provided a total of EUR 1 946 million
to Objective 1 programmes in Ireland during the programming period.
Implementation of the ERDF took place in the five Irish Objective 1 programmes:
Economic & Social Infrastructure, Productive Sector (PSOP), Technical
Assistance (TAOP), Border, Midland & Western (BMW) Region and Southern
& Eastern (S&E) Region. There were also ESF-funded programmes: the
ESF-funded childcare measures in the two regional programmes. During the 2000-2006 programming period the ESF
funded the Human Resources Development Operational Programme (EHRD) OP, The
Border, Midland and Western Region (BMW) OP, the Southern and Eastern Region
(S&E) OP, the PEACE programme and the EQUAL programme for a total of EUR 1
092 million. The Structural Funds for 2000-2006 played an
important role in fostering research, development and innovation and boosting
the information society. In the period 2000-2006, the ERDF will have spent an
estimated EUR 260 million on research, technical development and innovation and
the information society. During the 2000- 2006 period, Irish research and
innovation capacity increased significantly, in particularly in the S&E
region. Similarly strong impacts can be observed in the
field of human resources, which has been a vital area of ESF assistance since
1989. In the years preceding 2000, investment helped to boost education and
skills levels, with a strong focus on young people while at the same time
enhancing the employment prospects of the unemployed. Funding in 2000-2006 put
more emphasis on responding to shortages through targeted supply-side
initiatives in education and training. A good example of this development is
the emphasis on in-company training and support for a number of lifelong
learning schemes. A backdrop for these programme achievements has
nevertheless been a serious contraction in the Irish economy precipitated by
the collapse in the real estate market, the crisis in the banking sector and
the public finances. The economic downturn (which commenced in 2008) worsened
during the course of both 2009 and 2010, necessitating a series of incremental
budgetary steps seeking to improve the state of public finance. As part of the emergency recovery package,
Ireland requested a six-month extension in eligibility date for all of the
above programmes (except for the EHRD OP and the EQUAL programme) allowing the
mopping-up of remaining funds to proceed and for Ireland to maximise its
draw-down of Structural Funds. As already reported in 2008, ERDF payments had
already reached the payment limit of 95.0 % for four of the programmes, i.e.
PSOP, TA, BMW and S&E. Payments thus far represent 93.9 % of commitments
for ESIOP — no payments were recorded during 2009. Closure packages were
received for the 5 programmes in September 2010 and Commission services are
presently carrying out the necessary quality control and consistency checks of
the closure documentation. Closure documents were received within the
regulatory deadlines for all Irish programmes co-financed by ERDF. URBAN II
Dublin Ballyfermot was received on 31 March 2010, whist all the rest including
PEACE II, were sent on 30 September 2010. ESF Final claims arrived in due time as
scheduled. The Employment and Human Resources Development programme and the
Southern & Eastern (S&E) Region programme have reached 100% consumption
of which 95% were already paid. The Border, Midland & Western (BMW) has
reached 98.3% consumption of which 90.7% was already paid. The EHRD final report was accepted on 1/3/2011
but further work has to be done on the WUD by the Irish authorities. The documents related to S&E and BMW need
some clarification by the Irish auhorities concerning irregularities. PEACE II The ‘PEACE II’ programme covers Northern
Ireland and the border regions of Ireland. It builds on the experience of the
special support programme ‘PEACE I’ (1995–1999) and exemplifies the practical
support given by the EU to the peace process after the Belfast Agreement.
Initially PEACE II covered the period 2000-2004 but in 2004 it was decided to
provide additional funding and extend the programme to 2006, bringing it in
line with the other Structural Funds programmes in the rest of the European
Union. For the PEACE II programme, the ERDF
contribution amounts to EUR 368 million. Further contributions are provided by
ESF (EUR 194 million) and EAGGF (EUR 44 million). Payments under all Funds have
reached their 95.0 % payment limit. The closure process is ongoing. On the basis of
the documentation received, it appears that the programme has overspent across
all funds. EAGGF The revised EAGGF-Guidance section amounts to
EUR 153.6 million. Cumulative EAGGF (Guidance) payments to the end of 2009
amount to EUR 148.9 million or 95.0 % of the amount planned for the
programming period 2000-2006. (No payments were carried out during 2009 as the
95.0 % payment limit was already reached in 2008). EAGGF Guidance will not contribute to the
two-year extension of the PEACE II operational programme, jointly managed with
Northern Ireland. Therefore the EUR 12.6 million EU contribution to the
programme was not increased. Up to the end of 2009, total expenditure for the
PEACE II programme was EUR 12.3 million. Closure documents for the Irish objective 1
operational programmes were submitted to the Commission by the deadline of
30/9/2010 and are under treatment. FIFG Objective 1 The three Objective 1 programmes (Productive
Sector, Southern & Eastern and Border, Midlands, Western) contain a total
FIFG assistance of EUR 67.8 million.All threee programmes reached the
payment limit of 95.0 % at the end of 2009. Closure documents for all the
programmes were received in due time in 2010 and the final FIFG narrative
reports have been accepted by DG MARE. Analysis of the financial information of
the programmes is in process. Final eligible FIFG uptake figures are therefore
not available yet PEACE II -Ireland The total FIFG allocation to the Irish part of
the programmes is EUR 2.7 million. No execution took place in 2009 as the 95.0 %
payment limit had already been reached before. Closure documents for the
programmes was received in due time in 2010 and the final FIFG narrative report
have been accepted by DG MARE. Analysis of the financial information of the
programme is in process. Final eligible FIFG uptake figures are therefore not
available yet
11.2.
Community Initiatives
The final claim for the Irish EQUAL programme arrived
on 30 March 2010. The total absorption rate of ESF represents 95.7% . An
automatic decommitment of 1.4 ml. was made. The final report was accepted on 15/12/2010 and
the final payment was made on 11 May 2011 once all irregularities were
reconciliated. The programme is thus closed.
11.2.1.
Leader
The Ireland Leader+ programme was implemented
with 22 Local Action Groups involved. The total expenditure of the Ireland
Leader+ programme was EUR 74 million. The EAGGF contribution for
2000-2006 was EUR 46 million. At the end of 2009, expenditure amounted to EUR
43.5 million, 94.5 % of the initial programme budget. Closure documents for the Ireland Leader+
programme were submitted on 31/3/2010 and are under treatment.
11.2.2.
Urban
The Dublin-Ballyfermot URBAN II programme is
the only URBAN II Programme in Ireland. It was approved in December 2001, and
amended in 2004 as a result of indexation. The ERDF will contribute a total of
EUR 5.4 million to this programme, the total cost of which amounts to EUR 11.6
million. The final eligibility date of this programme was 31 December 2008 and
was not extended as part of the recovery package. On the basis of the closure
documentation received, the programme has under-spent.
11.3.
Closure of the 1994-1999 programming period
The RAL is zero for ERDF 94-99, ESF 94-99 and
EAGGF 94-99 programmes. The C.I. PESCA programme was closed at the end of 2008.
12.
Latvia
2000-2006 programming period
12.1.
Objective 1
Latvia is implementing a Single Programming
Document (SPD) with an ERDF participation of EUR 382 million and an ESF
allocation of EUR 127.3 million out of EUR 626 million in total. The Programme
Complement was last modified by the Monitoring Committee in December 2008 and
accepted by the Commission in 2009. Payments for the ERDF and ESF reached the 95.0 %
payment limit in 2008 so no further payments before closure were possible. In 2009 the Commission adopted an amending
decision to the SPD to extend the final eligibility date to 30 June 2009,
although effective implementation for most of the SPD was concluded in 2008. The Latvian Authorities submitted closure documentation for the SPD
on 30 June 2010. The SPD is aiming for ‘fast and regionally
balanced sustainable economic development’ mainly by shifting into higher
value-added production. According to the monitoring data, the progress made so
far in implementing the SPD has been good. The target levels for the main
indicators have been attained to a great extent, including the impact
indicators at the priority level. The managing authority for the SPD is located
in the Ministry of Finance. The paying authority is the treasury of Latvia and
the audit body is a department in the Ministry of Finance. There is one
monitoring committee. It includes participants from all state institutions
involved and representatives of social and economic partners, planning regions
and civil society. The Latvian 2004-2006 Objective 1 programme
partly contributed to the high growth rate and employment in Latvia until the
end of 2007. On the negative side, the growth was accompanied by supply-side
constraints leading to high price and wage growth and overheating. In the last
quarter of 2008 the economy started to shrink drastically. In 2009, GDP
declined by 18.0 % while unemployment reached 17.1 %. The monitoring committees include participants
from all state institutions involved and representatives of social and economic
partners, planning regions and civil society. No major problems in the
implementation of the SPD have been detected to date. The FIFG share in the Single Programming
Document for Latvia represents 3,89% (i.e. EUR 24.3 million). The 95.0 %
payment limit of Commission reimbursement was reached at the end of 2008. As no
further reimbursement is possible before the programme is closed, there were no
payments by the Commission in 2009 and 2010. After the receipt of closure documents on 30
June 2010, the analysis of winding up declaration has
been completed and the document was accepted by the Commission on 17 November
2010. For rest of the documents the request for complementary
information was sent to the Latvian authorities therefore their assesment was
not finalised in 2010. The main measures implemented were scrapping of fishing
vessels, investment in aquaculture and processing, investment in fishing ports
and socio-economic measures for fishermen. In total 447 projects were completed
during the programming period. All allocated FIFG funding have been entirely
exhausted.
12.2.
Community Initiatives
12.2.1.
Equal
EQUAL Latvia was a successful programme in
terms of reaching the set targets and financial performance. The actual implementation of the programme was
concluded in 2007.95 % of the programme expenditure was paid in 2007. The EQUAL Latvia closure package was submitted
to the Commission on 11 June 2009. The programme was closed (payment of the
final balance) on 19 October 2010.
12.2.2.
Leader
Leader+ type measures were included in the
Objective 1 programme under Priority 4: Promotion of Development of Rural
Areas and Fisheries. The EU contribution for 2004-2006 amounted to EUR 2.3
million. The start of Leader+ type measures was delayed due to administrative
and legal difficulties. In December 2006, seventeen Local Action Groups
were selected and selection of projects finished in October 2007 with contracts
covering 100 % of the finances available. In total 433 contracts were
concluded during two rounds of selection. Implementation of the projects
commenced in May 2008 and continued until September 2008. The implementation of
Leader under the Single Programming Document ended in summer 2008 and continues
under the EU Rural Development Programme 2007-2013 (separate from cohesion
policy).
13.
Lithuania
2000-2006 programming period
13.1.
Objective 1
General The Lithuanian Objective 1 Programme (Single
Programming Document of Lithuania for 2004-2006) covers the whole of Lithuania
as an eligible area. The programme was adopted by Commission Decision
C(2004)2120 of 18 June 2004 and is co-financed by the ERDF (EUR 583.9 million),
the ESF (EUR 176.2 million), the EAGGF (EUR 122.9 million), and the FIFG (EUR
12.1 million). The national funding consists of EUR 309.5 million of public
funds and EUR 2.3 million of private financing. Thus, the Structural Funds
provide EUR 895 million of a total budget of EUR 1 207 million. The
managing authority of the programme is the Ministry of Finance of the Republic
of Lithuania. The global objective of the programme is to
strengthen the basis for long‑term national economic competitiveness and to
facilitate the transition to a knowledge-based economy. It consists of five
priorities: socio‑economic infrastructure (EUR 347.1 million, ERDF), human
resources development (EUR 163.8 million, ESF), productive sector and
services (EUR 222.4 million, ERDF), rural and fisheries development
(EUR 122.9 million, EAGGF and EUR 12.1 million, FIFG), and technical
assistance (EUR 14.5 million, ERDF and EUR 12.4 million, ESF). Monitoring and annual review No programme monitoring committee meetings were
held during 2009 and 2010. In 2009 and 2010 no specific annual review
meetings between the Commission and the Managing Authority was arranged for the
Single Programming Document of Lithuania for 2004-2006. The work related to the
closure of 2004-2006 Structural Funds assistance advanced during the year and
closure documents were submitted to the Commission by the end of September.
Closure procedure is in well advanced and it is expected to be completed in
2011 with the payment of the balance. Information and publicity Lithuania has continued to implement a variety
of Structural Funds publicity and information activities. The public internet
portal www.esparama.lt,
maintained by the Lithuanian Ministry of Finance, has developed into a
central tool for providing the stakeholders with timely information on
programme implementation. Payments and programme results By the end of 2009, 95.0 % (EUR 554.7
million) of the total ERDF allocation (EUR 583.9 million) and 95.0 %
(EUR 167.4 million) of the total ESF allocation (EUR 176.2 million) had
been paid out to Lithuania by the Commission With regard to the FIFG measures, already by
mid-2008 the Commission had paid 95.0 % of the total FIFG allocations (EUR
12.1 million). The greatest share of the EU support had
targeted the reduction of the Baltic fleet and the compensations related to
these measures. Investments have been made into fisheries aquaculture and
processing sector. The closure documents were received by DG MARE on
04.10.2011. The documents have been assessed; additional information and
clarifications have been recently requested to the Lithuanian authorities. The
final implementation report has been accepted. The absorption rate of 95.0 % of the total
EAGGF-Guidance allocation (including the advance) was already reached in 2008,
and as a result there were no payments in 2010. The total amount of funding for projects
implemented stands at EUR 1 700 million of which EUR 932 million is from
the EU. Development of social and economic infrastructure accounted for almost
40.0 % of the funding. Among EU-10 Member States Lithuania has one of the
highest levels of spending on energy efficiency. In terms of results, over 3
500 projects were implemented and in 2008 the GDP was 2.1% higher compared to a
scenario without SPD interventions. More than 19 500 jobs were created.
13.2.
Community Initiatives
13.2.1.
Equal
The Lithuanian EQUAL programme proceeded
without any difficulties. The main focus was on preparing for the closure of
the programme. At the end of 2009, the rate of financial execution of the
community funding for the programme was 95.0 %. The managing
authority presented the closure documents to the Commission on 30 March 2010.
The closure letter to the Lithuanian Authorities has been sent on 22 December
2010 and the final payment has been executed on 4 May 2011.
13.2.2.
Leader
Leader+ type measures are mainstreamed in the
Objective 1 programme under Priority 4: Rural and Fisheries Development. The
implementation of all selected projects under Leader (106 in total) was already
completed in 2009.
14.
Luxembourg
2000-2006 programming period
14.1.
Objective 2
Overall, 100 % of the ERDF programme
budget was allocated through grant agreements. The programme monitoring committee met once in
2010, at the initiative of the Ministry of Economy, the managing authority of
the programme. The Commission played an active part in the work of the
committee. At this meeting was presented and adopted the final report. The three documents for closure were received
before the end of September: final report, final payment claim, and winding up
declaration. Some observations about the winding up declaration were
communicated to the Audit and Managing authorities. The level of expenditure submitted for payment
from the ERDF amounted to EUR 41.8 million, i.e. 95.0 % of the ERDF
allocation at the end of 2010.
14.2.
Objective 3
The Objective 3 programme involves a total ESF
contribution of EUR 31.7 million. Luxembourg did not manage to spend the total
ESF allocations, so there will be decommitments. The absorption rate is 74 %. Further to the decision to suspend interim
payments following the audit mission in June-July 2007, a 100%'s Article 4
(Regulation (EC) No 438/2001) verifications to all expenses was made by
external auditors, The results of these verifications were analysed by the
Commission and it was concluded that they comply with Article 4; all financial
corrective measures related to Article 4 were taken into account. On 21 January
2010, the Commission sent a letter to the Luxembourg authorities to withdraw
the suspension and to relaunch the interim payments The Luxembourg authorities sent all closure
documents on 6 October 2010. They were considered admissible. On 24 October
2010, the Commission sent a letter to the Luxembourg authorities concerning a
technical correction in the final payment request and on the same day, the
Commission sent a letter regarding the list of irregularities to be transmitted
by the Member State. During the annual meeting meeting between the
Commission and Luxembourg on 8 December 2010, the closure of the 2000-2006
period was also on the agenda and some administrative errors already discovered
in the closure documents (including an ineligible project in the winding-up
declaration, lack of submission of the list of irregularities) were discussed
and further detailed in a letter sent by the Commission on 3 March 2011 related
to the remarks of the Commission on the final execution report
14.3.
Community Initiatives
14.3.1.
Equal
At the end of 2010, the rate of execution
amounted to 73.1 % (EUR 2.9 million). Further to the decision to suspend interim
payments following the audit mission in June-July 2007, a 100%'s Article 4
(Regulation (EC) No 438/2001) verifications to all expenses was made by
external auditors, The results of these verifications were analysed by the
Commission and it was concluded that they comply with Article 4; all financial
corrective measures related to Article 4 were taken into account. On 21 January
2010, the Commission sent a letter to the Luxembourg authorities to withdraw
the suspension and to relaunch the interim payments The Luxembourg authorities sent all closure
documents on 6 October 2010. They were considered admissible. On 24 October
2010, the Commission sent a letter to the Luxembourg authorities concerning a
technical correction in the final payment request and on the same day, the
Commission sent a letter regarding the list of irregularities to be transmitted
by the Member State. During the annual meeting meeting between the
Commission and Luxembourg on 8 December 2010, the closure of the 2000-2006
period was also on the agenda and some administrative errors already discovered
in the closure documents were discussed and further detailed in a letter sent
by the Commission on 7 March 2011 related to the remarks of the Commission on
the final execution report.
14.3.2.
Leader
The programme involves total public expenditure
of EUR 8.4 million. The EAGGF contribution was fully committed ( EUR 2.1
million). Total financial execution came to EUR 2.0 million, i.e.92.6% of the
EAGGF amount committed . In Luxembourg, four LAGs were selected,
covering 90 000 inhabitants, with a fifth LAG financed by national funds. Closure documents were transmited to the
Commission in March 2010; a pre-closure letter was sent in July 2010, resulting
in the transmission of a final recovery order in November 2010.
15.
Hungary
2000-2006 programming period
15.1.
Objective 1
All Hungarian regions belong in 2004-2006
period to Objective 1. The payments for the 4 ERDF OP in Hungary reached the
limit of 95% in 2008, 3 of which were nevertheless extended until June 2009. No
payments were done in 2010. The documents necessary for the closure were
submitted in all cases on time. The closure procedure will be finalised at the
beginning of 2011 for the Regional OP. For the other OPs the procedure has been
interrupted awaiting complementary information from Hungarian Authorities on
the final report and winding-up declaration and precise definition of the
financial impact of irregularities and unfinished projects. In general the objectives settled in the OPs
were broadly achieved. However, even if all regions have grown, the gap between
most developed and least developed regions has not decreased. The medium term
impact of the grants to SMEs (companies surviving after 5 years) within the
Economic Development OP arouse concern about the sustainability of the
investments financed. In contrast this OP allowed for the creation of 11.263
new jobs or safeguarded; GVA growth in supported enterprises was nearly EUR 500
million. Further 3000 jobs were created by the new touristic attractions within
the Regional operational programme allowed for the creation of near 3000 jobs. In addition to the large infrastructure CF/ISPA
projects, ERDF supported the upgrade of 1073 km of national roads and 544 km of
regional/local roads. ERDF also supported improved drinking water and waste
water treatment facilities for respectively 20.477 and 17.208 new households. Evaluations workshops on the results of the
programmes and preparatory seminars and meetings for the closure were organised
in 2010, including two Monitoring Committees in view of the approval of the
final report. ESF contribution to Hungary between 2004-2006
has been channelled through the following programmes: –
Human Resources Development Operational
Programme (HRD OP) (2003HU051PO001) –
Operational Programme
for Regional Development (OPRD) (2003HU161PO001) The HRD OP contains 4 priorities (excluding
technical assistance), three financed by ESF and one by ERDF. At the same time,
there is one ESF priority in the OPRD, complementing the two ERDF priorities. The main priorities of the Human Resources
Development OP Supporting active labour market policies (Preventing and
tackling unemployment, Developing the Public Employment Service, Promoting the
participation of women in the labour market and the reconciliation of work and
family life), Fighting social exclusion by promoting access to the labour
market, Promoting life-long learning policies (Developing skills and
competencies necessary for lifelong learning, the content, methodology and
structure of VET, the structure and content of higher education, Training -
promoting job-creation and dev. of entrepreneurial skills, adult training
system). For the HRD OP The MA requested an extension of the
eligibility deadline until 30/06/2009. The closure documents have been received
by the COM on time and are being analysed. The following amounts were paid from
the ESF: EUR 366.168.888 (95% reached) out of which EUR 17.459.007,36 was paid
in 2010. For the OPRD The main priorities of the For Regional
Development OP Developing the human resources of the regions (Capacity building
of local public administration and NGOs, Support for local employment
initiatives, Strengthening co-operation of higher education institutions with
local actors, Support of region-specific vocational training). The closure documents have been received by the
COM on time and are being analysed. The following amounts were paid from the
ESF: EUR 50.984.157 (95% reached). No payments were made in 2010. As at 31 December 2009, total payments made
under measures co-financed by the EAGGF-Guidance Section (including the
advance) amounted to EUR 297 million or 95.0 % of the total Fund
allocation for the period 2004-2006. For that reason no payment has been made
in 2010. The Programme is now in the closure phase. The FIFG share in ARDOP represents 2,4% (i.e.
EUR 4,4 million). The total payment rate from the Commission reached 90.9 %
of the total FIFG allocation. FIFG was used exclusively for measure 2.1
“Structural assistance in the fisheries sector” under Priority 1: Establishment
of competitive basic material production in agriculture. During the whole
programming period 55 applications were approved; from that 51 were
successfully completed. Aquaculture was the most popular measure and had 30
projects completed. The closure documents were submitted by 30 September 2010.
The assessment of the documents is in the final stage of analysis.
15.2.
Community Initiatives
15.2.1.
Equal
The main priorities of the EQUAL Community
Initiative Programme was to facilitate access to the labour market of those
which feel difficulties of integrating, promote lifelong training and inclusive
practices encouraging recruitment and maintenance to the use of those which
suffer from discrimination or from treatment inequality in industry, reduce the
divergences between men and women and promote professional desegregation, help
to integrate asylum seekers. In order to facilitate the mainstreaming of the
results of EQUAL, the MA requested an extension on the eligibility deadline
until 30/06/2009. The closure documents have been received by the COM on time
and are being analysed. The 95%
ceiling has been reached and therefore no payments were made in 2010.
15.2.2.
Leader
Hungary included a Leader+ type measure in the
ARDOP under Priority 3 ‘Development of rural areas’. The objective of the
measure was to strengthen the LEADER approach to local development by means of
integrated regional development strategies organised and realised at local
level in the form of partnerships. Overall, 70 local action groups were
selected. The total Community contribution for this measure amounted to EUR
14.3 million. Given the resources committed, the measure has been outstandingly
successful, as the amount contracted for the applications submitted (EUR 23.2
million) exceeded the initial amount planned for the programming period
2004-2006.
16.
Malta
2000-2006 programming period
16.1.
Objective 1
Malta has one Single Programming Document (SPD)
for the period 2004-2006, jointly co-financed by ERDF (6 measures), ESF (5
measures), EAGGF (2 measures) and FIFG (1 measure). The total Structural Funds'
allocation amounts to EUR 63.2 million (EUR 46.7 million from ERDF, EUR 9.5
million from ESF, EUR 4.2 million from EAGGF and EUR 2.8 million from FIFG),
supplemented by EUR 23.3 million of national contribution. The ERDF share of payments made in favour of
ERDF co-financed projects amounts to EUR 47.6 million, bringing the overall
commitment for ERDF co-financed measures to 102% of allocated resources. The last Monitoring Committee meeting approving
the Final Report of the programme was held in July 2010. The implementation of
the programme has reached its objectives. In total, 89 projects had been
implemented, including 9 aid schemes. 373 enterprises benefitted from grants
under the programme. All documents necessary for the closure of the
ERDF parts of the programme were submitted to the Commission on 30 September
2010, i.e. within the agreed deadline. As regards implementation of the EAGGF, on 31
December 2009 total payments made under measures co-financed by the
EAGGF-Guidance Section amounted to EUR 4.4 million (interim payments of EUR 3.7
million and advance payments of EUR 0.7 million, including national
co-financing), thus attaining the payment limit of 95.0 % for total
eligible expenditure for the period 2004-2006 . For that reason no payment has
been made in 2010. The Programme is now in the closure phase. The total FIFG allocation committed to the
sub-measures ‘Fleet’ and ‘Structures’ within the SPD for structural assistance
in Malta under Objective 1 (2004-2006) amounted to EUR 2.8 million. The payment
limit of 95.0 % was reached in 2008. A final balance to the amount of EUR
120,000 was found to be paid at Closure, and EUR 22,000 to be de-committed.
That translates into an execution rate of 99.2% for the Maltese FIFG budget. A
smooth closure of the FIFG programme share could be prepared still in 2010.
16.2.
Community Initiatives
16.2.1.
Equal
All EQUAL projects finalised their training
activities by the end of December 2007. The monitoring committee lats met in
May 2009.The EQUAL Programme reached the ceiling of 95.0 %.
17.
Netherlands
2000-2006 programming period The Netherlands received a total Structural
Fund contribution of EUR 2.8 billion between 2000 and 2006 from the ERDF, ESF,
EAGGF and FIFG. The final date for the eligibility of
expenditure, normally set at 31 December 2008, was — at the request of the
Dutch authorities — extended for the single Objective 1, four Objective 2,
three URBAN and four LEADER programmes until 30 June 2009. For this extension,
the Commission adopted a decision on 23 February 2009. This gave the regions
and cities concerned an additional six months to implement the available
Structural Funds allocations. For ERDF and the EAGGF-Guidance, the closure
documents were submitted within the requested time frame. The final payment claims show a high absorption
rate reaching or approaching hundred percent of the available funds for all the
ERDF programmes. Following audits in 2005 and 2006, the Dutch authorities had
agreed with the European Commission to adopt a national action plan for ERDF
programmes. This national action plan led in 2010 to a final settlement between
the Dutch Ministry of Economical Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation, the
respective management authorities and the European Commission. The financial
corrections which were to be implemented as a result of this settlement have
been incorporated in the final payment requests. These payment requests are
currently being analyzed as part of the closure exercise. The annual review meeting was jointly organised
by the Dutch authorities and the European Commission in November 2010. The
progress of the implementation and the ex-post evaluation of the 2000-2006
programming period, prepared by the European Commission, were discussed. During
2010 the final monitoring committees for the 2000-2006 programmes have taken
place and several official events have been organized to mark the end of this
programming period.
17.1.
Objective 1
The Flevoland province received phasing-out support
under Objective 1 amounting up to EUR 131.9 million of which EUR 81.7 million
from ERDF, EUR 33.6 million from ESF, EUR 10.3 million from EAGGF and EUR 6.2
million from FIFG. The final payment request shows a full
absorption of the ERDF funds and close to full absorption for EAGGF and FIFG.
For ESF the absorption was close to 95.0 %. The closure documents received in September
2010 indicate total EAGGF payments reaching EUR 10.3 million, i.e. 99% of the
EAGGF allocation. The total FIFG allocation for Flevoland amounts
to EUR 6.2 million. There were no decommitments. The total payment rate of the
Commission reached 95 % of the FIFG allocation. Two measures were implemented,
"fleet renovation and crew management" and "Strengthening the
competitiveness of the fishery sector". At the end of the programme 18
projects were completed. The closure documents were received on 29 September
2010. The assessment of the documents is ongoing.
17.2.
Objective 2
The final payment requests of the four Dutch
Objective 2 programmes show an absorption level of 98% for the four programmes
combined. A realized amount of EUR 845 million has been declared out of a
decided amount of EUR 859 million, hence a shortfall of EUR 14 million. The absorption rates of the individual
programmes are; 96.1% for Zuid, 98.4% for Oost, 99.8% for Noord
and 97.4% for Stedelijke Gebieden. The final payment requests of the different
programmes reflect the outcome of the settlement of the national action plan.
This correction amounted up to EUR 160 million (including the Objective 1
programme) on the total eligible costs, mainly impacting the programme Noord
which was responsible for EUR 109 million.
17.3.
Objective 3
The total available ESF allocation for the SPD
amounted to EUR 1 532 million, which had been committed by the end of
October 2005. As all projects were terminated by the end of 2007, activities
focused on preparing closure of the programme. No request was received to
extend the final date of eligibility. The final implementation of the programme
is estimated to arrive at full absorption (the 95.0 % payment limit has
already been reached).In 2010 closure documents were received and accepted
except for the WUD. Futher work has to be done on the WUD by the Dutch
authorities.
17.4.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
The total FIFG allocation for the Netherlands
amounts to EUR 32.7 million. The total payment rate of the Commission reached 80.3 %
of the total FIFG allocation. At the end of the programming period serious
weaknesses were found by the Commission services in the management and control
system and the payments were suspended. The Netherlands made an action plan to
verify and correct these weaknesses. So far this resulted in a deduction of EUR
1.6 million applied by the Netherlands. The programme resulted in assistance to 502
operations. The great majority of assistance was given under the measures: 44
(Operations of members of the trade), 12 (transfer to a third
country/reassignment), 11 (scrapping) and 46 (innovative measures). The closure
documents were received on 30 July 2010. The assessment of the documents is
ongoing.
17.5.
Community Initiatives
17.5.1.
Urban
Three URBAN II programmes have been implemented
in the Netherlands in Amsterdam, Heerlen and Rotterdam. The ERDF contribution
for the programmes in Amsterdam and Rotterdam is
EUR 9 million each and in Heerlen EUR 12 million. The total
eligible cost of the three programmes is EUR 84 million. The cities themselves
are both managing authority and paying authority. Based on the final payment
requests received in March 2010, the three Urban programme requested EUR 29.1
million out of the EUR 30.3 million available, i.e. an absorption rate of 96%. The
Rotterdam programme has now been closed and both Amsterdam and Heerlen
will be closed in the course of 2011.
17.5.2.
Equal
The total available ESF allocation amounted to
EUR 158.2 million. As all projects had ended by the end of 2007, activities
focused on preparing closure of the programme. No request was received to
extend the final eligibility date. The final implementation of the programme is
estimated to show 87 % absorption (at end of 2009 the rate was 76.4 %).
In 2010 closure documents were received and accepted except for the WUD. Futher
work has to be done on the WUD by the Dutch authorities.
17.5.3.
Leader
Four Leader+ programmes were implemented in the
Netherlands in the 2000-2006 programming period (Randstad, Noord, Zuid and
Oost). The closure documents received in September 2010 indicate total EAGGF
payments reaching EUR 80.6 million, i.e. 98.5% of the EAGGF allocation.
17.6.
Closure of the 1994-1999 programming period
ERDF Closure of the ERDF programmes of the 1994-1999
programming period was already completed at the end of 2009. ESF Three ESF programmes remain open due to ongoing
judicial proceedings. As regards the Community Initiative Programmes
(CIP), two programmes are still to be closed due to ongoing judicial
proceedings. The Resider CIP was closed in 2009. EAGGF Closure of the EAGGF programmes of the
1994-1999 programming period was already completed at the end of 2008.
18.
Austria
2000-2006 programming period Between 2000 and 2006 Austria was allocated to
a total Structural Fund contribution of EUR 1,782 million from the ERDF, ESF,
EAGGF and FIFG. The ERDF allocation alone amounted to EUR 885.2 million.
18.1.
Objective 1
For the only Objective 1 region in
Austria (Burgenland) the ERDF allocation of EUR 181.5 million was committed
from 2000 to 2006. Total ERDF payments by the Commission between 2000 and 2009
amounted to EUR 172.4 million representing 95% of commitments, the maximum
percentage possible prior to closure. In January 2010, the Austrian authorities
submitted the closure documents (final report, winding-up declaration and final
payment claim) for this programme, and the Commission prepared the final
payment (EUR 9.1 million) thereafter which was paid in January 2011. The final
report included the 2008 annual implementation report as a separate chapter
which was consequently assessed and accepted as part of the closure procedure. No further meetings of the monitoring committee
took place after its last meeting in June 2006, and any further consultations
of the committee (inter alia, on the closure documents) were carried out by way
of written procedure. As regards the EAGGF-Guidance Section, the
final payment of EUR 2 148 218 was made by the Commission for the Objective 1
priority for Burgenland. The total amount paid and committed for the 2000-2006
period amounted to EUR 43 684 352. In the period 2000-2006, a total of EUR 57.4
million was committed and EUR 54.5 million was paid by the Commission
(i.e. 95.0 % of the total ESF contribution). The closure documents
were received in due time The total FIFG allocation for Burgenland amounts
finally to EUR 0.2 million and the total payment rate from the Commission
reached 77.6 % of the total final FIFG allocation. The programme resulted in
assistance to 15 Projects. All assistance was given under measure 3.2
(Aquaculture), in particular to increase the profitability of the fisheries
sector in Burgenland, with an improved processing and marketing. The closure
documents were sent by 8 March 2010. The assessment of the documents is in the
final stage of assessment.
18.2.
Objective 2
The eight Austrian Objective 2 regions
(Upper Austria, Lower Austria, Styria, Carinthia, Salzburg, Tyrol, Vorarlberg and
Vienna) have been allocated to the an ERDF contribution of EUR 703.7 million
which was committed between 2001 and 2006, and received the according ERDF
contribution before end of 2009. In 2010 the Commission reimbursed only a small
amount EUR 0.86 million representing 0.12% of the total ERDF contribution for
one programme (Vorarlberg), and closed the programme for Vienna by a recovery
of EUR 0.82 million. In total, the Commission reimbursed EUR 686.1 million
(including final payments) between 2000 and 2010, which is equivalent to 97.5%
of ERDF contributions allocated to the Austrian Objective 2 programmes.
The remainder is partly due to de-commitments undertaken by the Commission,
and/or under-utilisation of programmes taken account of at closure. The closure documents for all programmes were
formally submitted to the Commission between September 2009 and March 2010, and
included the 2008 annual implementation reports as part of each final report. No monitoring committee meetings took place in
2010 but all necessary decisions (inter alia, on closure documents) were
carried out by written procedure. At the annual meeting on 16 November 2010 in
Bregenz, the state of play of the closure of all programmes was discussed.
Before the end of the year 2010 six of eight programmes (Lower Austria, Tyrol,
Carinthia, Salzburg, Vienna and Vorarlberg) were fully closed, and closure of
the remaining two programmes was under preparation In the period 2000-2006, a total of EUR 27.5
million was committed and EUR 26 million was paid (i.e. 95.0 % of the
total ESF contribution). The closure documents were received in due time.The
final closure payment for Carinthia (146.915,34 €) and Styria (467.676,02 €)
were executed at the end of 2010
18.3.
Objective 3
The closure documents for the objective 3
programme were received in due time
18.4.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
The total FIFG allocation amounts to EUR 4.5
million. The total payment rate from the Commission reached 93.9 % of the total
FIFG allocation. (EUR 4.2 million out of EUR 4.5 million). There have been
no decommitments. There were two priority axes, ‘Aquatic resources, aquaculture,
fishing ports, processing and marketing, inland fisheries’ and ‘Other
measures’. The closure letter was sent on 2 August 2010 to the Austrian
Permanent Representation.
18.5.
Community Initiatives
18.5.1.
Urban
There were two URBAN II programmes for Austria.
The programme for Vienna received EUR 3.5 million and the one for Graz EUR 4.0
million from the ERDF. The total budget (including national co-financing) for
Vienna was EUR 12.9 million and for Graz EUR 23.1 million. For both
programmes, the final reports including the annual reports for 2008 were
submitted in November 2009. Both programmes were fully closed in July 2010.
18.5.2.
Equal
The closure documents were received in due time
18.5.3.
Leader
The Leader+ programme for Austria was approved
by Commission Decision C(2001) 820 of 26 March 2001 and amended by Decision
C(2006) 4830 of 6 December 2006. The Austrian Leader+ programme covered 8
regions of Austria, excluding the urban area of Vienna. The total EAGGF amount paid for the Leader+
programme amounted to EUR 74 879 475.53 for the whole period, including the
final payment in 2010 of EUR 1 887 865.53. An amount of EUR 1 953 798.47 was
decommitted in 2010. During the programming period 2001-2006, total
expenditure under the programme was initially foreseen to be EUR 164.30 million,
including an EU contribution of EUR 76.80 million. In practice, total
expenditure amounted to EUR 184 162 554.35, comprising an EAGGF contribution of
EUR 74.8 million, national funds (including national public expenditure) of
around EUR 29 346 951 and private financing of some EUR 79 936 127.
18.6.
Closure of the 1994-1999 programming period
All programmes are closed All Austrian Programmes could be fully closed
in 2010 after the final decisions about the last open cases
19.
Poland
2000-2006 programming period
19.1.
Objective 1
In 2004-2006, Poland received EUR 12.47 billion
(EUR 8.27 billion Structural Funds and EUR 4.2 billion Cohesion Fund). At the
end of 2010, payments for ERDF, ESF, FIFG and EAGGF taken together accounted
for 94.84% of the total allocation for 2004-2006 or 7.97 billion EUR. Only
final payments were still to be executed. For ERDF 95% of allocation (4.72 billion EUR)
has been paid, which means that no final payment for ERDF programmes was made
in 2010. As the final date of eligibility for all operational programmes,
except for the OP Technical Assistance and CIP EQUAL, was extended up to 30
June 2009, the closure documents were submitted in September-October 2010.
Until the end of December 2010 the assessment of closure documentation for SOP
Improvement of the competitiveness of the economy, Integrated regional
operational programme and SOP Transport was ongoing and resulted in an
interruption of the process in February 2011 due to questions related to the
final report and winding up declaration. In the case of OP Technical assistance
the closure letter proposing a small financial correction was sent. The
assessment of closure documentation for ESF programmes was interrupted in the
beginning of 2011 due to questions related to closure documents. Pending assessment
of additional documents and clarifications received from Poland, CIP EQUAL will
be closed by mid-2011 and remaining programmes - by the third quarter of 2011
at the latest. For ESF the final date of eligibility of the
Sectoral Operational Programme Human Resources Development and Integrated
Regional Operational Programme (IROP) was extended to 30 June 2009. As far as
financial execution of the ESF is concerned, the overall rate of execution in
terms of payments reached the level of 95 % and, in terms of contracts, –
exceeded 100% of the allocation at the end of 2009.. The Sectoral Operational Programme Human
Resources Development and CIP EQUAL demonstrated satisfactory progress in
implementation throughout the whole programming period. However, the Human
Resources Development OP was affected by corrective measures which will impact
on the final payment. As far as the Integrated Regional Operational Programme
(the ESF priority) is concerned, despite the slower pace of implementation in
some regions the risk of underspending was successfully addressed. In 2010, the
final Monitoring Committees took place, where consolidated results of
implementation were presented and discussed. The ex-post evaluation of ESF
programmes was finalised and fed into the discussion on the current ESF OP
(2007-2013). As far as other funds are concerned, payments
for the EAGGF programme also reached 95.0 %. 98 % of the FIFG
allocation was paid out to final beneficiaries. The payments for the FIFG
executed by the Commission accounted for 88.1 % of the total FIFG
allocation. 4.124 projects were implemented in the
framework of the Sectoral Operational Programme "Fisheries and Fish
Processing 2004-2006". The most important measures from the point of view
of the budget spent were: scrapping of fishing vessels, support to fish
processing and market, fishing port facilities and aquaculture. The closure documents were received by the
Commission on 30 June 2010 and their evaluation is ongoing. Structural Funds became one of the main pro-development
sources of financing (in 2007, 35 % of overall public spending). The
main impact of the cohesion policy is expected after 2012, as a result of
higher allocations of funds in the period 2007-2013 and expected accumulation
of outputs after 2012. The ex-post evaluations of Cohesion Policy
implemented in Poland in 2004-2009 and the final implementation reports of the
operational programmes allow to draw the conclusion that EU funds played a
positive role in the socio-economic development of the country. Positive
effects of interventions may be observed both at macro-economic level and at
microeconomic level under respective strategic areas of support. Macroeconomic impact Cohesion Policy contributed to the increase of
socio-economic welfare of Poland. Evaluations show that GDP level (in current
prices) in the 2004-2009 period was higher by 3% on average in 2009 due to EU
funds. Due to implementation of Cohesion Policy, the yearly average pace of GDP
increase in Poland in the 2004-2009 period was higher by 0.4 percentage point.
In 2009, in the period of world economic crisis, Poland was the only EU Member
State to experience a GDP increase (+1.7%). It is estimated that half of this
increase resulted from the implementation of Cohesion Policy. The labour market interventions within Cohesion
Policy contributed to the reduction of unemployment and increase of employment
in Poland. In 2009 an increase in the employment ratio reached due to the
interventions financed by Structural Funds ranged from 0.5 to as much as 2.6
percentage points, i.e. the average circa 200 thousand new jobs. By stimulating
new employment, the policy contributed to the decrease of the unemployment
level. In 2009, the unemployment level was lower by over 1 percentage point due
to the EU funds. Evaluations demonstrate that support provided
under Cohesion Policy contributed to the increase of competitiveness and
innovation of Polish enterprises and economy. Structural funds interventions
contributed to the increase of spending on research and development in the economy,
both in public and private sectors (without Cohesion Policy support, the share
of R&D expenditure in GDP would decrease). In particular, an increase of
innovation expenditure of enterprises as compared to 2003 was circa 6
percentage points higher than in a scenario without EU funds. Cohesion Policy decreased the pace of
inter-regional divergence processes. In addition, as compared to the GDP level
and the level of competitiveness of regions, Cohesion Policy played a more
important role in speeding up the development processes in regions with a lower
level of development.
19.2.
Community Initiatives
19.2.1.
Equal
The eligibility period for EQUAL, until 30
April 2009, was not extended. In financial terms the level of expenditure declared
to the Commission represented 102 % of the total ESF allocation by the end
of 2009. CIP EQUAL principles, e.g. partnership, gender
mainstreaming, transnational cooperation and innovation have been successfully
transferred to the new programming period 2007-2013. The last Monitoring Committee Meeting for CIP
EQUAL took place in 2010, approving the final implementation report. . Closure documents were submitted on time. While
Poland had to provide additional intormaiton on the winding-up declaration, the
implementation report was considered satisfactory. The final stage of the
closure procedure is on-going.
19.2.2.
Leader
As with other recently acceded Member States, a
Leader+ type measure is mainstreamed in the EAGGF Objective 1 programme
‘Restructuring and modernisation of the agri-food sector and rural
development’.
20.
Portugal
2000-2006 programming period
20.1.
Objective 1
The Portuguese Community Support Framework III
(2000-2006) received financial support under Objective 1 (with Lisbon and the
Tejo valley region as a phasing out region) and consisted of twenty operational
programmes. Out of the 20 operational programmes, seven covered each of the
Portuguese regions individually and thirteen were cross-regional. For operations included in the CSF III, as part
of the response to the financial crisis, an extension of the expenditure
eligibility date to 30 June 2009 was agreed for all operational programmes. During the year 2010 there was no
implementation activity just administrative in order to prepare the final reports,
as well as the 2008 and 2009 annual implementation reports, the final
expenditure certification and the winding-up declarations from the audit
authority. The final Monitoring Committee meetings were
held during the first quarter of 2010 (exception of one OP "Administração
Pública" held in December 2009), where the overall execution of each
programme was discussed and the final reports were approved, as well as the two
specific sections, for 2008 and 2009, as annual activity reports for those
years. In few cases the consultation of the monitoring committees took the form
of written procedure. Considered not to have any useful purpose, no annual
meetings under article 34.2 of the regulation 1260/1999 were organised in 2010.
All the Portuguese CSF III 2000-2006
operational programmes, and the three URBAN Community Initiative Programmes in
Portugal, completed their implementation period and the execution of the ERDF
2000-2006 programming period is globally satisfactory in financial and physical
terms being the rate of execution above 100% (109%) with some overbooking in
most of the operational programmes which allowed for substitution of potential
irregular expenditure by other regular expenditure. This was the case of the
PRIME operational programme showing 128% execution rate. No financial transactions were carried out in
2010, for most of the programmes the ceiling of 95% of interim payments with
the advance was reached in 2009 so no further intermediate payment claims were
submitted by the Member State. All the closure documents
were submitted within the deadline (30th September 2010), the final
reports were submitted first, as they were approved by the monitoring
committees and the balance payment claims, with the final certification of
expenditure and the winding-up declarations, were submitted close to the
deadline but all in time according to the sending date. No automatic decommitment procedures were
initiated, as the ‘n+2’ threshold will be calculated at programme closure. Several programmes are affected by
irregularities reported by the Member State to OLAF (in application of
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1681/94). In the run-up to closure of the
programmes, initial arbitration made it possible to propose the closure of a
number of cases to OLAF. There were no financial transactions in 2010 as
the seventeen operational programmes co-financed by the ESF reached the 95.0 %
payment limit in 2009. A total amount of 4.545 mio EUR was paid out of 4.748
mio EUR ESF total allocation.. As far as the FIFG is concerned, at the end of 2010
reimbursements amounted to EUR 221 million out of EUR 237 million,
corresponding to 93.5 % of the total FIFG appropriations to the eight
operational programmes. With the extension to 30 June
2009 of the eligibility deadline for the height multi-funds programmes, the
final execution is between 98 and 100% according the operational programme
concerned. As for the EAGGF Guidance Section, at the end
of 2009 two out of nine programmes did not reach the 95.0 payment limit (according
to Article 32(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999). The Norte programme
(1999PT161PO017) reached the payment limit in 2010 by submitting a last interim
payment application, while while no more applications were received for the the
Technical Assistance programme (2000PT161PO001) whose execution rate reached
only 42.1 %. The 27 closure documents were submitted on time (30 September
2010). Check of the documents started in the last quarter of 2010. Three recovery orders have been established for
a total of EUR 17.8 million. The Norte, Centro and Agricultura e
Desenvolvimento Rural programmes are touched by these financial corrections
resulting from Commission audit missions.
20.2.
Community Initiatives
20.2.1.
Equal
The 95.0 % payment limit of the programme
budget was reached in 2009, so no financial transaction was carried out in
2010. An amount of EUR110 million was reimbursed. out of EUR115,8 million toal
allocation.. No monitoring committee meetings were organised
in 2009. The managing authority continued its efforts to
mainstream EQUAL best practice and took advantage of the extended eligibility
period to make full use of the allocations available. Efforts were also made to transfer knowledge,
mainly by promoting the use of EQUAL innovation solutions by training operators
(especially in the field of social development contracts and difficult areas).
20.2.2.
Leader
By the end of 2008, the LEADER+ programme had
already reached the 95.0 % payment limit. The closure documents for the programme have
been submitted on time (30 September 2010) and their check started in the
last quarter of 2010. No automatic decommitment procedure was
initiated, as the ‘n+2’ threshold will be calculated at programme closure. The programme is affected by a small number of
irregularities reported by the Member State to OLAF (in application of
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1681/94). In the run-up to closure of the
programmes, initial arbitration made it possible to propose the closure of four
cases to OLAF.
20.2.3.
Urban
There are three URBAN II Programmes in
Portugal: Amadora, Lisboa and Porto-Gondomar. Overall, these programmes tackle
serious socio-economic and environment problems in inner-city areas. The
managing authorities for the programmes are at regional level, whereas the
beneficiaries are different bodies of the corresponding municipalities and
local public enterprises. As it has been indicated for the Objective 1
interventions, the Monitoring Committees of the three Programmes approved at
the end of 2009 a request for extending the payments end date, which was
approved by a global Commission Decision in March 2010 for all the Portuguese
interventions. The Monitoring Committee met in
January 2010 and approved the related final implementation reports.
20.3.
Closure of 1994-1999 programming period
The closure is now complete for the 1994-1999
programming period for CSF II with a recovery of 18.5 M€ on Operational
Programme "Modernização do Tecido Económico" related to irregular
expenditure. 4 cases reported by the
Member State to OLAF (in application of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1681/94) were still open in 2010 and were closed in the meantime in the
database.
21.
Slovakia
2000-2006 programming period Slovakia received a total EU contribution of
over EUR 1 137 million for the programming period 2004-2006 under the CSF (i.e.
funding from the ERDF, ESF, EAGGF and FIFG). This is split into three mono-fund
operational programmes (two ERDF and one ESF) and one operational programme
funded from the EAGGF and the FIFG respectively, as described below. There are
also Objective 2 and Objective 3 single programming documents for the Bratislava
Region
21.1.
Objective 1
OP Basic Infrastructure The programme benefitted from the extension of
the eligibility period until 30 June 2009. In 2010, the monitoring committee
approved the final implementation report via written procedure. The closure documents
(final report, winding-up declaration, final payment claim) were formally
submitted to the Commission in September 2010. The analysis of the closure
documents by the Commission Services had not been fully completed by the end of 2010; the closure process has been interrupted. In
total, EUR 401.2 million had already been paid out up to the end of 2008,
representing 95.0 % of overall commitments. Therefore, in 2009, only clearing
of pre-financing took place. There were no payments and no
clearing of pre-financing in 2010. No ‘n+2’ decommitments
were carried out during the period of implementation. There is an agreed 5.0 %
flat-rate financial correction for this programme resulting from deficiencies in
public procurement procedures. About 1130 projects (excluding
technical assistance) were financed under the operational programme, including
large environmental projects, road and railway projects, schools,
hospitals, social care facilities, cultural facilities, information technology projects and regeneration of settlements. OP Industry & Services The programme benefitted from the extension of
the eligibility period until 30 June 2009. In 2010, the monitoring committee
approved the final implementation report via written procedure. The closure
documents (final report, winding-up declaration, final payment claim) were
formally submitted to the Commission in September 2010. The analysis of the
closure documents by the Commission Services had not been fully completed by the end of 2010; the closure process has been interrupted. By the
end of 2008, EUR 140.7 million had already been paid, representing 93.1 % of
the overall commitment. There were no payments and no clearing of pre-financing in 2010. There is an agreed 10 % flat-rate financial correction for
this programme
resulting from deficiencies in public procurement procedures. About 480 projects (excluding technical assistance) were supported
under the operational programme, including investments in private companies and
public infrastructure to support innovation, business incubators, industrial
parks, research and development, energy efficiency and tourism The Agriculture and Rural Development OP
The programme benefited from the extension of
the eligibility period until 30 June 2009. In terms of
financial resources, the programme accounts for 16 % of funds for programming
period 2004 – 2006 under the CSF, with a contribution from the EAGGF Guidance
section of EUR 181 million. The main intervention areas were investments in
agricultural and processing holdings and support for promoting adaptation and
development of rural areas. In 2010, two consultations by written procedure
were held within the Monitoring Committee on the final report of the programme.
No amount was paid out by the Commission as 95.0 % of the total programmed
amount had been reached by the end of June 2008. All closure documents were
submitted to the Commission in due time, by the end of September 2010. The level of contracting was 104 % from
the FIFG contribution to the operational programme and the FIFG funding was
mainly used in aquaculture (52 %) and processing & marketing (44 %). The Commission
made the last interim payment in 2008, reaching the 95.0 % payment limit.
All projects were completed by the end of 2008. Slovakia requested an extension
until 30 June 2009 of the final date for eligibility of expenditure under the
Agriculture and Rural Development Operational Programme. SK has used 100 % of its
FIFG allocation (1,9 M€) for 20 operations. The closure letter was sent on
31/03/2011 and the final balance was paid out on 19/04/2011. The ESF Human Resources OP benefitted
from the extension of the eligibility period until 30 June 2009. There was no
monitoring committee meeting in 2009; the last one took place in 2010. The
Commission did
not process any payments in 2010. In total (advance and interim payments) EUR 270.2 million was paid
to the Paying Authority, representing 95.0 % of the total 2004-2006
allocation. Decommitments under the ‘n+2’ rule did not take place for this
programme. The projects financed included active labour market policy
development, improving the qualifications and adaptability of employees and job
seekers, and increasing social inclusion and equal opportunities in the
labour market. The closure documents were received on 6 October 2010 and the
analysis of the documents is on-going.
21.2.
Objective 2
SPD 2 programme Bratislava The programme benefitted from the extension of
the eligibility period until 30 June 2009. In 2010, the monitoring committee
approved the final implementation report via written procedure. The closure
documents (final report, winding-up declaration, final payment claim) were
formally submitted to the Commission in September 2010. The analysis of the
closure documents by the Commission Services had not been fully completed by the end of 2010; the closure process has been interrupted. In
total, EUR 35.2 million had already been paid out up to the end of 2008, of
which EUR 14.1 million was paid in 2008. This amounts to 95.0 % of overall
commitments. Therefore, in 2009 only clearing of pre-financing took place
under. There were no payments and no clearing of pre-financing in
2010. A decommitment under the ‘n+2’ rule took place in relation to the 2004
annual commitment. There is an agreed 5.0 % flat-rate financial correction for
this OP
resulting from deficiencies in public procurement.
About 260 projects (excluding technical assistance) were financed under the
SPD, including investments in SMEs, public infrastructure in support of
entrepreneurs, tourism and regeneration of settlements.
21.3.
Objective 3
SPD 3 programme Bratislava The programme benefitted from the extension of
the eligibility period until 30 June 2009. SPD held no monitoring
committee meetings in 2009; the last one took place in 2010. The Commission did not process any payments in 2010. In total (advance and
interim payments), EUR 35.3 million was paid to the Paying Authority,
representing 95.0 % of the total 2004-2006 allocation. Decommitment under
the ‘n+2’ rule took place in relation to the 2004 and 2005 annual commitment.
Projects financed included demand-driven and national projects for active
labour market policy development, life-long learning development and support to
R&D.The
closure documents were received on 5 October 2010 (the analysis of the
documents is in progress).
21.4.
Community Initiatives
21.4.1.
Equal
The eligibility period was extended until
30 June 2009. There were no monitoring committee meetings in 2009;
the last one took place in 2010. The Commission did not process any payments in 2010. In total (advance and
interim payments), EUR 21.1 million was paid to the Paying Authority,
representing 95.0 % of the total 2004-2006 allocation. Decommitment under
the ‘n+2’ rule did not take place in relation to EQUAL. The closure documents
were received on 5 October 2010 and the analysis of the documents is on-going.
22.
Slovenia
2000-2006 programming period
22.1.
Objective 1
During 2010 the national authorities
concentrated on the closure of the programme and funds. In line with the
extension of the final date for eligibility of expenditure for the Slovene Single
programming Document (SPD) 2004-2006 by six months until 30 June 2009, the
Commission received the complete closure documents on 30 September 2010, and
the final report was considered admissible by all Commission services involved.
The assessment of the final report and other closure documents was completed
only in 2011. The ERDF interventions were to a large extent Lisbon-oriented
and focussed on key areas such as improving the business environment for entrepreneurship,
enhancing public economic infrastructure and related public services necessary
for investment, transfer of knowledge and the promotion of entrepreneurship as
well as fostering innovation and research. A preliminary analysis of the final
report for the ERDF interventions showed that the majority of target values of
the indicators fixed for the programme were achieved or exceeded. Over 7,900 jobs
were created, and nine centres of excellence, 15 business zones across Slovenia
and over 5,900 small and medium-sized enterprises received support. The impact
of the ERDF was overall positive with a clear added value at macro economic
level and, for instance, in terms of initiating research and development
networks and organisational structures (technology centres/parks, clusters). The
main portion of ERDF funds was invested in the Eastern and South-Eastern parts
of Slovenia thus contributing to reduce the development disparities within the
country. The cumulative amount of ERDF payments made by
the Commission until the end of 2010 (incl. advance payments) amounted to EUR 129.7
million equivalent to 95% of the total allocation to the programme. No
automatic de-commitments under the “n+2” rule had to be made during its
implementation, and it is expected that after assessment of the closure
documents, the ERDF allocation will be fully absorbed. As the final date for eligibility of
expenditure was set on 30 June 2009, no meeting of the Monitoring Committee took
place in 2010, yet the committee was duly consulted on the closure of the
programme and endorsed the final report by written procedure. The annual reports for 2008 and the first
semester of 2009 were included in the final report submitted on 30 September
2010 and were declared admissible, though its assessment was continued in 2011.
No annual meeting took place in 2010. The Slovene SPD 2004-2006 contains a specific
priority for technical assistance which was destined to ensure financial
support from the ERDF and the ESF for effective implementation of the
development strategy. This included activities to facilitate the management,
follow-up, control, monitoring and evaluation of the programme. The eligibility period was extended until
30 June 2009. The payments for the ESF share of the programme reached
the 95.0 % payment limit (including advance payments) before the beginning
of 2009. All closure documents were submitted to the Commission in due time by
the end of September 2010. The expected level of reimbursement at closure is
98.6%. As regards financial execution of the
EAGGF-Guidance section, the Slovenian Objective 1 programme already reached the
95.0 % payment limit for the 2004-2006 period in 2008, amounting to total
payments of EUR 22.4 million. Therefore no payments were made in 2010. The total FIFG allocation within the SPD for
structural assistance in Slovenia under Objective 1 (2004-2006) amounts to EUR
1.8 million, of which an amount of EUR 1.5 million was certified before
the end of 2008. Legally binding commitments were reported to have covered the
whole FIFG allocation. The payment limit of 95.0 % was reached; payments
to the Member State amounted to EUR 1.7 million. The latest statement of
expenditure showed EUR 1.9 million spent for the Community share, which is an
‘overbooking’ in case some of the expenditure is found not to be eligible at
closure. In fact EUR 0.4 million, or possibly more,
risks having to be recovered and decommitted at closure due to the sale of the
company to which the aid was granted, the largest beneficiary of FIFG aid under
the Slovenian SPD. The aforementioned risk could be averted by
explanations given at Closure, and the remaining 5% of the budget were prepared
still in 2010 for payment of the final balance thsu bringing the execution rate
of the Slovenian FIFG budget to 100%.
22.2.
Community Initiatives
22.2.1.
Equal
The closure documents were submitted to the
Commission within the deadline, on 31 March 2010. The programme was closed in
March 2011 with a recovery in the amount of 1 million EUR. The reimbursement
rate at the end of the programme was 70%.
23.
Finland
2000-2006 programming period For the 2000-2006 period, Finland was allocated
EUR 2 124 million from the Structural Funds, of which approximately 60.0 %
ERDF, 26.0 % ESF, 13.5 % EAGGF and 0.5 % FIFG. The funds
were allocated to two Objective 1 programmes, three Objective 2 programmes, two
Objective 3 programmes, one FIFG programme, nine IINTERREG
programmes, one URBAN programme, one LEADER programme and one EQUAL
Community Initiative programme.
23.1.
Objective 1
The Northern and Eastern Finland Objective 1
programmes did not have any ongoing activity in 2010. At the national level, EU
funds were fully committed to projects and approximately 100.0 % of
EU funding was paid to final beneficiaries. At the Commission level, 100.0 % of
the programme funds were committed by the end of 2007 and 95.0 % of
programme funds had been paid to Finland, including advance payments. No ‘n+2’
decommitments were made for any of the programmes. No monitoring committee meetings were organised
for the two programmes in 2010. The quantitative and horizontal objectives set
for the programmes were achieved. The programmes helped to create nearly 40 000
jobs and 8 300 enterprises. Over 250 000 people participated in
ESF measures. In addition, the programmes strengthened the role of
regions, fostered regional identity and responsibility for local development,
improved multi-annual strategic planning, and promoted partnership and
cooperation between the different levels of public administration and other stakeholders.
New methods and models were created in the field of employment and education
and training policies At the closure of the programmes, an amount of
EUR 129.3 million or 99.9 %
of the total EAGGF for the programme was paid out for the Eastern Finland
programme, EUR 0.121 million
was decommitted at the closure. For Northern Finland programme EUR 69.9 million
was paid out at the closure, corresponding to 96.9% of the total EAGGF
financing for the programme. EUR 2.3 million was decommitted at the closure. The Northern and Eastern Finland Objective 1
programmes did not have any activity in 2010. EU funds were fully committed to
projects and approximately 100.0 % of EU funding was paid to
final beneficiaries. 95.0 % of programme funds had been paid to Finland,
including advance payments. No ‘n+2’ decommitments were made for any of the
programmes. In both programmes support was allocated mainly to inland fishing
measures including ice-fishing, followed by processing and marketing measures.
The closure documentation was submitted on 25th June 2010 for the
Eastern program and on 30th June 2010 for the Northern program. The
analysis is ongoing.
23.2.
Objective 2
The three Finnish Objective 2 programmes for
Southern Finland, Western Finland and the Åland Islands did not have any
ongoing activity in 2010. At national level, over 100.0 % of EU funds were
committed to projects and 100.0 % of EU funding was paid to final
beneficiaries in Southern and Western Finland, and, for the Åland Islands,
the funds are virtually fully committed and payment levels about 93.0 %.
At Commission level, 100.0 % of the programme funds had been committed by
the end of 2008 and 95.0 % of programme funds paid to the national
authorities, including advance payments. The programmes had no ‘n+2’ decommitments.
The Southern and Western Finland programmes
helped to create nearly 40 000 jobs and over 7 500 enterprises.
Over 180 000 people participated in ESF measures. The horizontal
targets for equality, environmental sustainability and information society were
reached, apart from gender equality projects in Southern Finland, where
only 50.0 % of the target was met. Due to very ambitious target setting,
the target for creating new enterprises will only be partly met: 50.0 %
for Western Finland and 57.0 % for Southern Finland. The Åland Islands
Objective 2 programme helped to create around 200 new jobs and 30 new
enterprises. No monitoring committee meetings were organised
for the Finnish Objective 2 programmes in 2010. Extension of 2000-2006 programming period Because of the global financial crisis, the
Commission decided to give the Member States more time to finalise the
programming period 2000-2006. Finland applied to extend the programming period
until 30 June 2009. The remaining resources (approximately EUR 38.5 million)
were budgeted again and there were about 160 new projects.
23.3.
Objective 3
Budgeted ESF funding for Finland’s Objective 3
programmes, including the Åland Islands, totalled EUR 436.6 million.
Finland applied for the eligibility period for the Mainland programme to be
extended until 30 June 2009. By the end of 2009, the payment limit of 95.0 %
was reached for the mainland programme. No extension was requested for the
Åland programme, which reached 88.8 % level of payments. About 540 000
people in total participated in the activities funded by Objective 3
programmes. The Mainland programme helped to create 9 114 new enterprises
and 21 040 new jobs. The monitoring committee for the mainland
Finland programme met on 15 April 2010 to adopt the final report. The annual
review meeting was held in Helsinki on 11 March 2010. The issue relevant to the
Objective 3 programme was the progress of the closure process and expected
delivery of the final report. The closure documents for the Mainland programme
were submitted in June 2010. Those for the Åland Islands programme were
submitted in March 2010
23.4.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
The programme did not have any activity in
2010. EU funds were fully committed to projects and approximately 100.0 % of
EU funding was paid to final beneficiaries. 95.0 % of programme funds had
been paid to Finland, including advance payments. Support was mainly given to
processing and marketing measures followed by fishing port facilities and
collective actions. No ‘n+2’ decommitments were made for the program. The
closure documentation was received on 1 October 2010. Analysis is ongoing.
23.5.
Community Initiatives
23.5.1.
Equal
Finland had decided to run down the EQUAL
programme according to the original schedule, and no prolongation of the
eligibility period was requested. Thus there were no operations running in
2010. The final payment level was estimated to be 94.0 %. Finland
submitted the closure documents in March 2010Leader In 2001, the Commission approved a Leader+
programme for Finland. Twenty-five Local Action Groups (LAGs) were selected and
are supported by a national network. At the closure of the programme, an amount of
EUR 51.3 million or 91.0 % of the total EAGGF funding was paid out, while
EUR 5.0 million were decommitted. Overall, the Leader+ programme has reached or
exceeded its targets. Only the overall employment target has not been achieved,
but employment of women and young people has exceeded the expected level. All
in all 4 612 projects were financed. The majority of the projects were
non-farm-related investment in enterprises. The Leader+ programme provided a
good complement to the other EU‑financed programmes on rural areas.
23.5.2.
Leader
In 2001, the Commission approved a Leader+
programme for Finland. Twenty-five Local Action Groups (LAGs) were selected and
are supported by a national network.
At the closure of the programme, an amount of EUR 51.3 million or 91.0 % of the
total EAGGF financing was paid out, while EUR 5.0 million was decommitted.
Overall, the Leader+ programme has reached or exceeded its targets. Only the
overall employment target has not been achieved, but employment of women and
young people has exceeded the expected level. All in all 4612 projects were
financed. The majority of the projects were non-farm-related investment in
enterprises. The Leader+ programme provided a good complement to the other EU
financed programmes on rural areas
23.5.3.
Urban
The Helsinki-Vantaa URBAN II programme is the
only one in Finland. The ERDF will contribute a total of EUR 5.4 million
to this programme, for which the total eligible cost amounts to EUR
20.4 million. The managing authority for the programme is the City of
Helsinki and the functional day-to-day management is delegated to URBAN
Helsinki-Vantaa. The URBAN programme in Helsinki/Vantaa did not
have any ongoing activity in 2010.
23.6.
Closure of the 1994-1999 programming period
All Finnish Structural Fund programmes from the
1994-1999 programming period were closed before 2006.
24.
Sweden
2000-2006 programming period General Objectives 1 and 2 The two Objective 1 programmes for Sweden,
Norra Norrlandsregionen and Södra Skogslänsregionen, cover 65 % of
Sweden’s land area but only 11 % of the total population. The funding of
the programmes accounts for 33% of the total allocation from the Structural
Funds 2000-2006 in Sweden. When including national public and private
participation, the Structural Funds generated assistance of EUR 2 100
million through the Objective 1 programmes. The four Objective 2 programmes, the North,
West, South and the Islands programmes, cover approximately 16 % of the
Swedish population. The funding for the programmes represents 18% of the total
allocation from the Structural Funds 2000-2006 in Sweden. When
including national public and private participation, the Structural Funds
generated assistance of EUR 1 500 million through the Objective 2
programmes. The Swedish programmes (all funds) created
more than 110 000 new or preserved jobs and more than 26 000 new
companies. There were no monitoring committee meetings in
2009 and 2010. Annual implementation reports for 2008 for three programmes were
approved in written procedure by the Monitoring Committees and accepted by the
Commission at the end of 2009. Annual implementation reports for 2008 for the
remaining programmes were included in the final reports, submitted end March
2010. Activities in 2010 were dominated by the closure of the 2000-2006
programmes. Closure documents for all programmes were submitted to the
Commission end of March 2010
24.1.
Objective 1
ERDF, ESF and EAGGF-Guidance Section By the end of 2009, the Commission had already paid
out 95 % of the total ERDF budget, 94.0 % of the total ESF
budget and 95.0 % of the total EAGGF budget. No decommitments following
the ‘n+2’ rule were necessary in 2010. The closure is carried out by fund and
is progressing according to plan. Financial closure is expected in 2011. The ERDF contributed to improving the
competitiveness of SMEs and increasing cooperation between them. The support
for R&D activities in SMEs and research centres contributed to raising the
expenditure on R&D in the regions. It also strengthened local partnerships.
The EAGGF contributed to the development in the
farm-, forestry and reindeer sector (e.g: modernisation, processing and
marketing, training) and to rural development measures such as small scale
tourism, services, village development and conservation of rural heritage and
last but not least environmental protection measures connected to agriculture
and forestry as well as animal welfare.
24.2.
Objective 2
By the end of 2009, the Commission had already
paid out 95 % of the total budget. The closure of the programmes is
carried out by fund and is progressing according to plan. By the end of 2010,
the payment of the final ERDF balance had been carried out for one of the
Objective 2 programmes (the Islands programme), with the remaining expected to
follow in 2011. The ERDF helped to adapt development to the
requirements of global competition. It contributed to a substantial increase in
expenditure on R&D, the development of advanced services and scientific and
cultural exchanges, improving the business environment and stimulating
knowledge‑driven development.
24.3.
Objective 3
The available ESF allocation for the SPD
amounted to EUR 780 million for the period 2000-2006. By the end of 2009, 94.0 %
of the total ESF budget had been paid out by the Commission. The closure
documents were submitted in March 2010. The closure is expected to be finalised
in 2011. Almost 48 000 projects were implemented in
the programming period and most of the targets set were reached. The number of
participants exceeded the targets for all priorities, amounting to a total of
about 1.7 million persons. The targets for the number of persons who started a
company and the number of people at work six months after participating in a
project were not fully reached. Nonetheless, the programme showed good overall
results.
24.4.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
The total FIFG allocation to the Swedish
fisheries programme outside Objective 1, including the reserve, is EUR 65
million. The programme had a rather low level of implementation. There were
decommitments for four consecutive years in application of the ‘n+2’ rule. In
total, the programme has so far been reduced by EUR 11 million. The financial
execution reached 86.5 % (EUR 46.7 million out of EUR 54 million). Sweden
submitted the closure documents in April 2010. The closure procedure has
reached an advanced phase of analysis. The Swedish final payment claim amounts
to EUR 45.5 million. The main measures in the programme were scrapping of
vessels, processing and marketing, innovative measures/pilot projects, fishing
port equipment, protection of aquatic resources, collective investments, and
renewal and modernisation of the fleet.
24.5.
Community Initiatives
24.5.1.
Equal
The rate of financial execution of the ESF part
of the programme already reached the 95.0 % payment limit in 2008.. Three
monitoring committee meetings and an annual review meeting were held in 2009.
The closure documents were submitted in March 2010. The closure is expected to
be finalised in 2011. Many of the experiences from the EQUAL
programme, especially when it comes to partnership, innovation,
transnationality and ways to influence system and policies, have been
mainstreamed in the 2007-2013 ESF operational programme.
24.5.2.
Leader
In 2001, the Commission approved one Swedish
Leader+ programme. Total support from the EAGGF-Guidance Section amounted to
EUR 41.2 million. In total, twelve Local Action Groups were selected. The
implementation of the programme reached its end in 2008. By the end of 2008
approximately 116.0 % of the total EAGGF budget for 2000–2006 had been
allocated to projects. By the end of 2009 the Commission had in total paid out
EUR 39.2 million (of which EUR 2.8 million as advances), an amount
equivalent to 95.0 % of the total EAGGF budget. No automatic decommitment
needed to be executed. Payment claims presented to the Commission up to the end
of 2009 amounted to EUR 38.2 million. The final report has been accepted in
December 2010 and the financial closure procedure will be finished in 2011. The
final amount accepted beginning of 2011 is 37.977.806,42 € = 92,15 % of the
total financial plan.
24.5.3.
Urban
The Göteborg URBAN II programme is the only
URBAN programme in Sweden. The funding for the programmes represents 0.2% of
the total allocation from the Structural Funds 2000-2006 in Sweden. When including national
participation, the Structural Funds generated assistance of EUR 16 million
through the URBAN programme. The programme strategy has a coherent approach
combining entrepreneurship, infrastructure improvement and equal opportunities.
The programme reached 94.7 % of payments in 2009 and the ‘n+2’ rule was
met. The annual implementation report for 2008 was included in the final
report, submitted end of March 2010. The closure of the programme is
progressing according to plan with financial closure expected in 2011.
24.6.
Closure of the 1994-1999 programming period
The last programmes from the budget period
1994-1999 were already closed in 2004.
25.
United Kingdom
2000-2006 programming period
25.1.
Objective 1
The ERDF provided a total of EUR 3 970 million
(excluding Peace II programme) to Objective 1 programmes in the United Kingdom
during the programming period. FIFG support was available in five Objective 1
programmes, for a total of EUR 94.3 million.Closure documents for all FIFG
programmes were received in due time in 2010. Four final narrative reports of
FIFG Objective 1 programmes have been accepted by DG MARE. Analysis of the last
final narrative report, as well as the financial information of all 5
programmes is in process. Final eligible FIFG uptake figures are therefore not
available yet.The ESF provided a total of EUR 1 886 million to Objective
1programmes in the United Kingdom during the programming period (including the
Northern Ireland BSP programme). The total ERDF amount paid out in 2010 was EUR
71.7 million. All the final claims for UK Objective 1 arrived
in due time as scheduled. The total average consumption was 92% of the total
ESF allocated for the 2000-2006 programming period. Automatic decommitments were made for a total
of EUR 77 million. in 2010 and EUR 27million. in 2011. The closure process is
underway for the English programmes, after the irregularities reconciliation
was made. Concerning Scotland further clarifications are still needed
concerning irregularities. For the EAGGF, the total amount (excluding
PEACE II) paid by the end of 2009 was EUR 344 million (95 % of the
scheduled budget for the 2000‑2006 programming period). Closure documents
for the UK objective 1 operational programmes were received by the deadline of
31/3/2010 (3 programmes) or 30/9/2010 (3 programmes). The documents are under
treatment. Assistance was provided through five Single
Programming Documents and two Operational Programmes. Three of the Single
Programming Documents concern the English regions of Cornwall and the Isles of
Scilly, Merseyside and South Yorkshire; the other two Single Programming
Documents concern Wales (West Wales and The Valleys) and Scotland (transitional
programme for Highlands and Islands). Each programme covers four to six
priority areas, grouped around five main themes: support for small and
medium-sized business, support for business modernisation, community economic
regeneration, human resource development and development of strategic
infrastructure. The two Operational Programmes under the
Northern Ireland Community Support Framework are funded by all four Structural
Funds. They are: ‘Building Sustainable Prosperity’ (BSP), a transitional
Objective 1 programme, and the EU Programme for Peace and Reconciliation in
Northern Ireland and the Border Region of Ireland (‘PEACE II’ programme
2000–2006). Extension of the final date of eligibility of
expenditure until 30 June 2009 was given for West Wales and the Valleys,
Highlands and Islands of Scotland and the BSP Operational Programme of Northern
Ireland, due to the impact of the 2008 financial crisis. PEACE II The ‘PEACE II’ programme covers Northern
Ireland and the border regions of Ireland. It builds on the experience of the
special support programme ‘PEACE I’ (1995–1999) and exemplifies the practical
support given by the EU to the peace process after the Belfast Agreement.
Initially PEACE II covered the period 2000-2004 but in 2004 it was decided to
provide additional funding and extend the programme to 2006, bringing it into
line with the other Structural Funds programmes in the rest of the European
Union. No interim payment claims were received for the
PEACE II programme for the ERDF in 2010. An extension of the final date of
eligibility until 30 June 2009 was given for the PEACE II programme. The final claim for the PEACE II programme
arrived in time as scheduled. The absorption was 100% of the total ESF funding
for the period 2000/2006 of which 95% was already paid. The analysis of the documents is finished
except for the OLAF reconciliation where some more clarifications are needed
concerning irregularities. The total FIFG allocation for Northern Ireland
is EUR 0.8 million. No execution took place in 2009 as the 95.0 %
payment limit had already been reached. Closure documents for the programme
were received in due time in 2010 and the final FIFG narrative report have been
accepted by DG MARE. Analysis of the financial information of the programme is
in process. Final eligible FIFG uptake figures are therefore not available yet.
25.2.
Objective 2
The ERDF provided a total of EUR 4 526 million
and the ESF a total of EUR 526.8 million for Objective 2 programmes in the
United Kingdom. The funds were implemented through fourteen Single Programming
Documents. Nine programmes covered the English regions of West Midlands,
Yorkshire and the Humber, East Midlands, North East of England, North West of
England, East England, South East England, South West England and London; three
covered the regions of South of Scotland, East of Scotland and Western Scotland;
one concerns East Wales and one Gibraltar. Each programme covered an average of
three priority areas, grouped around three main themes: developing diverse,
dynamic and competitive business bases, strategic spatial development, and
community regeneration and economic and social development. The UK Objective 2
programmes were adopted in 2001, meaning that increasing levels of activity and
progress were not registered until 2003. The total amount of ERDF paid in 2010
was EUR 24.6 million. Extensions of the final date of eligibility of
expenditure until 30 June 2009, due to the impact of the 2008 financial crisis,
were given for East Wales, Gibraltar, and Eastern, Western and South Scotland. The total ESF amount of interim claim paid out
in 2010 for Western Scotland Objective 2 is
EUR 16.5 million. The final claims for all UK Objective 2 programmes arrived in
due time as scheduled. The total average consumption was 92% of the total ESF
allocated for the 2000-2006 programming period. Automatic decommitments were made
for a total of € 59 ml. in 2010. The analysis of the documents is finished but
the final reports are not yet approved Overall summary of the 2000-2006 period The final eligibility dates for PEACE II, BSP
Northern Ireland Objective 1, the Welsh and Scottish Operational Programmes
were extended to 30 June 2010. and all closure packages were received by that
date. All English ESF and the two GB EQUAL programmes
retained the original final eligibility date of 31 December 2008 and closure
packages were received by end of March 2010 On 31 March 2010, the
Commission received all closure-related documents for those UK and Irish
programmes for which the final date of eligibility had not been extended. These
included all English programmes, URBAN II Clyde Waterfront and URBAN II West
Wrexham. In the case of Ireland, the closure package sent was that of URBAN II
Dublin Ballyfermot. The closure package for Northern Ireland "Building
Sustainable Prosperity" had been sent in August 2009. The remainder of the
closure packages for the UK and Ireland were sent on 30 September 2010. For the
UK these included Highlands & Islands, South of Scotland, East of Scotland
and Western Scotland; West Wales and the Valleys and East Wales as well as
Gibraltar and PEACE II. In the case of Ireland the closure packages covered the
Productive Sector OP, the Technical Assistance OP, the Economic and Social
Infrastructure OP, the Southern and Eastern Ireland OP and the Borders, Midland
and Western OP. The Gibraltar programme was
closed on 20 December 2010.
25.3.
Objective 3
The ESF provides a total of EUR 4 948
million for Objective 3 programmes in Great Britain, implemented through
one Community Support Framework and three Operational Programmes: England (EUR
4 290 million), Scotland (EUR 520 million) and East Wales (EUR 138.0
million). The programmes were implemented through five
policy fields: active labour markets, equal opportunities and social inclusion,
lifelong learning, adaptability and entrepreneurship and gender equality. The
English OP alone supported about 6 630 projects and helped more than 5.26
million people through a range of employability, training, advice and guidance
activities. Almost half a million unemployed or inactive participants gained
jobs and 1.4 million participants gained qualifications. After a formal suspension of the Objective 3
Scotland Programme in 2008 and after the action plan had been implemented by
the Scottish Authorities, the audit problems were solved end 2009. An Interim
payment was then paid out for Scotland Objective 3 of EUR 107.6 ml in 2010. All the closure documents for the three
programmes were received in due time. The English Objective 3 programme consumption
was 92% of the total ESF allocated for the 2000-2006 programming period and an
automatic decommitment was made for 214.4M The East Wales Objective 3 programme
consumption was 94.7 of the total ESF allocated for the 2000-2006 programming
period and an automatic decommitment of 9.1 ml. was made. The Scottish Objective 3 programme consumption
was 89.1% of the total ESF allocated for the 2000-2006 programming period and
an automatic decommitment of 28.8 ml. was made. The analysis of the documents is finished and
some clarification is still needed concerning irregularities
25.4.
Fisheries outside Objective 1
The UK FIFG outside Objective 1 programme was
closed in 2008; the end date of eligibility was 30 April 2009. DG MARE accepted
the final narrative report of the progamme in March 2011, the analysis of
financial information is in process. The total FIFG allocation to the programme
was
EUR 88.9 million following the last decommitment in 2008 of EUR 4.3 million of
the 2005 commitment. Total declared FIFG expenditures amount 77,2 MEUR, i.e.
only 61% of the original allocation of 125,5 MEUR. Final eligible FIFG uptake
figures are not available yet. The most important measures were processing and
marketing (35.3 % of FIFG committed), scrapping (19.8 % of FIFG
committed), operations by members of trade (15.1 % of FIFG committed) and
fishing port facilities (16.4 % of FIFG committed).
25.5.
Community Initiatives
25.5.1.
Equal
The UK has two EQUAL programmes: Great Britain
(GB) and Northern Ireland (NI). The closure package for N.I. Equal programme
and UK Equal programme were sent in due time. The documents were analysed and accepted.
The N.I. Equal programme is closed, a final
payment of 1.157.192€ was made on 16/12/2010 and the closure letter was sent to
the MS on 22/12/2010. The total consumption is 92.9% of the total ESF allocated
for the 2000-2006 programming period and an automatic decommitment of 0.8 M.was
made. The UK Equal programme closure is underway. All
documents have been accepted and a final payment of 25.010.727€ is proposed.
25.5.2.
Leader
The UK has four Leader+ programmes: England,
Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales with fifty-five Local Action Groups. The
total cost of the four programmes amounts to EUR 266.0 million, of which the
EAGGF-Guidance Section contributes EUR 115.0 million. By the end of 2009, a total amount of EUR 109.4
million was paid (95 % of the total budget for the 2000-2006 programming
period). All the programmes reached their ‘n+2’ targets. The extension of the final date of eligibility
of expenditure until 30 June 2009 was requested in December 2008 for Leader+
Northern Ireland, due to the impact of the 2008 financial crisis. Closure documents for the UK Leader+ programmes
were submitted by the deadline of 31/3/2010 (3 programmes) or 30/9/2010
(Northern Ireland Leader+ programme). The Leader+ England programme was closed
at the end of 2010. For the other UK Leader+ programmes, the closure documents
are under treatment.
25.5.3.
Urban
In the UK, the ERDF supported eleven programmes
under the URBAN II Community Initiative, eight of them in England, one in
Wales, one in Scotland and one in Northern Ireland. These programmes proposed
innovative development models for the economic and social regeneration of the
areas concerned, and finance projects to this end. Partnership in design,
selection and implementation of projects was a key feature of the URBAN II programmes. The total ERDF support allocated to all 11
programmes was EUR 126.2 million. In 2010, total payments to URBAN II
programmes reached EUR 11.6 million (the average absorption rate for all
programmes reached 92 %).
25.6.
Closure of the 1994-1999 programming period
All ERDF programmes are closed All ESF programmes were already closed at the
end of 2008. All EAGGF programmes are closed. Part 3: List of Major Projects A list of major projects for the 2000-2006
programming period was included in Part 3 of the Commission Staff Working
Document accompanying the 18th Annual Report on the Implementation of the
Structural Funds (COM(2007) 676), as amended in Part 3 of Commission Staff
Working Document accompanying the 20th Annual Report on the
Implementation of the Structural Funds (COM(2009) 617) and the Commission Staff
Working Document accompanying the 21st Annual Report on the
Implementation of the Structural Funds (COM(2010) 587). That list remains valid
and can be consulted for further details. There were no major projects decisions
in 2010. Part 4: Financial Figures Financial implementation 2010: Objectives
1-3 || || Sum of all transactions, up to 2010, since the beginning of the programming period 2000-2006 || Financial year: 2010 Country || || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF Belgique-België || 1.Decided || 843,903,942.00 || 1,045,114,317.00 || 41,805,665.00 || 1,556,226.00 || 1,932,380,150.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 843,903,942.00 || 1,022,053,069.47 || 41,805,665.00 || 1,556,225.78 || 1,909,318,902.25 || || -23,061,248.04 || || || -23,061,248.04 3.Paid || 799,985,250.39 || 991,207,998.54 || 36,663,486.00 || 1,478,414.70 || 1,829,335,149.63 || 23,710,020.09 || 1,518,147.72 || || 950,000.92 || 26,178,168.73 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 97.79 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 98.81 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.80 % || 94.84 % || 87.70 % || 95.00 % || 94.67 % || || || || || Ceska Republika || 1.Decided || 985,562,948.00 || 424,890,166.00 || 169,790,354.00 || 4,111,073.00 || 1,584,354,541.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 985,562,948.00 || 424,890,166.00 || 169,790,354.00 || 4,111,073.00 || 1,584,354,541.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 936,284,800.60 || 403,645,657.70 || 161,300,836.00 || 3,905,519.35 || 1,505,136,813.65 || || 1,292,762.34 || || || 1,292,762.34 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Danmark || 1.Decided || 141,648,773.00 || 446,121,951.00 || || || 587,770,724.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 141,648,773.00 || 397,125,340.98 || || || 538,774,113.98 || || -34,049,348.12 || || || -34,049,348.12 3.Paid || 133,363,289.34 || 362,762,350.49 || || || 496,125,639.83 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 89.02 % || || || 91.66 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.15 % || 81.31 % || || || 84.41 % || || || || || Deutschland || 1.Decided || 15,424,973,509.00 || 11,289,253,220.00 || 3,417,719,969.00 || 91,495,213.00 || 30,223,441,911.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 15,424,973,512.68 || 10,921,876,551.95 || 3,417,287,030.86 || 91,495,212.58 || 29,855,632,308.07 || || -367,376,668.90 || -432,937.14 || || -367,809,606.04 3.Paid || 14,721,321,360.25 || 10,723,033,324.13 || 3,284,973,761.86 || 86,920,452.35 || 28,816,248,898.59 || 83,187,413.60 || || 38,139,792.86 || || 121,327,206.46 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 96.75 % || 99.99 % || 100.00 % || 98.78 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.44 % || 94.98 % || 96.12 % || 95.00 % || 95.34 % || || || || || Eesti || 1.Decided || 232,820,142.00 || 69,275,610.00 || 56,798,282.00 || 12,469,418.00 || 371,363,452.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 232,820,142.00 || 68,816,786.76 || 56,798,282.00 || 12,469,418.00 || 370,904,628.76 || || -458,823.24 || || || -458,823.24 3.Paid || 221,179,134.88 || 65,640,753.54 || 53,958,367.00 || 11,845,947.10 || 352,624,202.52 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 99.34 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.88 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 94.75 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 94.95 % || || || || || Ellada || 1.Decided || 15,152,463,366.00 || 4,771,653,980.00 || 2,550,311,562.00 || 213,893,365.00 || 22,688,322,273.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 15,152,463,366.20 || 4,771,653,979.60 || 2,550,311,562.00 || 213,893,365.00 || 22,688,322,272.80 || || || || || 3.Paid || 14,394,840,197.60 || 4,533,071,280.03 || 2,422,795,979.00 || 203,198,696.75 || 21,553,906,153.38 || 15,888,922.42 || 3,051,126.75 || 1,096,525.00 || || 20,036,574.17 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || España || 1.Decided || 27,904,766,267.00 || 11,699,051,196.00 || 5,232,503,468.00 || 1,570,925,014.00 || 46,407,245,945.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 27,904,766,267.00 || 11,666,155,505.57 || 5,232,503,468.28 || 1,570,925,014.00 || 46,374,350,254.85 || || -32,895,691.28 || || || -32,895,691.28 3.Paid || 26,371,895,708.51 || 10,919,194,712.78 || 4,970,878,288.52 || 1,492,378,763.30 || 43,754,347,473.11 || 346,388,171.05 || 17,071,891.16 || || || 363,460,062.21 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 99.72 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.93 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.51 % || 93.33 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 94.28 % || || || || || France || 1.Decided || 8,167,416,971.00 || 6,666,386,443.00 || 670,263,108.00 || 33,842,296.00 || 15,537,908,818.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 8,167,416,972.00 || 6,306,018,437.59 || 670,263,108.00 || 33,842,296.00 || 15,177,540,813.59 || 758,730.98 || -360,368,004.01 || || || -359,609,273.03 3.Paid || 7,745,898,631.80 || 6,252,565,174.87 || 636,749,950.00 || 31,853,568.87 || 14,667,067,325.54 || || 27,460,236.95 || || 34,344.44 || 27,494,581.39 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 94.59 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 97.68 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.84 % || 93.79 % || 95.00 % || 94.12 % || 94.40 % || || || || || Ireland || 1.Decided || 1,946,313,000.00 || 1,016,487,000.00 || 153,636,289.00 || 67,800,000.00 || 3,184,236,289.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 1,946,313,000.00 || 1,016,487,000.00 || 153,636,289.00 || 67,800,000.00 || 3,184,236,289.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 1,837,448,414.77 || 961,937,618.00 || 145,954,474.00 || 64,410,000.00 || 3,009,750,506.77 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.41 % || 94.63 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 94.52 % || || || || || Italia || 1.Decided || 18,639,088,813.00 || 8,457,731,299.00 || 3,258,998,890.00 || 288,055,284.00 || 30,643,874,286.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 18,639,088,813.00 || 8,422,039,892.39 || 3,258,998,890.00 || 288,055,283.61 || 30,608,182,879.00 || || -35,691,407.03 || || || -35,691,407.03 3.Paid || 17,699,749,395.62 || 7,510,696,850.00 || 3,033,531,694.00 || 254,262,266.92 || 28,498,240,206.54 || 946,683,482.07 || 101,651,077.73 || 94,131,901.00 || 5,536,379.17 || 1,148,002,839.97 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 99.58 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.88 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.96 % || 88.80 % || 93.08 % || 88.27 % || 93.00 % || || || || || Kypros || 1.Decided || 28,022,807.00 || 21,945,197.00 || || || 49,968,004.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 28,022,807.00 || 21,945,197.00 || || || 49,968,004.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 26,621,666.65 || 20,847,937.15 || || || 47,469,603.80 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Latvija || 1.Decided || 382,043,677.00 || 127,341,960.00 || 91,848,189.00 || 24,335,000.00 || 625,568,826.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 382,043,677.00 || 127,341,960.00 || 91,848,189.00 || 24,335,000.00 || 625,568,826.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 362,941,493.15 || 120,974,862.00 || 87,255,779.00 || 23,118,250.00 || 594,290,384.15 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Lietuva || 1.Decided || 583,939,739.00 || 176,217,551.00 || 122,898,628.00 || 12,116,766.00 || 895,172,684.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 583,939,739.00 || 176,217,551.00 || 122,898,628.00 || 12,116,766.00 || 895,172,684.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 554,742,752.05 || 167,406,673.45 || 116,753,696.00 || 11,510,927.70 || 850,414,049.20 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Luxembourg (Grand-Duche) || 1.Decided || 44,000,000.00 || 31,682,966.00 || || || 75,682,966.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 44,000,000.00 || 31,682,966.63 || || || 75,682,966.63 || || || || || 3.Paid || 41,800,000.00 || 25,990,446.00 || || || 67,790,446.00 || || 2,549,530.50 || || || 2,549,530.50 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 82.03 % || || || 89.57 % || || || || || Magyarország || 1.Decided || 1,239,381,188.00 || 439,117,222.00 || 312,828,868.00 || 4,389,882.00 || 1,995,717,160.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 1,239,381,188.00 || 438,841,598.78 || 312,828,868.00 || 4,389,882.00 || 1,995,441,536.78 || || -275,623.22 || || || -275,623.22 3.Paid || 1,177,412,128.60 || 417,153,038.84 || 297,187,419.00 || 3,990,044.92 || 1,895,742,631.36 || || 17,459,007.36 || || || 17,459,007.36 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 99.94 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.99 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 90.89 % || 94.99 % || || || || || Malta || 1.Decided || 46,697,639.00 || 9,457,500.00 || 4,200,000.00 || 2,837,500.00 || 63,192,639.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 46,697,639.00 || 9,457,500.00 || 4,200,000.00 || 2,837,500.00 || 63,192,639.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 44,362,757.05 || 8,984,625.00 || 3,990,000.00 || 2,695,625.00 || 60,033,007.05 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Nederland || 1.Decided || 940,660,000.00 || 1,565,741,433.00 || 10,398,242.00 || 6,280,000.00 || 2,523,079,675.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 940,660,000.00 || 1,564,038,690.16 || 10,398,242.00 || 6,280,000.00 || 2,521,376,932.16 || || -1,702,742.84 || || || -1,702,742.84 3.Paid || 890,236,188.62 || 1,486,356,104.85 || 9,878,329.00 || 5,906,146.00 || 2,392,376,768.47 || 64,393,280.74 || 6,220,169.83 || 1,719,795.00 || || 72,333,245.57 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 99.89 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.93 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.64 % || 94.93 % || 95.00 % || 94.05 % || 94.82 % || || || || || Österreich || 1.Decided || 885,173,694.00 || 656,938,420.00 || 43,684,352.00 || 257,784.00 || 1,586,054,250.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 884,203,372.36 || 655,988,574.07 || 43,684,352.00 || 257,784.09 || 1,584,134,082.52 || -970,321.68 || -949,845.93 || || || -1,920,167.61 3.Paid || 858,533,637.81 || 624,706,090.36 || 43,684,352.00 || 195,451.73 || 1,527,119,531.90 || 861,378.51 || 614,591.36 || 2,184,218.00 || || 3,660,187.87 % (2)/(1) || 99.89 % || 99.86 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.88 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 96.99 % || 95.09 % || 100.00 % || 75.82 % || 96.28 % || || || || || Polska || 1.Decided || 4,972,788,583.00 || 1,908,502,751.00 || 1,192,689,238.00 || 201,832,064.00 || 8,275,812,636.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 4,972,788,583.00 || 1,908,502,751.00 || 1,192,689,238.00 || 201,832,064.00 || 8,275,812,636.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 4,724,149,153.85 || 1,813,077,613.45 || 1,133,054,776.00 || 177,788,079.98 || 7,848,069,623.28 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 88.09 % || 94.83 % || || || || || Portugal || 1.Decided || 13,229,822,910.00 || 4,784,220,439.00 || 2,185,038,433.00 || 236,816,863.00 || 20,435,898,645.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 13,229,822,910.00 || 4,784,220,439.05 || 2,185,038,432.57 || 236,816,863.00 || 20,435,898,644.62 || || || || || 3.Paid || 12,568,231,567.68 || 4,545,009,417.05 || 2,060,567,852.00 || 224,929,584.87 || 19,398,738,421.60 || || || 2,623,837.00 || 3,443,884.68 || 6,067,721.68 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 94.30 % || 94.98 % || 94.92 % || || || || || Slovenija || 1.Decided || 136,523,478.00 || 75,635,986.00 || 23,569,093.00 || 1,781,040.00 || 237,509,597.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 136,523,478.00 || 74,615,524.76 || 23,569,093.00 || 1,781,040.00 || 236,489,135.76 || || -1,020,461.24 || || || -1,020,461.24 3.Paid || 129,697,304.10 || 71,854,186.70 || 22,390,638.00 || 1,691,988.00 || 225,634,116.80 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 98.65 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.57 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Slovenska Republica || 1.Decided || 610,606,848.00 || 321,599,056.00 || 181,158,922.00 || 1,829,065.00 || 1,115,193,891.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 610,606,847.30 || 321,599,057.12 || 181,158,922.00 || 1,829,065.00 || 1,115,193,891.42 || || || || || 3.Paid || 577,121,220.55 || 305,519,103.20 || 172,100,975.00 || 1,737,611.75 || 1,056,478,910.50 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.52 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 94.73 % || || || || || Suomi/Finland || 1.Decided || 910,807,000.00 || 834,231,400.00 || 201,640,000.00 || 8,884,000.00 || 1,955,562,400.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 910,807,000.00 || 804,747,800.28 || 201,640,000.00 || 8,884,000.00 || 1,926,078,800.28 || || -29,483,599.72 || || || -29,483,599.72 3.Paid || 865,164,572.29 || 792,351,783.30 || 199,250,797.76 || 8,439,800.00 || 1,865,206,953.35 || || || 7,692,797.76 || || 7,692,797.76 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 96.47 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 98.49 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.99 % || 94.98 % || 98.82 % || 95.00 % || 95.38 % || || || || || Sverige || 1.Decided || 875,439,631.00 || 998,005,293.00 || 116,044,514.00 || 8,425,923.00 || 1,997,915,361.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 875,439,631.00 || 941,046,571.60 || 116,044,514.00 || 8,425,923.82 || 1,940,956,640.42 || || -56,971,671.00 || || || -56,971,671.00 3.Paid || 832,003,029.30 || 938,989,976.75 || 110,242,287.00 || 7,280,756.24 || 1,888,516,049.29 || 335,379.85 || || || || 335,379.85 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 94.29 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 97.15 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.04 % || 94.09 % || 95.00 % || 86.41 % || 94.52 % || || || || || United Kingdom || 1.Decided || 8,864,321,357.00 || 7,535,301,392.00 || 400,196,902.00 || 97,763,651.00 || 16,897,583,302.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 8,864,321,357.28 || 7,155,877,020.59 || 400,196,902.00 || 97,763,650.42 || 16,518,158,930.29 || || -379,424,370.99 || || || -379,424,370.99 3.Paid || 8,381,088,485.54 || 7,077,227,509.16 || 380,298,950.00 || 85,137,027.77 || 15,923,751,972.47 || 96,863,164.79 || 123,559,228.32 || 5,414,229.00 || || 225,836,622.11 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 94.96 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 97.75 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.55 % || 93.92 % || 95.03 % || 87.08 % || 94.24 % || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || Total || 1. Decided || 123,189,186,282.00 || 65,371,903,748.00 || 20,438,022,968.00 || 2,891,697,427.00 || 211,890,810,425.00 || || || || || || 2.Committed || 123,188,215,964.82 || 64,033,239,932.35 || 20,437,590,029.71 || 2,891,697,426.30 || 210,550,743,353.18 || -211,590.70 || -1,323,729,505.56 || -432,937.14 || || -1,324,374,033.4 || 3.Paid || 116,896,072,141.00 || 61,140,205,087.34 || 19,383,462,687.14 || 2,704,674,923.30 || 200,124,414,838.78 || 1,578,311,213.12 || 302,447,770.02 || 153,003,095.62 || 9,964,609.21 || 2,043,726,687.97 || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 97.95 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.37 % || || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.89 % || 93.53 % || 94.84 % || 93.53 % || 94.45 % || || || || || Source: Commission database SFC / ABAC / SINCOM Financial
implementation 2010: Objective 1 || || Sum of all transactions, up to 2010, since the beginning of the programming period 2000-2006 || Financial year: 2010 Country || || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF Belgique-België || 1.Decided || 427,589,200.00 || 200,203,797.00 || 41,805,665.00 || 1,556,226.00 || 671,154,888.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 427,589,200.00 || 193,172,088.09 || 41,805,665.00 || 1,556,225.78 || 664,123,178.87 || || -7,031,708.91 || || || -7,031,708.91 3.Paid || 406,209,740.00 || 190,193,607.15 || 36,663,486.00 || 1,478,414.70 || 634,545,247.85 || 1,633,809.05 || || || 950,000.92 || 2,583,809.97 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 96.49 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 98.95 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 87.70 % || 95.00 % || 94.55 % || || || || || Ceska Republika || 1.Decided || 914,267,548.00 || 366,096,803.00 || 169,790,354.00 || 4,111,073.00 || 1,454,265,778.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 914,267,548.00 || 366,096,803.00 || 169,790,354.00 || 4,111,073.00 || 1,454,265,778.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 868,554,170.60 || 347,791,962.85 || 161,300,836.00 || 3,905,519.35 || 1,381,552,488.80 || || 1,292,762.34 || || || 1,292,762.34 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Deutschland || 1.Decided || 12,177,017,415.00 || 5,816,988,103.00 || 3,417,719,969.00 || 91,495,213.00 || 21,503,220,700.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 12,177,017,415.21 || 5,678,824,751.65 || 3,417,287,030.86 || 91,495,212.58 || 21,364,624,410.30 || || -138,163,350.94 || -432,937.14 || || -138,596,288.08 3.Paid || 11,647,928,536.51 || 5,526,138,697.85 || 3,284,973,761.86 || 86,920,452.35 || 20,545,961,448.57 || 83,050,000.00 || || 38,139,792.86 || || 121,189,792.86 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 97.62 % || 99.99 % || 100.00 % || 99.36 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.66 % || 95.00 % || 96.12 % || 95.00 % || 95.55 % || || || || || Eesti || 1.Decided || 232,820,142.00 || 69,275,610.00 || 56,798,282.00 || 12,469,418.00 || 371,363,452.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 232,820,142.00 || 68,816,786.76 || 56,798,282.00 || 12,469,418.00 || 370,904,628.76 || || -458,823.24 || || || -458,823.24 3.Paid || 221,179,134.88 || 65,640,753.54 || 53,958,367.00 || 11,845,947.10 || 352,624,202.52 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 99.34 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.88 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 94.75 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 94.95 % || || || || || Ellada || 1.Decided || 15,152,463,366.00 || 4,771,653,980.00 || 2,550,311,562.00 || 213,893,365.00 || 22,688,322,273.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 15,152,463,366.20 || 4,771,653,979.60 || 2,550,311,562.00 || 213,893,365.00 || 22,688,322,272.80 || || || || || 3.Paid || 14,394,840,197.60 || 4,533,071,280.03 || 2,422,795,979.00 || 203,198,696.75 || 21,553,906,153.38 || 15,888,922.42 || 3,051,126.75 || 1,096,525.00 || || 20,036,574.17 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || España || 1.Decided || 25,351,187,210.00 || 9,080,273,167.00 || 5,232,503,468.00 || 1,570,925,014.00 || 41,234,888,859.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 25,351,187,210.00 || 9,076,893,196.48 || 5,232,503,468.28 || 1,570,925,014.00 || 41,231,508,888.76 || || -3,379,970.16 || || || -3,379,970.16 3.Paid || 23,998,121,237.17 || 8,452,555,425.24 || 4,970,878,288.52 || 1,492,378,763.30 || 38,913,933,714.23 || 228,827,259.04 || || || || 228,827,259.04 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 99.96 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.99 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.66 % || 93.09 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 94.37 % || || || || || France || 1.Decided || 2,466,235,644.00 || 947,715,419.00 || 670,263,108.00 || 33,842,296.00 || 4,118,056,467.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 2,466,235,644.91 || 907,452,800.28 || 670,263,108.00 || 33,842,296.00 || 4,077,793,849.19 || 758,730.98 || -40,262,618.72 || || || -39,503,887.74 3.Paid || 2,332,574,931.08 || 874,387,318.30 || 636,749,950.00 || 31,853,568.87 || 3,875,565,768.25 || || 7,834,812.28 || || 34,344.44 || 7,869,156.72 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 95.75 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.02 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.58 % || 92.26 % || 95.00 % || 94.12 % || 94.11 % || || || || || Ireland || 1.Decided || 1,946,313,000.00 || 1,016,487,000.00 || 153,636,289.00 || 67,800,000.00 || 3,184,236,289.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 1,946,313,000.00 || 1,016,487,000.00 || 153,636,289.00 || 67,800,000.00 || 3,184,236,289.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 1,837,448,414.77 || 961,937,618.00 || 145,954,474.00 || 64,410,000.00 || 3,009,750,506.77 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.41 % || 94.63 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 94.52 % || || || || || Italia || 1.Decided || 15,918,088,813.00 || 4,401,926,099.00 || 3,258,998,890.00 || 288,055,284.00 || 23,867,069,086.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 15,918,088,813.00 || 4,401,926,099.42 || 3,258,998,890.00 || 288,055,283.61 || 23,867,069,086.03 || || || || || 3.Paid || 15,122,184,372.35 || 3,659,856,235.35 || 3,033,531,694.00 || 254,262,266.92 || 22,069,834,568.62 || 946,683,482.07 || 3,578,472.09 || 94,131,901.00 || 5,536,379.17 || 1,049,930,234.33 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 83.14 % || 93.08 % || 88.27 % || 92.47 % || || || || || Latvija || 1.Decided || 382,043,677.00 || 127,341,960.00 || 91,848,189.00 || 24,335,000.00 || 625,568,826.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 382,043,677.00 || 127,341,960.00 || 91,848,189.00 || 24,335,000.00 || 625,568,826.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 362,941,493.15 || 120,974,862.00 || 87,255,779.00 || 23,118,250.00 || 594,290,384.15 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Lietuva || 1.Decided || 583,939,739.00 || 176,217,551.00 || 122,898,628.00 || 12,116,766.00 || 895,172,684.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 583,939,739.00 || 176,217,551.00 || 122,898,628.00 || 12,116,766.00 || 895,172,684.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 554,742,752.05 || 167,406,673.45 || 116,753,696.00 || 11,510,927.70 || 850,414,049.20 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Magyarország || 1.Decided || 1,239,381,188.00 || 439,117,222.00 || 312,828,868.00 || 4,389,882.00 || 1,995,717,160.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 1,239,381,188.00 || 438,841,598.78 || 312,828,868.00 || 4,389,882.00 || 1,995,441,536.78 || || -275,623.22 || || || -275,623.22 3.Paid || 1,177,412,128.60 || 417,153,038.84 || 297,187,419.00 || 3,990,044.92 || 1,895,742,631.36 || || 17,459,007.36 || || || 17,459,007.36 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 99.94 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.99 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 90.89 % || 94.99 % || || || || || Malta || 1.Decided || 46,697,639.00 || 9,457,500.00 || 4,200,000.00 || 2,837,500.00 || 63,192,639.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 46,697,639.00 || 9,457,500.00 || 4,200,000.00 || 2,837,500.00 || 63,192,639.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 44,362,757.05 || 8,984,625.00 || 3,990,000.00 || 2,695,625.00 || 60,033,007.05 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Nederland || 1.Decided || 81,660,000.00 || 33,590,000.00 || 10,398,242.00 || 6,280,000.00 || 131,928,242.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 81,660,000.00 || 31,887,257.16 || 10,398,242.00 || 6,280,000.00 || 130,225,499.16 || || -1,702,742.84 || || || -1,702,742.84 3.Paid || 77,577,000.00 || 30,812,243.50 || 9,878,329.00 || 5,906,146.00 || 124,173,718.50 || || 6,220,169.83 || 1,719,795.00 || || 7,939,964.83 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 94.93 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 98.71 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 91.73 % || 95.00 % || 94.05 % || 94.12 % || || || || || Österreich || 1.Decided || 181,519,085.00 || 57,440,139.00 || 43,684,352.00 || 257,784.00 || 282,901,360.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 181,519,085.00 || 57,251,995.76 || 43,684,352.00 || 257,784.09 || 282,713,216.85 || || -188,143.24 || || || -188,143.24 3.Paid || 172,443,130.75 || 54,568,132.05 || 43,684,352.00 || 195,451.73 || 270,891,066.53 || || || 2,184,218.00 || || 2,184,218.00 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 99.67 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.93 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 100.00 % || 75.82 % || 95.75 % || || || || || Polska || 1.Decided || 4,972,788,583.00 || 1,908,502,751.00 || 1,192,689,238.00 || 201,832,064.00 || 8,275,812,636.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 4,972,788,583.00 || 1,908,502,751.00 || 1,192,689,238.00 || 201,832,064.00 || 8,275,812,636.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 4,724,149,153.85 || 1,813,077,613.45 || 1,133,054,776.00 || 177,788,079.98 || 7,848,069,623.28 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 88.09 % || 94.83 % || || || || || Portugal || 1.Decided || 13,229,822,910.00 || 4,784,220,439.00 || 2,185,038,433.00 || 236,816,863.00 || 20,435,898,645.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 13,229,822,910.00 || 4,784,220,439.05 || 2,185,038,432.57 || 236,816,863.00 || 20,435,898,644.62 || || || || || 3.Paid || 12,568,231,567.68 || 4,545,009,417.05 || 2,060,567,852.00 || 224,929,584.87 || 19,398,738,421.60 || || || 2,623,837.00 || 3,443,884.68 || 6,067,721.68 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 94.30 % || 94.98 % || 94.92 % || || || || || Slovenija || 1.Decided || 136,523,478.00 || 75,635,986.00 || 23,569,093.00 || 1,781,040.00 || 237,509,597.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 136,523,478.00 || 74,615,524.76 || 23,569,093.00 || 1,781,040.00 || 236,489,135.76 || || -1,020,461.24 || || || -1,020,461.24 3.Paid || 129,697,304.10 || 71,854,186.70 || 22,390,638.00 || 1,691,988.00 || 225,634,116.80 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 98.65 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.57 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Slovenska Republica || 1.Decided || 573,574,135.00 || 284,480,923.00 || 181,158,922.00 || 1,829,065.00 || 1,041,043,045.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 573,574,135.00 || 284,480,923.00 || 181,158,922.00 || 1,829,065.00 || 1,041,043,045.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 541,940,143.20 || 270,256,876.85 || 172,100,975.00 || 1,737,611.75 || 986,035,606.80 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.48 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 94.72 % || || || || || Suomi/Finland || 1.Decided || 498,641,000.00 || 279,835,000.00 || 201,640,000.00 || 8,884,000.00 || 989,000,000.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 498,641,000.00 || 276,937,540.69 || 201,640,000.00 || 8,884,000.00 || 986,102,540.69 || || -2,897,459.31 || || || -2,897,459.31 3.Paid || 473,708,950.00 || 265,843,250.00 || 199,250,797.76 || 8,439,800.00 || 947,242,797.76 || || || 7,692,797.76 || || 7,692,797.76 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 98.96 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.71 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || 98.82 % || 95.00 % || 95.78 % || || || || || Sverige || 1.Decided || 489,460,422.00 || 164,021,802.00 || 116,044,514.00 || 8,425,923.00 || 777,952,661.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 489,460,422.00 || 154,091,910.85 || 116,044,514.00 || 8,425,923.82 || 768,022,770.67 || || -9,929,890.75 || || || -9,929,890.75 3.Paid || 464,987,400.90 || 154,091,910.85 || 110,242,287.00 || 7,280,756.24 || 736,602,354.99 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 93.95 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 98.72 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 93.95 % || 95.00 % || 86.41 % || 94.68 % || || || || || United Kingdom || 1.Decided || 4,338,242,143.00 || 2,060,065,687.00 || 400,196,902.00 || 97,763,651.00 || 6,896,268,383.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 4,338,242,144.06 || 1,983,023,061.85 || 400,196,902.00 || 97,763,650.42 || 6,819,225,758.33 || || -77,042,625.81 || || || -77,042,625.81 3.Paid || 4,120,374,693.76 || 1,923,864,371.26 || 380,298,950.00 || 85,137,027.77 || 6,509,675,042.79 || 71,771,278.46 || || 5,414,229.00 || || 77,185,507.46 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 96.26 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 98.88 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.98 % || 93.39 % || 95.03 % || 87.08 % || 94.39 % || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || Total || 1. Decided || 101,340,276,337.00 || 37,070,546,938.00 || 20,438,022,968.00 || 2,891,697,427.00 || 161,740,543,670.00 || || || || || || 2.Committed || 101,340,276,339.38 || 36,788,193,519.18 || 20,437,590,029.71 || 2,891,697,426.30 || 161,457,757,314.57 || 758,730.98 || -282,353,418.38 || -432,937.14 || || -282,027,624.54 || 3.Paid || 96,241,609,210.05 || 34,455,470,099.31 || 19,383,462,687.14 || 2,704,674,923.30 || 152,785,216,919.80 || 1,347,854,751.04 || 39,436,350.65 || 153,003,095.62 || 9,964,609.21 || 1,550,258,806.52 || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 99.24 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 99.83 % || || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.97 % || 92.95 % || 94.84 % || 93.53 % || 94.46 % || || || || || Source: Commission database SFC / ABAC / SINCOM Financial implementation 2010: Objective 2 || || Sum of all transactions, up to 2010, since the beginning of the programming period 2000-2006 || Financial year: 2010 Country || || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF Belgique-België || 1.Decided || 416,314,742.00 || 48,499,226.00 || || || 464,813,968.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 416,314,742.00 || 46,200,617.23 || || || 462,515,359.23 || || -2,298,608.77 || || || -2,298,608.77 3.Paid || 393,775,510.39 || 45,185,882.01 || || || 438,961,392.40 || 22,076,211.04 || 959,285.32 || || || 23,035,496.36 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 95.26 % || || || 99.51 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.59 % || 93.17 % || || || 94.44 % || || || || || Ceska Republika || 1.Decided || 71,295,400.00 || || || || 71,295,400.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 71,295,400.00 || || || || 71,295,400.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 67,730,630.00 || || || || 67,730,630.00 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Danmark || 1.Decided || 141,648,773.00 || 51,322,702.00 || || || 192,971,475.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 141,648,773.00 || 45,376,450.61 || || || 187,025,223.61 || || -5,946,251.90 || || || -5,946,251.90 3.Paid || 133,363,289.34 || 42,806,163.90 || || || 176,169,453.24 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 88.41 % || || || 96.92 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.15 % || 83.41 % || || || 91.29 % || || || || || Deutschland || 1.Decided || 3,247,956,094.00 || 509,753,617.00 || || || 3,757,709,711.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 3,247,956,097.47 || 492,005,399.64 || || || 3,739,961,497.11 || || -17,748,218.62 || || || -17,748,218.62 3.Paid || 3,073,392,823.74 || 482,508,701.28 || || || 3,555,901,525.02 || 137,413.60 || || || || 137,413.60 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 96.52 % || || || 99.53 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.63 % || 94.66 % || || || 94.63 % || || || || || España || 1.Decided || 2,553,579,057.00 || 310,304,761.00 || || || 2,863,883,818.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 2,553,579,057.00 || 288,207,164.39 || || || 2,841,786,221.39 || || -22,097,597.42 || || || -22,097,597.42 3.Paid || 2,373,774,471.34 || 284,161,782.33 || || || 2,657,936,253.67 || 117,560,912.01 || 16,217,709.34 || || || 133,778,621.35 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 92.88 % || || || 99.23 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 92.96 % || 91.58 % || || || 92.81 % || || || || || France || 1.Decided || 5,701,181,327.00 || 800,573,924.00 || || || 6,501,755,251.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 5,701,181,327.09 || 769,290,876.96 || || || 6,470,472,204.05 || || -31,283,045.64 || || || -31,283,045.64 3.Paid || 5,413,323,700.72 || 748,903,096.22 || || || 6,162,226,796.94 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 96.09 % || || || 99.52 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.95 % || 93.55 % || || || 94.78 % || || || || || Italia || 1.Decided || 2,721,000,000.00 || || || || 2,721,000,000.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 2,721,000,000.00 || || || || 2,721,000,000.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 2,577,565,023.27 || || || || 2,577,565,023.27 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.73 % || || || || 94.73 % || || || || || Kypros || 1.Decided || 28,022,807.00 || || || || 28,022,807.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 28,022,807.00 || || || || 28,022,807.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 26,621,666.65 || || || || 26,621,666.65 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Luxembourg (Grand-Duche) || 1.Decided || 44,000,000.00 || || || || 44,000,000.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 44,000,000.00 || || || || 44,000,000.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 41,800,000.00 || || || || 41,800,000.00 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Nederland || 1.Decided || 859,000,000.00 || || || || 859,000,000.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 859,000,000.00 || || || || 859,000,000.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 812,659,188.62 || || || || 812,659,188.62 || 64,393,280.74 || || || || 64,393,280.74 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.61 % || || || || 94.61 % || || || || || Österreich || 1.Decided || 703,654,609.00 || 27,525,881.00 || || || 731,180,490.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 702,684,287.36 || 26,764,178.31 || || || 729,448,465.67 || -970,321.68 || -761,702.69 || || || -1,732,024.37 3.Paid || 686,090,507.06 || 26,764,178.31 || || || 712,854,685.37 || 861,378.51 || 614,591.36 || || || 1,475,969.87 % (2)/(1) || 99.86 % || 97.23 % || || || 99.76 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 97.50 % || 97.23 % || || || 97.49 % || || || || || Slovenska Republica || 1.Decided || 37,032,713.00 || || || || 37,032,713.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 37,032,712.30 || || || || 37,032,712.30 || || || || || 3.Paid || 35,181,077.35 || || || || 35,181,077.35 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Suomi/Finland || 1.Decided || 412,166,000.00 || 117,834,000.00 || || || 530,000,000.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 412,166,000.00 || 113,244,026.29 || || || 525,410,026.29 || || -4,589,973.71 || || || -4,589,973.71 3.Paid || 391,455,622.29 || 111,942,300.00 || || || 503,397,922.29 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 96.10 % || || || 99.13 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.98 % || 95.00 % || || || 94.98 % || || || || || Sverige || 1.Decided || 385,979,209.00 || 54,020,791.00 || || || 440,000,000.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 385,979,209.00 || 51,350,420.56 || || || 437,329,629.56 || || -2,670,370.44 || || || -2,670,370.44 3.Paid || 367,015,628.40 || 51,319,751.45 || || || 418,335,379.85 || 335,379.85 || || || || 335,379.85 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 95.06 % || || || 99.39 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.09 % || 95.00 % || || || 95.08 % || || || || || United Kingdom || 1.Decided || 4,526,079,214.00 || 526,806,805.00 || || || 5,052,886,019.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 4,526,079,213.22 || 467,729,142.05 || || || 4,993,808,355.27 || || -59,077,662.87 || || || -59,077,662.87 3.Paid || 4,260,713,791.78 || 459,621,519.77 || || || 4,720,335,311.55 || 25,091,886.33 || 16,545,045.91 || || || 41,636,932.24 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 88.79 % || || || 98.83 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.14 % || 87.25 % || || || 93.42 % || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || Total || 1. Decided || 21,848,909,945.00 || 2,446,641,707.00 || || || 24,295,551,652.00 || || || || || || 2.Committed || 21,847,939,625.44 || 2,300,168,276.04 || || || 24,148,107,901.48 || -970,321.68 || -146,473,432.06 || || || -147,443,753.74 || 3.Paid || 20,654,462,930.95 || 2,253,213,375.27 || || || 22,907,676,306.22 || 230,456,462.08 || 34,336,631.93 || || || 264,793,094.01 || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 94.01 % || || || 99.39 % || || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.53 % || 92.09 % || || || 94.29 % || || || || || Source: Commission database SFC / ABAC / SINCOM Financial
implementation 2010: Objective 3 || || Sum of all transactions, up to 2010, since the beginning of the programming period 2000-2006 || Financial year: 2010 Country || || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF Belgique-België || 1.Decided || || 796,411,294.00 || || || 796,411,294.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 782,680,364.15 || || || 782,680,364.15 || || -13,730,930.36 || || || -13,730,930.36 3.Paid || || 755,828,509.38 || || || 755,828,509.38 || || 558,862.40 || || || 558,862.40 % (2)/(1) || || 98.28 % || || || 98.28 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 94.90 % || || || 94.90 % || || || || || Ceska Republika || 1.Decided || || 58,793,363.00 || || || 58,793,363.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 58,793,363.00 || || || 58,793,363.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || 55,853,694.85 || || || 55,853,694.85 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Danmark || 1.Decided || || 394,799,249.00 || || || 394,799,249.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 351,748,890.37 || || || 351,748,890.37 || || -28,103,096.22 || || || -28,103,096.22 3.Paid || || 319,956,186.59 || || || 319,956,186.59 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 89.10 % || || || 89.10 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 81.04 % || || || 81.04 % || || || || || Deutschland || 1.Decided || || 4,962,511,500.00 || || || 4,962,511,500.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 4,751,046,400.66 || || || 4,751,046,400.66 || || -211,465,099.34 || || || -211,465,099.34 3.Paid || || 4,714,385,925.00 || || || 4,714,385,925.00 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 95.74 % || || || 95.74 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || España || 1.Decided || || 2,308,473,268.00 || || || 2,308,473,268.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 2,301,055,144.70 || || || 2,301,055,144.70 || || -7,418,123.70 || || || -7,418,123.70 3.Paid || || 2,182,477,505.21 || || || 2,182,477,505.21 || || 854,181.82 || || || 854,181.82 % (2)/(1) || || 99.68 % || || || 99.68 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 94.54 % || || || 94.54 % || || || || || France || 1.Decided || || 4,918,097,100.00 || || || 4,918,097,100.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 4,629,274,760.35 || || || 4,629,274,760.35 || || -288,822,339.65 || || || -288,822,339.65 3.Paid || || 4,629,274,760.35 || || || 4,629,274,760.35 || || 19,625,424.67 || || || 19,625,424.67 % (2)/(1) || || 94.13 % || || || 94.13 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 94.13 % || || || 94.13 % || || || || || Italia || 1.Decided || || 4,055,805,200.00 || || || 4,055,805,200.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 4,020,113,792.97 || || || 4,020,113,792.97 || || -35,691,407.03 || || || -35,691,407.03 3.Paid || || 3,850,840,614.65 || || || 3,850,840,614.65 || || 98,072,605.64 || || || 98,072,605.64 % (2)/(1) || || 99.12 % || || || 99.12 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 94.95 % || || || 94.95 % || || || || || Kypros || 1.Decided || || 21,945,197.00 || || || 21,945,197.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 21,945,197.00 || || || 21,945,197.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || 20,847,937.15 || || || 20,847,937.15 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Luxembourg (Grand-Duche) || 1.Decided || || 31,682,966.00 || || || 31,682,966.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 31,682,966.63 || || || 31,682,966.63 || || || || || 3.Paid || || 25,990,446.00 || || || 25,990,446.00 || || 2,549,530.50 || || || 2,549,530.50 % (2)/(1) || || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 82.03 % || || || 82.03 % || || || || || Nederland || 1.Decided || || 1,532,151,433.00 || || || 1,532,151,433.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 1,532,151,433.00 || || || 1,532,151,433.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || 1,455,543,861.35 || || || 1,455,543,861.35 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Österreich || 1.Decided || || 571,972,400.00 || || || 571,972,400.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 571,972,400.00 || || || 571,972,400.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || 543,373,780.00 || || || 543,373,780.00 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Slovenska Republica || 1.Decided || || 37,118,133.00 || || || 37,118,133.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 37,118,134.12 || || || 37,118,134.12 || || || || || 3.Paid || || 35,262,226.35 || || || 35,262,226.35 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Suomi/Finland || 1.Decided || || 436,562,400.00 || || || 436,562,400.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 414,566,233.30 || || || 414,566,233.30 || || -21,996,166.70 || || || -21,996,166.70 3.Paid || || 414,566,233.30 || || || 414,566,233.30 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 94.96 % || || || 94.96 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 94.96 % || || || 94.96 % || || || || || Sverige || 1.Decided || || 779,962,700.00 || || || 779,962,700.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 735,604,240.19 || || || 735,604,240.19 || || -44,371,409.81 || || || -44,371,409.81 3.Paid || || 733,578,314.45 || || || 733,578,314.45 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 94.31 % || || || 94.31 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 94.05 % || || || 94.05 % || || || || || United Kingdom || 1.Decided || || 4,948,428,900.00 || || || 4,948,428,900.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 4,705,124,816.69 || || || 4,705,124,816.69 || || -243,304,082.31 || || || -243,304,082.31 3.Paid || || 4,693,741,618.13 || || || 4,693,741,618.13 || || 107,014,182.41 || || || 107,014,182.41 % (2)/(1) || || 95.08 % || || || 95.08 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 94.85 % || || || 94.85 % || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || Total || 1. Decided || || 25,854,715,103.00 || || || 25,854,715,103.00 || || || || || || 2.Committed || || 24,944,878,137.13 || || || 24,944,878,137.13 || || -894,902,655.12 || || || -894,902,655.12 || 3.Paid || || 24,431,521,612.76 || || || 24,431,521,612.76 || || 228,674,787.44 || || || 228,674,787.44 || % (2)/(1) || || 96.48 % || || || 96.48 % || || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 94.50 % || || || 94.50 % || || || || || Source: Commission database SFC / ABAC / SINCOM Financial implementation 2010: Community
Initiatives || || Sum of all transactions, up to 2010, since the beginning of the programming period 2000-2006 || Financial year: 2010 Country || || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF Belgique-België || 1.Decided || 21,387,345.00 || 68,237,842.00 || 14,326,747.00 || || 103,951,934.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 21,387,345.62 || 62,079,628.20 || 14,627,257.00 || || 98,094,230.82 || || -6,158,210.45 || || || -6,158,210.45 3.Paid || 20,317,977.75 || 61,804,746.41 || 12,115,845.83 || || 94,238,569.99 || || 3,307,552.79 || 4.81 || || 3,307,557.60 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 90.98 % || 102.10 % || || 94.36 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 90.57 % || 84.57 % || || 90.66 % || || || || || Ceska Republika || 1.Decided || || 32,100,930.00 || || || 32,100,930.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 32,100,929.00 || || || 32,100,929.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || 30,495,883.34 || || || 30,495,883.34 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Danmark || 1.Decided || 5,380,115.00 || 30,0428,011.00 || 17,300,208.00 || || 53,108,334.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 5,380,115.00 || 25,599,382.14 || 17,300,208.00 || || 48,279,705.14 || || -4,414,565.31 || || || -4,414,565.31 3.Paid || 5,111,109.25 || 24,627,778.43 || 16,380,016.89 || || 46,118,904.57 || || || 1,118,601.89 || || 1,118,601.89 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 84.13 % || 100.00 % || || 90.91 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.00 % || 80.94 % || 94.68 % || || 86.84 % || || || || || Deutschland || 1.Decided || 149,639,795.00 || 523,585,685.00 || 255,874,055.00 || || 929,099,535.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 148,635,680.92 || 477,370,553.76 || 255,284,372.65 || || 881,290,607.33 || -1,004,113.42 || -46,215,131.24 || -589,681.60 || || -47,808,926.26 3.Paid || 144,140,156.61 || 477,370,553.76 || 244,873,682.62 || || 866,384,392.99 || 2,983,595.33 || || 2,744,695.62 || || 5,728,290.95 % (2)/(1) || 99.33 % || 91.17 % || 99.77 % || || 94.85 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 96.32 % || 91.17 % || 95.70 % || || 93.25 % || || || || || Eesti || 1.Decided || || 4,068,097.00 || || || 4,068,097.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 3,864,692.15 || || || 3,864,692.15 || || -203,404.85 || || || -203,404.85 3.Paid || || 3,864,692.15 || || || 3,864,692.15 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Ellada || 1.Decided || 24,130,374.00 || 105,938,327.00 || 186,129,877.00 || || 316,198,578.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 24,130,375.81 || 105,938,102.00 || 186,129,877.00 || || 316,198,354.81 || || || || || 3.Paid || 19,528,289.77 || 100,641,410.65 || 176,823,383.00 || || 296,993,083.42 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 80.93 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || 93.93 % || || || || || España || 1.Decided || 114,199,845.00 || 511,222,482.00 || 497,080,370.00 || || 1,122,502,697.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 114,199,845.00 || 467,941,719.75 || 497,080,370.00 || || 1,079,221,934.75 || || -43,280,761.26 || || || -43,280,761.26 3.Paid || 102,248,121.76 || 467,941,719.75 || 467,847,531.24 || || 1,038,037,372.75 || 1,860,367.67 || || 8,252,457.24 || || 10,112,824.91 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 91.53 % || 100.00 % || || 96.14 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 89.53 % || 91.53 % || 94.12 % || || 92.48 % || || || || || EU cross-border cooperation || 1.Decided || 4,324,336,688.00 || || || || 4,324,336,688.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 4,308,610,350.95 || || || || 4,308,610,350.95 || -15,726,336.00 || || || || -15,726,336.00 3.Paid || 4,064,329,672.21 || || || || 4,064,329,672.21 || 80,460,454.58 || || || || 80,460,454.58 % (2)/(1) || 99.64 % || || || || 99.64 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 93.99 % || || || || 93.99 % || || || || || EU internal needs. || 1.Decided || 18,031,417.00 || || || || 18,031,417.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 16,276,024.00 || || || || 16,276,024.00 || -1,755,393.00 || || || || -1,755,393.00 3.Paid || 16,276,024.00 || || || || 16,276,024.00 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 90.26 % || || || || 90.26 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 90.26 % || || || || 90.26 % || || || || || EU Interregional cooperation. || 1.Decided || 1,320,811,837.00 || || || || 1,320,811,837.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 1,320,811,836.35 || || || || 1,320,811,836.35 || || || || || 3.Paid || 1,196,962,659.47 || || || || 1,196,962,659.47 || 9,845,228.82 || || || || 9,845,228.82 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 90.62 % || || || || 90.62 % || || || || || France || 1.Decided || 102,548,897.00 || 287,438,101.00 || 259,909,081.00 || || 649,896,079.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 102,066,812.33 || 274,755,717.37 || 259,909,081.00 || || 636,731,610.70 || -482,084.67 || -12,682,382.96 || || || -13,164,467.63 3.Paid || 97,974,887.43 || 273,016,214.61 || 246,913,626.00 || || 617,904,728.04 || 1,690,778.58 || || || || 1,690,778.58 % (2)/(1) || 99.53 % || 95.59 % || 100.00 % || || 97.97 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 95.54 % || 94.98 % || 95.00 % || || 95.08 % || || || || || Ireland || 1.Decided || 5,380,115.00 || 34,498,648.00 || 45,927,997.00 || || 85,806,760.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 5,380,115.00 || 33,024,446.24 || 45,927,997.00 || || 84,332,558.24 || || -1,474,201.76 || || || -1,474,201.76 3.Paid || 4,521,094.57 || 32,772,223.93 || 43,631,597.00 || || 80,924,915.50 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 95.73 % || 100.00 % || || 98.28 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 84.03 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || 94.31 % || || || || || Italia || 1.Decided || 114,065,379.00 || 401,364,808.00 || 281,553,068.00 || || 796,983,255.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 114,065,379.16 || 401,364,808.00 || 281,553,068.00 || || 796,983,255.16 || || || || || 3.Paid || 107,651,827.15 || 375,382,693.35 || 248,923,490.14 || || 731,958,010.64 || 1,411,211.50 || 9,815,808.35 || 533,730.14 || || 11,760,749.99 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.38 % || 93.53 % || 88.41 % || || 91.84 % || || || || || Kypros || 1.Decided || || 1,808,793.00 || || || 1,808,793.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 1,808,793.00 || || || 1,808,793.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || 1,718,353.35 || || || 1,718,353.35 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Latvija || 1.Decided || || 8,025,784.00 || || || 8,025,784.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 8,024,903.78 || || || 8,024,903.78 || || -880.22 || || || -880.22 3.Paid || || 8,024,903.78 || || || 8,024,903.78 || || 400,408.98 || || || 400,408.98 % (2)/(1) || || 99.99 % || || || 99.99 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 99.99 % || || || 99.99 % || || || || || Lietuva || 1.Decided || || 11,866,395.00 || || || 11,866,395.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 11,376,778.42 || || || 11,376,778.42 || || -489,616.58 || || || -489,616.58 3.Paid || || 11,347,602.05 || || || 11,347,602.05 || || 74,526.80 || || || 74,526.80 % (2)/(1) || || 95.87 % || || || 95.87 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.63 % || || || 95.63 % || || || || || Luxembourg (Grand-Duche) || 1.Decided || || 4,048,041.00 || 2,137,084.00 || || 6,185,125.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 4,048,241.09 || 2,137,084.00 || || 6,185,325.09 || || || || || 3.Paid || || 3,551,071.25 || 1,991,135.00 || || 5,542,206.25 || || 591,776.63 || || || 591,776.63 % (2)/(1) || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 87.72 % || 93.17 % || || 89.61 % || || || || || Magyarország || 1.Decided || || 30,292,135.00 || || || 30,292,135.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 28,777,527.28 || || || 28,777,527.28 || || -1,514,607.72 || || || -1,514,607.72 3.Paid || || 28,777,527.28 || || || 28,777,527.28 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Malta || 1.Decided || || 1,241,163.00 || || || 1,241,163.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 1,218,073.52 || || || 1,218,073.52 || || -23,089.48 || || || -23,089.48 3.Paid || || 1,179,104.85 || || || 1,179,104.85 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 98.14 % || || || 98.14 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Nederland || 1.Decided || 30,250,460.00 || 158,221,240.00 || 81,787,596.00 || || 270,259,296.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 30,250,460.00 || 152,960,434.31 || 81,787,596.00 || || 264,998,490.31 || || -5,220,909.87 || || || -5,220,909.87 3.Paid || 27,953,364.17 || 120,808,590.54 || 77,037,758.00 || || 225,799,712.71 || 1,057,923.46 || || || || 1,057,923.46 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 96.68 % || 100.00 % || || 98.05 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 92.41 % || 76.35 % || 94.19 % || || 83.55 % || || || || || Österreich || 1.Decided || 8,526,975.00 || 103,801,243.00 || 76,833,274.00 || || 189,161,492.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 7,699,937.42 || 94,280,831.68 || 74,879,475.53 || || 176,860,244.63 || -827,037.58 || -9,520,411.32 || || || -10,347,448.90 3.Paid || 7,699,937.42 || 94,280,831.68 || 74,879,475.53 || || 176,860,244.63 || || || 1,887,865.53 || || 1,887,865.53 % (2)/(1) || 90.30 % || 90.83 % || 97.46 % || || 93.50 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 90.30 % || 90.83 % || 97.46 % || || 93.50 % || || || || || Polska || 1.Decided || || 133,938,206.00 || || || 133,938,206.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 133,938,206.00 || || || 133,938,206.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || 127,241,295.70 || || || 127,241,295.70 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Portugal || 1.Decided || 19,456,845.00 || 115,809,622.00 || 164,453,735.00 || || 299,720,202.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 19,456,845.00 || 115,809,622.00 || 164,453,735.00 || || 299,720,202.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || 16,782,859.71 || 110,019,140.90 || 156,231,048.00 || || 283,033,048.61 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 86.26 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || 94.43 % || || || || || Slovenija || 1.Decided || || 6,165,847.00 || || || 6,165,847.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 5,351,962.47 || || || 5,351,962.47 || || -813,884.69 || || || -813,884.69 3.Paid || || 5,351,962.47 || || || 5,351,962.47 || || 355,188.96 || || || 355,188.96 % (2)/(1) || || 86.80 % || || || 86.80 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 86.80 % || || || 86.80 % || || || || || Slovenska Republica || 1.Decided || || 22,266,351.00 || || || 22,266,351.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || 22,266,351.00 || || || 22,266,351.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || 21,153,033.45 || || || 21,153,033.45 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || 100.00 % || || || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || 95.00 % || || || 95.00 % || || || || || Suomi/Finland || 1.Decided || 5,380,115.00 || 73,576,763.00 || 56,378,322.00 || || 135,335,200.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 5,380,115.00 || 69,897,924.85 || 56,378,322.00 || || 131,656,361.85 || || -3,678,838.15 || || || -3,678,838.15 3.Paid || 4,911,492.23 || 69,897,924.85 || 47,898,886.00 || || 122,708,303.08 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 95.00 % || 100.00 % || || 97.28 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 91.29 % || 95.00 % || 84.96 % || || 90.67 % || || || || || Sverige || 1.Decided || 5,380,115.00 || 87,722,227.00 || 41,215,200.00 || || 134,317,542.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 5,380,115.00 || 86,334,165.13 || 41,215,200.00 || || 132,929,480.13 || || -1,388,061.87 || || || -1,388,061.87 3.Paid || 5,096,390.40 || 83,336,115.65 || 39,154,439.00 || || 127,586,945.05 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 98.42 % || 100.00 % || || 98.97 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 94.73 % || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || 94.99 % || || || || || United Kingdom || 1.Decided || 126,178,934.00 || 406,656,637.00 || 114,690,197.00 || || 647,525,768.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || 126,178,934.00 || 405,819,709.32 || 114,690,197.00 || || 646,688,840.32 || || -836,927.68 || || || -836,927.68 3.Paid || 114,136,734.97 || 380,808,981.92 || 109,470,989.98 || || 604,416,706.87 || 1,058,648.44 || 1,157,192.60 || 736,241.98 || || 2,952,083.02 % (2)/(1) || 100.00 % || 99.79 % || 100.00 % || || 99.87 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 90.46 % || 93.64 % || 95.45 % || || 93.34 % || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || Total || 1. Decided || 6,395,085,251.00 || 3,164,323,378.00 || 2,095,596,811.00 || || 11,655,005,440.00 || || || || || || 2.Committed || 6,375,290,286.56 || 3,025,953,502.46 || 2,093,353,840.18 || || 11,494,597,629.20 || -19,794,964.67 || -137,915,885.41 || -589,681.60 || || -158,300,531.68 || 3.Paid || 5,955,642,598.87 || 2,915,414,356.10 || 1,964,172,904.23 || || 10,835,229,859.20 || 100,368,208.38 || 15,702,455.11 || 15,273,597.21 || || 131,344,260.70 || % (2)/(1) || 99.69 % || 95.63 % || 99.89 % || || 98.62 % || || || || || || % (3)/(1) || 93.13 % || 92.13 % || 93.73 % || || 92.97 % || || || || || Source: Commission database SFC / ABAC / SINCOM Financial
implementation 2010: Objective F || || Sum of all transactions, up to 2010, since the beginning of the programming period 2000-2006 || Financial year: 2010 Country || || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF || ERDF || ESF || EAGGF || FIFG || Total SF Belgique-België || 1.Decided || || || || 21,309,355.00 || 21,309,355.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 21,309,355.23 || 21,309,355.23 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 19,600,054.39 || 19,600,054.39 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 91.98 % || 91.98 % || || || || || Danmark || 1.Decided || || || || 182,587,747.00 || 182,587,747.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 182,587,746.81 || 182,587,746.81 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 165,065,915.10 || 165,065,915.10 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 90.40 % || 90.40 % || || || || || Deutschland || 1.Decided || || || || 62,992,329.00 || 62,992,329.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 62,992,329.22 || 62,992,329.22 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 48,850,567.16 || 48,850,567.16 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 77.55 % || 77.55 % || || || || || España || 1.Decided || || || || 216,600,000.00 || 216,600,000.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 216,600,000.00 || 216,600,000.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 205,770,000.00 || 205,770,000.00 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || France || 1.Decided || || || || 243,800,000.00 || 243,800,000.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 243,800,000.00 || 243,800,000.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 231,610,000.00 || 231,610,000.00 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Italia || 1.Decided || || || || 99,734,031.00 || 99,734,031.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 99,734,031.00 || 99,734,031.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 94,747,329.45 || 94,747,329.45 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Kypros || 1.Decided || || || || 3,419,073.00 || 3,419,073.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 3,419,073.00 || 3,419,073.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 3,248,119.35 || 3,248,119.35 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 95.00 % || 95.00 % || || || || || Nederland || 1.Decided || || || || 32,754,732.00 || 32,754,732.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 32,754,732.00 || 32,754,732.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 26,310,085.24 || 26,310,085.24 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 80.32 % || 80.32 % || || || || || Österreich || 1.Decided || || || || 4,500,000.00 || 4,500,000.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 4,500,000.00 || 4,500,000.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 4,229,726.52 || 4,229,726.52 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 93.99 % || 93.99 % || || || || || Suomi/Finland || 1.Decided || || || || 33,500,000.00 || 33,500,000.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 33,500,000.00 || 33,500,000.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 30,781,875.81 || 30,781,875.81 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 91.89 % || 91.89 % || || || || || Sverige || 1.Decided || || || || 54,014,745.00 || 54,014,745.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 54,014,745.08 || 54,014,745.08 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 46,721,761.87 || 46,721,761.87 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 86.50 % || 86.50 % || || || || || United Kingdom || 1.Decided || || || || 88,913,742.00 || 88,913,742.00 || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 88,913,742.00 || 88,913,742.00 || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 57,770,640.53 || 57,770,640.53 || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 64.97 % || 64.97 % || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || || Total || 1. Decided || || || || 1,044,125,754.00 || 1,044,125,754.00 || || || || || || 2.Committed || || || || 1,044,125,754.34 || 1,044,125,754.34 || || || || || || 3.Paid || || || || 934,706,075.42 || 934,706,075.42 || || || || || || % (2)/(1) || || || || 100.00 % || 100.00 % || || || || || || % (3)/(1) || || || || 89.52 % || 89.52 % || || || || || Source:
Commission database SFC / ABAC / SINCOM Part 5: Use of Structural Funds in the 2000-2006 period by Objective
and Field of Intervention || Prog. complement || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure || Total (%) Total (SF) || 224,613,432,069 || 100.00 % || 222,786,376,488 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure || Total (%) Objective 1 (SF) || 161,740,543,670 || 72.01 % || 162,971,187,791 || 73.15 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 56,487,988,042 || 34.93 % || 53,523,362,783 || 32.84 % 10. Productive Environment || 31,267,582 || 0.06 % || 37,301,123 || 0.07 % 1. Productive Environment || 31,267,582 || 100.00 % || 37,301,123 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 56,487,988,042 || 34.93 % || 53,523,362,783 || 32.84 % 11. Agriculture || 8,598,071,899 || 15.22 % || 8,310,362,907 || 15.53 % 11. Agriculture || 624,878,777 || 7.27 % || 605,555,023 || 7.29 % 111. Investments in agricultural holdings || 3,871,721,686 || 45.03 % || 3,845,974,839 || 46.28 % 112. Setting up young farmers || 1,131,953,445 || 13.17 % || 1,112,487,410 || 13.39 % 114. Improving processing and marketing of agricultural products || 2,745,575,629 || 31.93 % || 2,542,088,091 || 30.59 % 113. Agriculture-specific vocational training || 189,717,003 || 2.21 % || 170,541,178 || 2.05 % 1182. Meeting standards: use of farm advisory services || 34,225,359 || 0.40 % || 33,716,365 || 0.41 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 56,487,988,042 || 34.93 % || 53,523,362,783 || 32.84 % 12. Forestry || 2,019,003,988 || 3.57 % || 2,022,821,403 || 3.78 % 12. Forestry || 489,706,179 || 24.25 % || 496,913,274 || 24.57 % 122. Improving harvesting, processing and marketing of forestry products || 98,323,271 || 4.87 % || 95,763,285 || 4.73 % 123. Promoting new outlets for the use and marketing of forestry products || 45,188,848 || 2.24 % || 47,321,004 || 2.34 % 124. Establishment of associations of forest holders || 21,638,173 || 1.07 % || 22,484,444 || 1.11 % 125. Restoring forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters and fire and introducing appropriate prevention instruments || 480,045,072 || 23.78 % || 500,315,451 || 24.73 % 121. Investments in forest holdings || 457,344,364 || 22.65 % || 441,210,252 || 21.81 % 128. Forestry-specific vocational training || 78,351,288 || 3.88 % || 73,608,167 || 3.64 % 126. Planting of non-farm land || 238,157,797 || 11.80 % || 230,780,937 || 11.41 % 127. Improving and maintaining the ecological stability of protected woodlands || 110,248,995 || 5.46 % || 114,424,588 || 5.66 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 56,487,988,042 || 34.93 % || 53,523,362,783 || 32.84 % 13. Promoting the adaptation and the development of rural areas || 10,479,070,105 || 18.55 % || 10,207,048,186 || 19.07 % 13. Promoting the adaptation and the development of rural areas || 876,085,410 || 8.36 % || 808,787,592 || 7.92 % 1301. Land improvement || 189,958,209 || 1.81 % || 182,528,935 || 1.79 % 1302. Reparcelling || 550,740,342 || 5.26 % || 537,456,537 || 5.27 % 1303. Setting up of farm relief and farm management services || 160,279,871 || 1.53 % || 161,142,784 || 1.58 % 1304. Marketing of quality agricultural products || 179,406,269 || 1.71 % || 170,914,466 || 1.67 % 1305. Basic services for the rural economy and population || 332,988,448 || 3.18 % || 318,870,724 || 3.12 % 1306. Renovation and development of villages and protection and conservation of the rural heritage || 2,100,281,868 || 20.04 % || 2,078,691,574 || 20.37 % 1307. Diversification of agricultural activities and activities close to agriculture, to provide multiple activities or alternative incomes || 488,653,279 || 4.66 % || 435,767,731 || 4.27 % 1308. Agricultural water resources management || 2,160,194,076 || 20.61 % || 1,963,193,733 || 19.23 % 1309. Development and improvement of infrastructire connected with the development of agriculture || 1,602,667,446 || 15.29 % || 1,662,351,611 || 16.29 % 1310. Encouragement for tourist activities || 391,948,168 || 3.74 % || 392,143,441 || 3.84 % 1311. Encouragement for craft activities || 434,892,992 || 4.15 % || 439,991,424 || 4.31 % 1312. Preservation of the environment inconnection with land, forestry and landscape conservation as well as with the improvement of animal welfare || 702,630,596 || 6.71 % || 739,103,963 || 7.24 % 1313. Restoring agricultural production potential damaged by natural disaters and introducing appropriate prevention instruments || 250,798,235 || 2.39 % || 246,372,607 || 2.41 % 1314. Financial engineering || 43,178,009 || 0.41 % || 52,088,325 || 0.51 % 1399. LEADER+ || 14,366,887 || 0.14 % || 17,642,740 || 0.17 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 56,487,988,042 || 34.93 % || 53,523,362,783 || 32.84 % 14. Fisheries || 2,920,327,130 || 5.17 % || 2,622,680,891 || 4.64 % 14. Fisheries || 57,551,432 || 1.97 % || 37,245,090 || 64.72 % 141. Adjustment of the fishing effort || 431,621,728 || 14.78 % || 430,688,651 || 99.78 % 142. Renewal and modernisation of the fishing fleet || 518,781,002 || 17.76 % || 465,161,674 || 89.66 % 143. Processing, marketing and promoting of fisheries products || 630,943,772 || 21.61 % || 567,353,980 || 89.92 % 144. Aquaculture || 337,670,049 || 11.56 % || 286,409,977 || 84.82 % 145. Equipment of the fishing ports and protection of the coastal marine zones || 390,106,792 || 13.36 % || 289,250,975 || 74.15 % 146. Socio-economic measures (including aids to the temporary stopping and compensation for technical restrictions) || 339,915,760 || 11.64 % || 346,157,608 || 101.84 % 147. Actions by professionals (including vocational training, small coastal fishing) || 110,922,865 || 3.80 % || 104,522,971 || 94.23 % 148. Measures financed by other Structural Funds (ERDF, ESF) || 102,813,729 || 3.52 % || 95,889,965 || 93.27 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 56,487,988,042 || 34.93 % || 53,523,362,783 || 32.84 % 15. Assisting large business organisations || 4,364,959,091 || 7.73 % || 4,380,849,014 || 8.18 % 15. Assisting large business organisations || 438,279,245 || 10.04 % || 446,090,015 || 10.18 % 151. Investment in physical capital (plant and equipment, cofinancing of state aids) || 2,847,969,052 || 65.25 % || 2,789,482,851 || 63.67 % 152. Environment-friendly technologies, clean and economical energy technologies || 358,284,408 || 8.21 % || 376,522,000 || 8.59 % 153. Business advisory services (including internationalisation, exporting and environmental management, purchase of technology) || 504,032,744 || 11.55 % || 569,202,976 || 12.99 % 154. Services to stakeholders (health and safety, providing care for dependants) || 56,297,890 || 1.29 % || 56,559,585 || 1.29 % 155. Financial engineering || 160,095,751 || 3.67 % || 142,991,587 || 3.26 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 56,487,988,042 || 34.93 % || 53,523,362,783 || 32.84 % 16. Assisting SMEs and the craft sector || 15,020,123,741 || 26.59 % || 15,061,255,464 || 28.14 % 16. Assisting SMEs and the craft sector || 763,725,373 || 5.08 % || 763,008,954 || 5.07 % 161. Investment in physical capital (plant and equipment, cofinancing of state aids) || 7,896,909,788 || 52.58 % || 7,954,433,027 || 52.81 % 162. Environment-friendly technologies, clean and economical energy technologies || 811,331,951 || 5.40 % || 845,393,174 || 5.61 % 163. Business advisory services (information, business planning, consultancy services, marketing, management, design, internationalisation, exporting, environmental management, purchase of technology) || 1,747,059,287 || 11.63 % || 1,786,552,276 || 11.86 % 164. Shared business services (business estates, incubator units, stimulation, promotional services, networking, conferences, trade fairs) || 2,004,489,982 || 13.35 % || 2,050,083,341 || 13.61 % 165. Financial engineering || 1,087,944,964 || 7.24 % || 1,032,987,005 || 6.86 % 166. Services in support of the social economy (providing care for dependents, health and safety, cultural activities) || 300,677,117 || 2.00 % || 296,445,911 || 1.97 % 167. Vocational training || 407,985,278 || 2.72 % || 332,351,776 || 2.21 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 56,487,988,042 || 34.93 % || 53,523,362,783 || 32.84 % 17. Tourism || 5,141,814,509 || 9.10 % || 5,251,164,642 || 9.81 % 17. Tourism || 572,532,726 || 11.13 % || 588,123,456 || 11.20 % 171. Physical investment (information centres, tourist accommodation, catering, facilities) || 3,113,182,196 || 60.55 % || 3,188,415,411 || 60.72 % 172. Non-physical investments (development and provision of tourist services, sporting, cultural and leisure activities, heritage) || 681,891,664 || 13.26 % || 673,632,187 || 12.83 % 173. Shared services for the tourism industry (including promotional activities, networking, conferences and trade fairs) || 613,587,949 || 11.93 % || 628,374,789 || 11.97 % 174. Vocational training || 160,619,973 || 3.12 % || 172,618,799 || 3.29 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 56,487,988,042 || 34.93 % || 53,523,362,783 || 32.84 % 18. Research, technological development and innovation (RTDI) || 7,913,349,997 || 14.01 % || 8,083,212,797 || 15.10 % 18. Research, technological development and innovation (RTDI) || 533,631,025 || 6.74 % || 529,774,352 || 6.55 % 181. Research projects based in universities and research institutes || 1,939,709,568 || 24.51 % || 2,008,760,563 || 24.85 % 182. Innovation and technology transfers, establishment of networks and partnerships between businesses and/or research institutes || 2,640,461,537 || 33.37 % || 2,667,431,925 || 33.00 % 183. RTDI Infrastructure || 2,445,597,218 || 30.90 % || 2,523,955,651 || 31.22 % 184. Training for researchers || 353,950,649 || 4.47 % || 353,290,306 || 4.37 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 36,469,898,378 || 22.55 % || 37,006,528,445 || 22.71 % 20. Human Resources || 98,582,302 || 0.27 % || 93,712,100 || 0.25 % 2. Human Resources || 98,582,302 || 100.00 % || 93,712,100 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 36,469,898,378 || 22.55 % || 37,006,528,445 || 22.71 % 21. Labour market policy || 11,169,905,319 || 30.63 % || 11,446,763,293 || 30.93 % 21. Labour market policy || 11,169,905,319 || 100.00 % || 11,446,763,293 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 36,469,898,378 || 22.55 % || 37,006,528,445 || 22.71 % 22. Social inclusion || 4,902,656,985 || 13.44 % || 4,934,542,032 || 13.33 % 22. Social inclusion || 4,902,656,985 || 100.00 % || 4,934,542,032 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 36,469,898,378 || 22.55 % || 37,006,528,445 || 22.71 % 23. Developing educational and vocational training (persons, firms) || 11,376,619,570 || 31.19 % || 11,553,614,983 || 31.22 % 23. Developing educational and vocational training (persons, firms) || 11,376,619,570 || 100.00 % || 11,553,614,983 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 36,469,898,378 || 22.55 % || 37,006,528,445 || 22.71 % 24. Workforce flexibility, entrepreneurial activity, innovation, information and communication technologies (persons, firms) || 7,010,515,844 || 19.22 % || 7,048,424,640 || 19.05 % 24. Workforce flexibility, entrepreneurial activity, innovation, information and communication technologies (persons, firms) || 7,010,515,844 || 100.00 % || 7,048,424,640 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 36,469,898,378 || 22.55 % || 37,006,528,445 || 22.71 % 25. Positive labour market actions for woman || 1,911,618,359 || 5.24 % || 1,929,471,398 || 5.21 % 25. Positive labour market actions for woman || 1,911,618,359 || 100.00 % || 1,929,471,398 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 65,085,431,094 || 40.24 % || 69,081,841,854 || 42.39 % 30. Basic Infrastructure || 4,997,238 || 0.01 % || 5,197,480 || 0.01 % 3. Basic Infrastructure || 4,997,238 || 100.00 % || 5,197,480 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 65,085,431,094 || 40.24 % || 69,081,841,854 || 42.39 % 31. Transport infrastructure || 32,460,747,092 || 49.87 % || 35,170,514,692 || 50.91 % 31. Transport infrastructure || 477,381,715 || 1.47 % || 473,347,241 || 1.35 % 311. Rail || 7,537,857,661 || 23.22 % || 8,382,170,576 || 23.83 % 3121. National roads || 2,267,519,323 || 6.99 % || 2,626,505,142 || 7.47 % 3122. Regional/local roads || 2,767,047,249 || 8.52 % || 3,013,880,040 || 8.57 % 3123. Cycle tracks || 33,401,364 || 0.10 % || 36,433,745 || 0.10 % 312. Roads || 9,199,064,879 || 28.34 % || 9,999,151,451 || 28.43 % 313. Motorways || 4,305,893,031 || 13.26 % || 4,521,233,178 || 12.86 % 314. Airports || 915,485,819 || 2.82 % || 1,057,556,866 || 3.01 % 315. Ports || 1,437,264,597 || 4.43 % || 1,488,139,879 || 4.23 % 316. Waterways || 79,523,156 || 0.24 % || 82,636,316 || 0.23 % 317. Urban Transport || 2,070,842,642 || 6.38 % || 2,062,894,496 || 5.87 % 318. Multimodal Transport || 940,816,936 || 2.90 % || 993,205,357 || 2.82 % 319. Intelligent Transport Systems || 428,648,719 || 1.32 % || 433,360,407 || 1.23 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 65,085,431,094 || 40.24 % || 69,081,841,854 || 42.39 % 32. Telecommunications infrastructure and information society || 5,568,003,450 || 8.55 % || 5,759,206,450 || 8.34 % 32. Telecommunications infrastructure and information society || 335,924,949 || 6.03 % || 357,386,810 || 6.21 % 321. Basic infrastructure || 998,129,349 || 17.93 % || 1,052,588,350 || 18.28 % 322. Information and Communication Technology (including security and safe transmission measures) || 1,463,126,644 || 26.28 % || 1,483,630,045 || 25.76 % 323. Services and applications for the citizen (health, administration, education) || 1,831,855,673 || 32.90 % || 1,884,457,449 || 32.72 % 324. Services and applications for SMEs (electronic commerce and transactions, education and training, networking) || 938,966,835 || 16.86 % || 981,143,795 || 17.04 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 65,085,431,094 || 40.24 % || 69,081,841,854 || 42.39 % 33. Energy infrastructures (production, delivery) || 1,355,363,505 || 2.08 % || 1,334,285,235 || 1.93 % 33. Energy infrastructures (production, delivery) || 384,203,715 || 28.35 % || 391,055,077 || 29.31 % 331. Electricity, gas, petrol, solid fuel || 357,302,037 || 26.36 % || 359,768,002 || 26.96 % 332. Renewable sources of energy (solar power, wind power, hydro-electricity, biomass) || 379,311,638 || 27.99 % || 362,446,895 || 27.16 % 333. Energy efficiency, cogeneration, energy control || 234,546,114 || 17.31 % || 221,015,261 || 16.56 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 65,085,431,094 || 40.24 % || 69,081,841,854 || 42.39 % 34. Environmental infrastructure (including water) || 10,360,323,077 || 15.92 % || 10,731,115,326 || 15.53 % 34. Environmental infrastructure (including water) || 2,070,332,225 || 19.98 % || 2,106,486,382 || 19.63 % 341. Air || 280,869,612 || 2.71 % || 281,814,983 || 2.63 % 342. Noise || 44,736,817 || 0.43 % || 45,084,324 || 0.42 % 343. Urban and industrial waste (including hospital and dangerous waste) || 1,315,569,362 || 12.70 % || 1,381,808,498 || 12.88 % 344. Drinking water (collection, storage, treatment and distribution) || 2,832,897,955 || 27.34 % || 2,874,170,855 || 26.78 % 345. Sewerage and purification || 3,815,917,107 || 36.83 % || 4,041,750,284 || 37.66 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 65,085,431,094 || 40.24 % || 69,081,841,854 || 42.39 % 35. Planning and rehabilitation || 8,888,625,815 || 13.66 % || 9,193,437,700 || 13.31 % 35. Planning and rehabilitation || 204,820,245 || 2.30 % || 209,344,327 || 2.28 % 351. Upgrading and Rehabilitation of industrial and military sites || 1,194,182,796 || 13.43 % || 1,192,660,878 || 12.97 % 352. Rehabilitation of urban areas || 3,291,314,250 || 37.03 % || 3,485,282,008 || 37.91 % 353. Protection, improvement and regeneration of the natural environment || 2,459,235,873 || 27.67 % || 2,451,378,498 || 26.66 % 354. Maintenance and restoration of the cultural heritage || 1,739,072,652 || 19.57 % || 1,854,771,989 || 20.17 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 65,085,431,094 || 40.24 % || 69,081,841,854 || 42.39 % 36. Social infrastructure and public health || 6,447,370,917 || 9.91 % || 6,888,084,970 || 9.97 % 36. Social infrastructure and public health || 6,447,370,917 || 100.00 % || 6,888,084,970 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 4. Miscelllaneous || 3,697,226,155 || 2.29 % || 3,359,454,710 || 2.06 % 40. Miscelllaneous || 256,519,006 || 6.94 % || 286,203,280 || 8.52 % 4. Miscelllaneous || 256,519,006 || 100.00 % || 286,203,280 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 4. Miscelllaneous || 3,697,226,155 || 2.29 % || 3,359,454,710 || 2.06 % 41. Technical assistance and innovative actions (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF, FIFG) || 2,978,327,631 || 80.56 % || 2,621,039,212 || 78.02 % 41. Technical assistance and innovative actions (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF, FIFG) || 568,552,064 || 19.09 % || 455,350,740 || 17.37 % 411. Preparation, implementation, monitoring, publicity || 1,147,303,437 || 38.52 % || 1,077,880,401 || 41.12 % 412. Evaluation || 227,627,985 || 7.64 % || 208,238,186 || 7.94 % 413. Studies || 658,644,114 || 22.11 % || 603,265,660 || 23.02 % 414. Innovative actions || 182,465,288 || 6.13 % || 89,336,047 || 3.41 % 415. Information to the public || 193,734,742 || 6.50 % || 186,968,178 || 7.13 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 4. Miscelllaneous || 3,697,226,155 || 2.29 % || 3,359,454,710 || 2.06 % 49. || 462,379,518 || 12.51 % || 452,212,218 || 13.46 % 499. Data not available || 462,379,518 || 100.00 % || 452,212,218 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure || Total (%) Objective 2 (SF) || 24,295,551,652 || 10.82 % || 23,754,059,201 || 10.66 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 13,458,381,153 || 55.39 % || 13,020,352,807 || 54.81 % 10. Productive Environment || 8,008,875 || 0.06 % || 7,924,553 || 0.06 % 1. Productive Environment || 8,008,875 || 100.00 % || 7,924,553 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 13,458,381,153 || 55.39 % || 13,020,352,807 || 54.81 % 11. Agriculture || 29,318,825 || 0.22 % || 27,233,185 || 0.21 % 11. Agriculture || 6,298,307 || 21.48 % || 5,802,777 || 21.31 % 112. Setting up young farmers || 8,168,382 || 27.86 % || 6,950,963 || 25.52 % 113. Agriculture-specific vocational training || 14,852,136 || 50.66 % || 14,479,445 || 53.17 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 13,458,381,153 || 55.39 % || 13,020,352,807 || 54.81 % 12. Forestry || 9,601,560 || 0.07 % || 10,065,662 || 0.08 % 123. Promoting new outlets for the use and marketing of forestry products || 353,218 || 3.68 % || 407,849 || 4.05 % 128. Forestry-specific vocational training || 5,167,142 || 53.82 % || 5,308,087 || 52.73 % 127. Improving and maintaining the ecological stability of protected woodlands || 4,081,201 || 42.51 % || 4,349,726 || 43.21 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 13,458,381,153 || 55.39 % || 13,020,352,807 || 54.81 % 13. Promoting the adaptation and the development of rural areas || 591,784,017 || 4.40 % || 580,733,562 || 4.46 % 13. Promoting the adaptation and the development of rural areas || 81,367,577 || 13.75 % || 79,688,852 || 13.72 % 1301. Land improvement || 2,640,677 || 0.45 % || 2,600,971 || 0.45 % 1302. Reparcelling || 7,727,620 || 1.31 % || 6,642,731 || 1.14 % 1304. Marketing of quality agricultural products || 1,141,974 || 0.19 % || 1,132,719 || 0.20 % 1305. Basic services for the rural economy and population || 58,585,548 || 9.90 % || 55,841,300 || 9.62 % 1306. Renovation and development of villages and protection and conservation of the rural heritage || 204,851,425 || 34.62 % || 202,462,970 || 34.86 % 1307. Diversification of agricultural activities and activities close to agriculture, to provide multiple activities or alternative incomes || 11,498,154 || 1.94 % || 10,875,293 || 1.87 % 1308. Agricultural water resources management || 9,929,872 || 1.68 % || 9,699,910 || 1.67 % 1309. Development and improvement of infrastructire connected with the development of agriculture || 34,664,176 || 5.86 % || 31,963,696 || 5.50 % 1310. Encouragement for tourist activities || 51,694,452 || 8.74 % || 55,641,038 || 9.58 % 1311. Encouragement for craft activities || 15,891,092 || 2.69 % || 15,022,746 || 2.59 % 1312. Preservation of the environment inconnection with land, forestry and landscape conservation as well as with the improvement of animal welfare || 109,450,725 || 18.50 % || 106,853,581 || 18.40 % 1314. Financial engineering || 2,340,726 || 0.40 % || 2,307,757 || 0.40 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 13,458,381,153 || 55.39 % || 13,020,352,807 || 54.81 % 14. Fisheries || 12,751,774 || 0.09 % || 12,732,091 || 0.10 % 14. Fisheries || 4,573,486 || 35.87 % || 4,684,075 || 36.79 % 145. Equipment of the fishing ports and protection of the coastal marine zones || 1,900,470 || 14.90 % || 1,850,095 || 14.53 % 148. Measures financed by other Structural Funds (ERDF, ESF) || 6,277,819 || 49.23 % || 6,197,921 || 48.68 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 13,458,381,153 || 55.39 % || 13,020,352,807 || 54.81 % 15. Assisting large business organisations || 560,852,368 || 4.17 % || 543,053,639 || 4.17 % 15. Assisting large business organisations || 41,035,409 || 7.32 % || 39,523,715 || 7.28 % 151. Investment in physical capital (plant and equipment, cofinancing of state aids) || 431,271,473 || 76.90 % || 418,978,966 || 77.15 % 152. Environment-friendly technologies, clean and economical energy technologies || 26,171,118 || 4.67 % || 24,611,320 || 4.53 % 153. Business advisory services (including internationalisation, exporting and environmental management, purchase of technology) || 32,395,097 || 5.78 % || 31,866,566 || 5.87 % 154. Services to stakeholders (health and safety, providing care for dependants) || 330,749 || 0.06 % || 250,783 || 0.05 % 155. Financial engineering || 29,648,522 || 5.29 % || 27,822,288 || 5.12 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 13,458,381,153 || 55.39 % || 13,020,352,807 || 54.81 % 16. Assisting SMEs and the craft sector || 7,484,106,293 || 55.61 % || 7,094,157,259 || 54.49 % 16. Assisting SMEs and the craft sector || 1,125,681,491 || 15.04 % || 1,067,051,310 || 15.04 % 161. Investment in physical capital (plant and equipment, cofinancing of state aids) || 1,950,219,380 || 26.06 % || 1,943,754,002 || 27.40 % 162. Environment-friendly technologies, clean and economical energy technologies || 298,784,199 || 3.99 % || 286,038,676 || 4.03 % 163. Business advisory services (information, business planning, consultancy services, marketing, management, design, internationalisation, exporting, environmental management, purchase of technology) || 1,358,855,903 || 18.16 % || 1,219,352,501 || 17.19 % 164. Shared business services (business estates, incubator units, stimulation, promotional services, networking, conferences, trade fairs) || 1,647,734,223 || 22.02 % || 1,553,049,174 || 21.89 % 165. Financial engineering || 488,597,562 || 6.53 % || 446,240,108 || 6.29 % 166. Services in support of the social economy (providing care for dependents, health and safety, cultural activities) || 382,570,955 || 5.11 % || 365,286,193 || 5.15 % 167. Vocational training || 231,662,581 || 3.10 % || 213,385,295 || 3.01 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 13,458,381,153 || 55.39 % || 13,020,352,807 || 54.81 % 17. Tourism || 2,269,394,363 || 16.86 % || 2,300,508,411 || 17.67 % 17. Tourism || 268,978,354 || 11.85 % || 266,241,830 || 11.57 % 171. Physical investment (information centres, tourist accommodation, catering, facilities) || 1,397,406,167 || 61.58 % || 1,426,212,546 || 62.00 % 172. Non-physical investments (development and provision of tourist services, sporting, cultural and leisure activities, heritage) || 369,775,600 || 16.29 % || 376,407,890 || 16.36 % 173. Shared services for the tourism industry (including promotional activities, networking, conferences and trade fairs) || 198,632,162 || 8.75 % || 197,144,733 || 8.57 % 174. Vocational training || 34,602,080 || 1.52 % || 34,501,413 || 1.50 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 13,458,381,153 || 55.39 % || 13,020,352,807 || 54.81 % 18. Research, technological development and innovation (RTDI) || 2,492,563,077 || 18.52 % || 2,443,944,445 || 18.77 % 18. Research, technological development and innovation (RTDI) || 251,824,729 || 10.10 % || 237,688,200 || 9.73 % 181. Research projects based in universities and research institutes || 646,131,144 || 25.92 % || 651,332,911 || 26.65 % 182. Innovation and technology transfers, establishment of networks and partnerships between businesses and/or research institutes || 896,703,558 || 35.98 % || 867,970,928 || 35.52 % 183. RTDI Infrastructure || 680,701,648 || 27.31 % || 670,264,945 || 27.43 % 184. Training for researchers || 17,201,998 || 0.69 % || 16,687,461 || 0.68 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 2,554,162,327 || 10.51 % || 2,373,462,215 || 9.99 % 20. Human Resources || 124,208,021 || 4.86 % || 114,878,748 || 4.84 % 2. Human Resources || 124,208,021 || 100.00 % || 114,878,748 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 2,554,162,327 || 10.51 % || 2,373,462,215 || 9.99 % 21. Labour market policy || 448,555,744 || 17.56 % || 426,978,207 || 17.99 % 21. Labour market policy || 448,555,744 || 100.00 % || 426,978,207 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 2,554,162,327 || 10.51 % || 2,373,462,215 || 9.99 % 22. Social inclusion || 486,445,817 || 19.05 % || 451,494,454 || 19.02 % 22. Social inclusion || 486,445,817 || 100.00 % || 451,494,454 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 2,554,162,327 || 10.51 % || 2,373,462,215 || 9.99 % 23. Developing educational and vocational training (persons, firms) || 550,104,122 || 21.54 % || 520,956,206 || 21.95 % 23. Developing educational and vocational training (persons, firms) || 550,104,122 || 100.00 % || 520,956,206 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 2,554,162,327 || 10.51 % || 2,373,462,215 || 9.99 % 24. Workforce flexibility, entrepreneurial activity, innovation, information and communication technologies (persons, firms) || 807,932,364 || 31.63 % || 730,122,190 || 30.76 % 24. Workforce flexibility, entrepreneurial activity, innovation, information and communication technologies (persons, firms) || 807,932,364 || 100.00 % || 730,122,190 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 2,554,162,327 || 10.51 % || 2,373,462,215 || 9.99 % 25. Positive labour market actions for woman || 136,916,260 || 5.36 % || 129,032,410 || 5.44 % 25. Positive labour market actions for woman || 136,916,260 || 100.00 % || 129,032,410 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 7,107,138,025 || 29.25 % || 7,253,049,121 || 30.53 % 30. Basic Infrastructure || 211,368,935 || 2.97 % || 211,043,330 || 2.91 % 3. Basic Infrastructure || 211,368,935 || 100.00 % || 211,043,330 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 7,107,138,025 || 29.25 % || 7,253,049,121 || 30.53 % 31. Transport infrastructure || 1,392,257,454 || 19.59 % || 1,461,447,033 || 20.15 % 31. Transport infrastructure || 202,993,864 || 14.58 % || 195,119,250 || 13.35 % 311. Rail || 186,506,019 || 13.40 % || 219,776,807 || 15.04 % 3121. National roads || 84,057,511 || 6.04 % || 98,694,375 || 6.75 % 3122. Regional/local roads || 113,756,195 || 8.17 % || 126,659,820 || 8.67 % 3123. Cycle tracks || 17,740,150 || 1.27 % || 18,567,108 || 1.27 % 312. Roads || 147,983,968 || 10.63 % || 151,894,320 || 10.39 % 313. Motorways || 10,927,125 || 0.78 % || 10,693,475 || 0.73 % 314. Airports || 13,967,232 || 1.00 % || 15,961,956 || 1.09 % 315. Ports || 256,981,424 || 18.46 % || 266,914,002 || 18.26 % 316. Waterways || 18,424,341 || 1.32 % || 18,798,787 || 1.29 % 317. Urban Transport || 93,621,532 || 6.72 % || 91,691,433 || 6.27 % 318. Multimodal Transport || 239,463,913 || 17.20 % || 240,842,690 || 16.48 % 319. Intelligent Transport Systems || 5,834,180 || 0.42 % || 5,833,011 || 0.40 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 7,107,138,025 || 29.25 % || 7,253,049,121 || 30.53 % 32. Telecommunications infrastructure and information society || 764,490,511 || 10.76 % || 755,536,264 || 10.42 % 32. Telecommunications infrastructure and information society || 168,840,590 || 22.09 % || 167,930,789 || 22.23 % 321. Basic infrastructure || 126,553,522 || 16.55 % || 128,374,234 || 16.99 % 322. Information and Communication Technology (including security and safe transmission measures) || 134,944,954 || 17.65 % || 127,358,793 || 16.86 % 323. Services and applications for the citizen (health, administration, education) || 137,471,409 || 17.98 % || 134,696,388 || 17.83 % 324. Services and applications for SMEs (electronic commerce and transactions, education and training, networking) || 196,680,035 || 25.73 % || 197,176,060 || 26.10 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 7,107,138,025 || 29.25 % || 7,253,049,121 || 30.53 % 33. Energy infrastructures (production, delivery) || 211,106,115 || 2.97 % || 200,070,853 || 2.76 % 33. Energy infrastructures (production, delivery) || 37,214,846 || 17.63 % || 36,469,488 || 18.23 % 331. Electricity, gas, petrol, solid fuel || 28,072,357 || 13.30 % || 27,766,329 || 13.88 % 332. Renewable sources of energy (solar power, wind power, hydro-electricity, biomass) || 84,977,367 || 40.25 % || 77,661,828 || 38.82 % 333. Energy efficiency, cogeneration, energy control || 60,841,545 || 28.82 % || 58,173,207 || 29.08 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 7,107,138,025 || 29.25 % || 7,253,049,121 || 30.53 % 34. Environmental infrastructure (including water) || 1,006,746,732 || 14.17 % || 1,062,283,473 || 14.65 % 34. Environmental infrastructure (including water) || 306,454,041 || 30.44 % || 309,280,718 || 29.11 % 341. Air || 39,873,502 || 3.96 % || 39,754,827 || 3.74 % 342. Noise || 7,550,801 || 0.75 % || 7,880,504 || 0.74 % 343. Urban and industrial waste (including hospital and dangerous waste) || 141,038,835 || 14.01 % || 154,872,496 || 14.58 % 344. Drinking water (collection, storage, treatment and distribution) || 214,185,759 || 21.28 % || 227,500,281 || 21.42 % 345. Sewerage and purification || 297,643,794 || 29.56 % || 322,994,647 || 30.41 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 7,107,138,025 || 29.25 % || 7,253,049,121 || 30.53 % 35. Planning and rehabilitation || 3,239,499,657 || 45.58 % || 3,277,795,362 || 45.19 % 35. Planning and rehabilitation || 319,004,320 || 9.85 % || 323,262,133 || 9.86 % 351. Upgrading and Rehabilitation of industrial and military sites || 1,002,540,063 || 30.95 % || 980,607,514 || 29.92 % 352. Rehabilitation of urban areas || 1,244,630,466 || 38.42 % || 1,268,198,421 || 38.69 % 353. Protection, improvement and regeneration of the natural environment || 371,781,062 || 11.48 % || 389,728,238 || 11.89 % 354. Maintenance and restoration of the cultural heritage || 301,543,747 || 9.31 % || 315,999,055 || 9.64 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 7,107,138,025 || 29.25 % || 7,253,049,121 || 30.53 % 36. Social infrastructure and public health || 281,668,621 || 3.96 % || 284,872,805 || 3.93 % 36. Social infrastructure and public health || 281,668,621 || 100.00 % || 284,872,805 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 4. Miscelllaneous || 1,175,870,147 || 4.84 % || 1,107,195,058 || 4.66 % 40. Miscelllaneous || 37,027,783 || 3.15 % || 36,904,678 || 3.33 % 4. Miscelllaneous || 37,027,783 || 100.00 % || 36,904,678 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 4. Miscelllaneous || 1,175,870,147 || 4.84 % || 1,107,195,058 || 4.66 % 41. Technical assistance and innovative actions (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF, FIFG) || 489,454,815 || 41.62 % || 431,281,087 || 38.95 % 41. Technical assistance and innovative actions (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF, FIFG) || 166,544,041 || 34.03 % || 140,649,595 || 32.61 % 411. Preparation, implementation, monitoring, publicity || 186,648,717 || 38.13 % || 168,236,431 || 39.01 % 412. Evaluation || 32,307,090 || 6.60 % || 26,330,942 || 6.11 % 413. Studies || 68,001,879 || 13.89 % || 64,011,763 || 14.84 % 414. Innovative actions || 15,174,055 || 3.10 % || 14,145,071 || 3.28 % 415. Information to the public || 20,779,032 || 4.25 % || 17,907,286 || 4.15 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 4. Miscelllaneous || 1,175,870,147 || 4.84 % || 1,107,195,058 || 4.66 % 49. || 649,387,549 || 55.23 % || 639,009,292 || 57.71 % 499. Data not available || 649,387,549 || 100.00 % || 639,009,292 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure || Total (%) Objective 3 (SF) || 25,854,715,103 || 11.51 % || 24,895,087,309 || 11.17 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 142,037,033 || 0.55 % || 140,916,955 || 0.57 % 11. Agriculture || 28,076,240 || 19.77 % || 28,354,195 || 20.12 % 113. Agriculture-specific vocational training || 28,076,240 || 100.00 % || 28,354,195 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 142,037,033 || 0.55 % || 140,916,955 || 0.57 % 12. Forestry || 28,720,765 || 20.22 % || 28,945,753 || 20.54 % 128. Forestry-specific vocational training || 28,720,765 || 100.00 % || 28,945,753 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 142,037,033 || 0.55 % || 140,916,955 || 0.57 % 13. Promoting the adaptation and the development of rural areas || 644,525 || 0.45 % || 591,558 || 0.42 % 1303. Setting up of farm relief and farm management services || 644,525 || 100.00 % || 591,558 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 142,037,033 || 0.55 % || 140,916,955 || 0.57 % 14. Fisheries || 644,525 || 0.45 % || 591,558 || 0.42 % 148. Measures financed by other Structural Funds (ERDF, ESF) || 644,525 || 100.00 % || 591,558 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 142,037,033 || 0.55 % || 140,916,955 || 0.57 % 15. Assisting large business organisations || 5,346,565 || 3.76 % || 4,965,820 || 3.52 % 153. Business advisory services (including internationalisation, exporting and environmental management, purchase of technology) || 5,346,565 || 100.00 % || 4,965,820 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 142,037,033 || 0.55 % || 140,916,955 || 0.57 % 16. Assisting SMEs and the craft sector || 36,000,905 || 25.35 % || 35,686,245 || 25.32 % 163. Business advisory services (information, business planning, consultancy services, marketing, management, design, internationalisation, exporting, environmental management, purchase of technology) || 5,346,565 || 14.85 % || 4,965,820 || 13.92 % 164. Shared business services (business estates, incubator units, stimulation, promotional services, networking, conferences, trade fairs) || 644,525 || 1.79 % || 591,558 || 1.66 % 165. Financial engineering || 644,525 || 1.79 % || 591,558 || 1.66 % 166. Services in support of the social economy (providing care for dependents, health and safety, cultural activities) || 644,525 || 1.79 % || 591,558 || 1.66 % 167. Vocational training || 28,720,765 || 79.78 % || 28,945,753 || 81.11 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 142,037,033 || 0.55 % || 140,916,955 || 0.57 % 17. Tourism || 29,365,290 || 20.67 % || 29,537,310 || 20.96 % 173. Shared services for the tourism industry (including promotional activities, networking, conferences and trade fairs) || 644,525 || 2.19 % || 591,558 || 2.00 % 174. Vocational training || 28,720,765 || 97.81 % || 28,945,753 || 98.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 142,037,033 || 0.55 % || 140,916,955 || 0.57 % 18. Research, technological development and innovation (RTDI) || 13,238,218 || 9.32 % || 12,244,516 || 8.69 % 181. Research projects based in universities and research institutes || 8,294,893 || 62.66 % || 7,828,918 || 63.94 % 182. Innovation and technology transfers, establishment of networks and partnerships between businesses and/or research institutes || 2,579,280 || 19.48 % || 2,294,425 || 18.74 % 184. Training for researchers || 2,364,045 || 17.86 % || 2,121,174 || 17.32 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 25,101,436,032 || 97.09 % || 24,216,762,127 || 97.28 % 20. Human Resources || 37,610,300 || 0.15 % || 23,207,045 || 0.10 % 2. Human Resources || 37,610,300 || 100.00 % || 23,207,045 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 25,101,436,032 || 97.09 % || 24,216,762,127 || 97.28 % 21. Labour market policy || 7,504,037,832 || 29.89 % || 7,372,490,798 || 30.44 % 21. Labour market policy || 7,504,037,832 || 100.00 % || 7,372,490,798 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 25,101,436,032 || 97.09 % || 24,216,762,127 || 97.28 % 22. Social inclusion || 5,342,018,070 || 21.28 % || 4,987,349,620 || 20.59 % 22. Social inclusion || 5,342,018,070 || 100.00 % || 4,987,349,620 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 25,101,436,032 || 97.09 % || 24,216,762,127 || 97.28 % 23. Developing educational and vocational training (persons, firms) || 5,710,121,732 || 22.75 % || 5,503,967,416 || 22.73 % 23. Developing educational and vocational training (persons, firms) || 5,710,121,732 || 100.00 % || 5,503,967,416 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 25,101,436,032 || 97.09 % || 24,216,762,127 || 97.28 % 24. Workforce flexibility, entrepreneurial activity, innovation, information and communication technologies (persons, firms) || 4,846,891,516 || 19.31 % || 4,762,108,446 || 19.66 % 24. Workforce flexibility, entrepreneurial activity, innovation, information and communication technologies (persons, firms) || 4,846,891,516 || 100.00 % || 4,762,108,446 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 25,101,436,032 || 97.09 % || 24,216,762,127 || 97.28 % 25. Positive labour market actions for woman || 1,660,756,583 || 6.62 % || 1,567,638,801 || 6.47 % 25. Positive labour market actions for woman || 1,660,756,583 || 100.00 % || 1,567,638,801 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 92,568,775 || 0.36 % || 92,914,751 || 0.37 % 32. Telecommunications infrastructure and information society || 86,162,295 || 93.08 % || 86,837,258 || 93.46 % 322. Information and Communication Technology (including security and safe transmission measures) || 28,720,765 || 33.33 % || 28,945,753 || 33.33 % 323. Services and applications for the citizen (health, administration, education) || 28,720,765 || 33.33 % || 28,945,753 || 33.33 % 324. Services and applications for SMEs (electronic commerce and transactions, education and training, networking) || 28,720,765 || 33.33 % || 28,945,753 || 33.33 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 92,568,775 || 0.36 % || 92,914,751 || 0.37 % 36. Social infrastructure and public health || 6,406,480 || 6.92 % || 6,077,493 || 6.54 % 36. Social infrastructure and public health || 6,406,480 || 100.00 % || 6,077,493 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 4. Miscelllaneous || 518,673,263 || 2.01 % || 444,493,475 || 1.79 % 41. Technical assistance and innovative actions (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF, FIFG) || 518,673,263 || 100.00 % || 444,493,475 || 100.00 % 41. Technical assistance and innovative actions (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF, FIFG) || 436,206,490 || 84.10 % || 371,947,869 || 83.68 % 411. Preparation, implementation, monitoring, publicity || 41,724,453 || 8.04 % || 40,701,354 || 9.16 % 412. Evaluation || 6,135,011 || 1.18 % || 3,922,386 || 0.88 % 413. Studies || 5,937,976 || 1.14 % || 4,316,526 || 0.97 % 414. Innovative actions || 11,283,857 || 2.18 % || 9,689,846 || 2.18 % 415. Information to the public || 17,385,475 || 3.35 % || 13,915,495 || 3.13 % || || || || || Prog. complement || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure || Total (%) Objective F (SF) || 1,044,125,754 || 0.46 % || 912,638,218 || || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 964,954,640 || 92.42 % || 850,678,152 || 93.21 % 14. Fisheries || 964,954,640 || 100.00 % || 850,678,152 || 88.16 % 141. Adjustment of the fishing effort || 171,685,278 || 17.79 % || 168,824,292 || 19.84 % 142. Renewal and modernisation of the fishing fleet || 168,852,388 || 17.50 % || 141,393,192 || 16.62 % 143. Processing, marketing and promoting of fisheries products || 258,141,196 || 26.75 % || 220,933,474 || 25.97 % 144. Aquaculture || 53,467,390 || 5.54 % || 45,678,345 || 5.4 % 145. Equipment of the fishing ports and protection of the coastal marine zones || 162,726,258 || 16.86 % || 142,137,472 || 16.71 % 146. Socio-economic measures (including aids to the temporary stopping and compensation for technical restrictions) || 27,070,729 || 2.81 % || 25,984,224 || 3.05 % 147. Actions by professionals (including vocational training, small coastal fishing) || 123,011,401 || 12.75 % || 105,727,152 || 12.43 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 4. Miscelllaneous || 79,171,114 || 7.58 % || || 41. Technical assistance and innovative actions (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF, FIFG) || 79,171,114 || 100.00 % || || 41. Technical assistance and innovative actions (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF, FIFG) || 12,583,072 || 15.89 % || || 411. Preparation, implementation, monitoring, publicity || 6,599,303 || 8.34 % || || 413. Studies || 2,515,727 || 3.18 % || || 414. Innovative actions || 57,158,546 || 72.20 % || || 415. Information to the public || 314,466 || 0.40 % || || || || || || || Prog. complement || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure || Total (%) IC (SF) || 11,678,495,890 || 5.20 % || 11,166,042,188 || 5.01 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 4,187,311,429 || 35.85 % || 4,052,129,061 || 36.29 % 10. Productive Environment || 900,131 || 0.02 % || 1,137,758 || 0.03 % 1. Productive Environment || 900,131 || 100.00 % || 1,137,758 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 4,187,311,429 || 35.85 % || 4,052,129,061 || 36.29 % 11. Agriculture || 47,998,696 || 1.15 % || 47,886,752 || 1.18 % 11. Agriculture || 1,141,770 || 2.38 % || 1,153,377 || 2.41 % 111. Investments in agricultural holdings || 14,790,961 || 30.82 % || 14,229,244 || 29.71 % 114. Improving processing and marketing of agricultural products || 27,554,969 || 57.41 % || 27,938,032 || 58.34 % 113. Agriculture-specific vocational training || 4,510,996 || 9.40 % || 4,566,099 || 9.54 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 4,187,311,429 || 35.85 % || 4,052,129,061 || 36.29 % 12. Forestry || 43,652,221 || 1.04 % || 42,496,148 || 1.05 % 12. Forestry || 3,442,705 || 7.89 % || 3,285,015 || 7.73 % 122. Improving harvesting, processing and marketing of forestry products || 6,452,273 || 14.78 % || 5,925,388 || 13.94 % 123. Promoting new outlets for the use and marketing of forestry products || 745,874 || 1.71 % || 683,010 || 1.61 % 124. Establishment of associations of forest holders || 22,415 || 0.05 % || 21,672 || 0.05 % 125. Restoring forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters and fire and introducing appropriate prevention instruments || 12,489,840 || 28.61 % || 12,630,750 || 29.72 % 121. Investments in forest holdings || 1,726,079 || 3.95 % || 1,493,341 || 3.51 % 128. Forestry-specific vocational training || 2,971,909 || 6.81 % || 2,898,170 || 6.82 % 126. Planting of non-farm land || 3,576,449 || 8.19 % || 3,618,935 || 8.52 % 127. Improving and maintaining the ecological stability of protected woodlands || 12,224,678 || 28.00 % || 11,939,867 || 28.10 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 4,187,311,429 || 35.85 % || 4,052,129,061 || 36.29 % 13. Promoting the adaptation and the development of rural areas || 2,460,491,826 || 58.76 % || 2,393,215,905 || 59.06 % 13. Promoting the adaptation and the development of rural areas || 50,027,919 || 2.03 % || 47,207,864 || 1.97 % 1301. Land improvement || 9,535,684 || 0.39 % || 9,852,529 || 0.41 % 1302. Reparcelling || 458,380 || 0.02 % || 446,674 || 0.02 % 1303. Setting up of farm relief and farm management services || 1,166,055 || 0.05 % || 1,146,446 || 0.05 % 1304. Marketing of quality agricultural products || 20,350,357 || 0.83 % || 20,087,206 || 0.84 % 1305. Basic services for the rural economy and population || 84,009,420 || 3.41 % || 88,573,460 || 3.70 % 1306. Renovation and development of villages and protection and conservation of the rural heritage || 125,012,659 || 5.08 % || 125,148,022 || 5.23 % 1307. Diversification of agricultural activities and activities close to agriculture, to provide multiple activities or alternative incomes || 24,422,924 || 0.99 % || 23,279,018 || 0.97 % 1308. Agricultural water resources management || 13,505,105 || 0.55 % || 13,694,472 || 0.57 % 1309. Development and improvement of infrastructire connected with the development of agriculture || 2,644,403 || 0.11 % || 2,478,137 || 0.10 % 1310. Encouragement for tourist activities || 92,261,004 || 3.75 % || 92,879,061 || 3.88 % 1311. Encouragement for craft activities || 24,009,785 || 0.98 % || 22,757,242 || 0.95 % 1312. Preservation of the environment inconnection with land, forestry and landscape conservation as well as with the improvement of animal welfare || 112,028,800 || 4.55 % || 110,209,727 || 4.61 % 1313. Restoring agricultural production potential damaged by natural disaters and introducing appropriate prevention instruments || 22,064,577 || 0.90 % || 22,002,240 || 0.92 % 1314. Financial engineering || 236,105 || 0.01 % || 220,374 || 0.01 % 1399. LEADER+ || 1,400,769,604 || 56.93 % || 1,347,604,400 || 56.31 % 1318. Leader + National networks || 4,186,676 || 0.17 % || 2,748,932 || 0.11 % 1317. Leader + Transnational co-operation || 21,622,914 || 0.88 % || 18,296,032 || 0.76 % 1316. Leader + Inter-territorial co-operation || 24,716,903 || 1.00 % || 21,745,395 || 0.91 % 1315. Leader + LAG overhead and animation costs || 427,462,551 || 17.37 % || 422,838,675 || 17.67 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 4,187,311,429 || 35.85 % || 4,052,129,061 || 36.29 % 14. Fisheries || 20,420,003 || 0.49 % || 20,008,361 || 0.49 % 14. Fisheries || 723,518 || 3.54 % || 578,552 || 2.89 % 141. Adjustment of the fishing effort || 858,652 || 4.20 % || 888,794 || 4.44 % 142. Renewal and modernisation of the fishing fleet || 998,248 || 4.89 % || 1,017,515 || 5.09 % 143. Processing, marketing and promoting of fisheries products || 9,419,921 || 46.13 % || 9,428,353 || 47.12 % 144. Aquaculture || 1,998,072 || 9.78 % || 2,001,877 || 10.01 % 145. Equipment of the fishing ports and protection of the coastal marine zones || 998,248 || 4.89 % || 1,017,515 || 5.09 % 146. Socio-economic measures (including aids to the temporary stopping and compensation for technical restrictions) || 998,248 || 4.89 % || 1,017,515 || 5.09 % 147. Actions by professionals (including vocational training, small coastal fishing) || 836,237 || 4.10 % || 867,122 || 4.33 % 148. Measures financed by other Structural Funds (ERDF, ESF) || 3,588,859 || 17.58 % || 3,191,116 || 15.95 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 4,187,311,429 || 35.85 % || 4,052,129,061 || 36.29 % 15. Assisting large business organisations || 29,716,255 || 0.71 % || 27,564,107 || 0.68 % 15. Assisting large business organisations || 4,540,828 || 15.28 % || 4,077,686 || 14.79 % 151. Investment in physical capital (plant and equipment, cofinancing of state aids) || 3,492,953 || 11.75 % || 3,283,421 || 11.91 % 152. Environment-friendly technologies, clean and economical energy technologies || 10,355,908 || 34.85 % || 9,805,796 || 35.57 % 153. Business advisory services (including internationalisation, exporting and environmental management, purchase of technology) || 8,302,388 || 27.94 % || 7,501,202 || 27.21 % 154. Services to stakeholders (health and safety, providing care for dependants) || 2,932,698 || 9.87 % || 2,810,113 || 10.19 % 155. Financial engineering || 91,480 || 0.31 % || 85,889 || 0.31 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 4,187,311,429 || 35.85 % || 4,052,129,061 || 36.29 % 16. Assisting SMEs and the craft sector || 730,358,278 || 17.44 % || 699,492,183 || 17.26 % 16. Assisting SMEs and the craft sector || 85,201,995 || 11.67 % || 79,547,799 || 11.37 % 161. Investment in physical capital (plant and equipment, cofinancing of state aids) || 61,918,164 || 8.48 % || 55,797,013 || 7.98 % 162. Environment-friendly technologies, clean and economical energy technologies || 78,999,979 || 10.82 % || 72,851,568 || 10.41 % 163. Business advisory services (information, business planning, consultancy services, marketing, management, design, internationalisation, exporting, environmental management, purchase of technology) || 206,783,240 || 28.31 % || 204,683,423 || 29.26 % 164. Shared business services (business estates, incubator units, stimulation, promotional services, networking, conferences, trade fairs) || 147,228,377 || 20.16 % || 139,104,337 || 19.89 % 165. Financial engineering || 19,376,987 || 2.65 % || 18,425,045 || 2.63 % 166. Services in support of the social economy (providing care for dependents, health and safety, cultural activities) || 63,343,204 || 8.67 % || 60,498,757 || 8.65 % 167. Vocational training || 67,506,331 || 9.24 % || 68,584,239 || 9.80 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 4,187,311,429 || 35.85 % || 4,052,129,061 || 36.29 % 17. Tourism || 559,672,523 || 13.37 % || 539,595,996 || 13.32 % 17. Tourism || 124,042,065 || 22.16 % || 118,022,693 || 21.87 % 171. Physical investment (information centres, tourist accommodation, catering, facilities) || 104,027,774 || 18.59 % || 103,302,175 || 19.14 % 172. Non-physical investments (development and provision of tourist services, sporting, cultural and leisure activities, heritage) || 167,161,620 || 29.87 % || 158,725,765 || 29.42 % 173. Shared services for the tourism industry (including promotional activities, networking, conferences and trade fairs) || 116,071,576 || 20.74 % || 112,552,303 || 20.86 % 174. Vocational training || 48,369,487 || 8.64 % || 46,993,060 || 8.71 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 1. Productive Environment || 4,187,311,429 || 35.85 % || 4,052,129,061 || 36.29 % 18. Research, technological development and innovation (RTDI) || 294,101,497 || 7.02 % || 280,731,852 || 6.93 % 18. Research, technological development and innovation (RTDI) || 57,337,330 || 19.50 % || 54,667,527 || 19.47 % 181. Research projects based in universities and research institutes || 71,093,962 || 24.17 % || 67,345,283 || 23.99 % 182. Innovation and technology transfers, establishment of networks and partnerships between businesses and/or research institutes || 117,852,814 || 40.07 % || 112,650,743 || 40.13 % 183. RTDI Infrastructure || 35,436,438 || 12.05 % || 34,827,940 || 12.41 % 184. Training for researchers || 12,380,953 || 4.21 % || 11,240,358 || 4.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 3,411,936,417 || 29.22 % || 3,242,353,636 || 29.04 % 20. Human Resources || 215,530,122 || 6.32 % || 201,230,232 || 6.21 % 2. Human Resources || 215,530,122 || 100.00 % || 201,230,232 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 3,411,936,417 || 29.22 % || 3,242,353,636 || 29.04 % 21. Labour market policy || 625,177,758 || 18.32 % || 596,142,671 || 18.39 % 21. Labour market policy || 625,177,758 || 100.00 % || 596,142,671 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 3,411,936,417 || 29.22 % || 3,242,353,636 || 29.04 % 22. Social inclusion || 810,174,173 || 23.75 % || 780,025,173 || 24.06 % 22. Social inclusion || 810,174,173 || 100.00 % || 780,025,173 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 3,411,936,417 || 29.22 % || 3,242,353,636 || 29.04 % 23. Developing educational and vocational training (persons, firms) || 466,692,398 || 13.68 % || 439,613,503 || 13.56 % 23. Developing educational and vocational training (persons, firms) || 466,692,398 || 100.00 % || 439,613,503 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 3,411,936,417 || 29.22 % || 3,242,353,636 || 29.04 % 24. Workforce flexibility, entrepreneurial activity, innovation, information and communication technologies (persons, firms) || 905,356,244 || 26.53 % || 858,622,869 || 26.48 % 24. Workforce flexibility, entrepreneurial activity, innovation, information and communication technologies (persons, firms) || 905,356,244 || 100.00 % || 858,622,869 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 2. Human Resources || 3,411,936,417 || 29.22 % || 3,242,353,636 || 29.04 % 25. Positive labour market actions for woman || 389,005,723 || 11.40 % || 366,719,189 || 11.31 % 25. Positive labour market actions for woman || 389,005,723 || 100.00 % || 366,719,189 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 2,600,517,431 || 22.27 % || 2,550,910,854 || 22.85 % 30. Basic Infrastructure || 900,401 || 0.03 % || 1,138,100 || 0.04 % 3. Basic Infrastructure || 900,401 || 100.00 % || 1,138,100 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 2,600,517,431 || 22.27 % || 2,550,910,854 || 22.85 % 31. Transport infrastructure || 841,334,747 || 32.35 % || 828,898,178 || 32.49 % 31. Transport infrastructure || 81,468,928 || 9.68 % || 75,273,108 || 9.08 % 311. Rail || 48,502,092 || 5.76 % || 45,136,742 || 5.45 % 3121. National roads || 53,809,835 || 6.40 % || 55,475,452 || 6.69 % 3122. Regional/local roads || 28,525,199 || 3.39 % || 28,852,450 || 3.48 % 3123. Cycle tracks || 23,086,554 || 2.74 % || 23,549,279 || 2.84 % 312. Roads || 211,449,091 || 25.13 % || 211,286,553 || 25.49 % 313. Motorways || 98,788,095 || 11.74 % || 104,656,583 || 12.63 % 314. Airports || 19,850,084 || 2.36 % || 19,365,635 || 2.34 % 315. Ports || 68,785,626 || 8.18 % || 62,748,902 || 7.57 % 316. Waterways || 48,817,229 || 5.80 % || 47,419,232 || 5.72 % 317. Urban Transport || 53,123,971 || 6.31 % || 52,992,683 || 6.39 % 318. Multimodal Transport || 60,517,096 || 7.19 % || 59,285,588 || 7.15 % 319. Intelligent Transport Systems || 44,610,948 || 5.30 % || 42,855,969 || 5.17 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 2,600,517,431 || 22.27 % || 2,550,910,854 || 22.85 % 32. Telecommunications infrastructure and information society || 545,103,042 || 20.96 % || 520,138,391 || 20.39 % 32. Telecommunications infrastructure and information society || 80,701,984 || 14.80 % || 74,310,166 || 14.29 % 321. Basic infrastructure || 86,546,633 || 15.88 % || 85,155,300 || 16.37 % 322. Information and Communication Technology (including security and safe transmission measures) || 131,507,384 || 24.13 % || 125,474,190 || 24.12 % 323. Services and applications for the citizen (health, administration, education) || 143,984,771 || 26.41 % || 136,631,273 || 26.27 % 324. Services and applications for SMEs (electronic commerce and transactions, education and training, networking) || 102,362,270 || 18.78 % || 98,567,461 || 18.95 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 2,600,517,431 || 22.27 % || 2,550,910,854 || 22.85 % 33. Energy infrastructures (production, delivery) || 78,505,681 || 3.02 % || 74,428,443 || 2.92 % 33. Energy infrastructures (production, delivery) || 4,076,208 || 5.19 % || 3,912,996 || 5.26 % 331. Electricity, gas, petrol, solid fuel || 8,279,139 || 10.55 % || 8,201,344 || 11.02 % 332. Renewable sources of energy (solar power, wind power, hydro-electricity, biomass) || 54,814,887 || 69.82 % || 52,370,886 || 70.36 % 333. Energy efficiency, cogeneration, energy control || 11,335,448 || 14.44 % || 9,943,217 || 13.36 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 2,600,517,431 || 22.27 % || 2,550,910,854 || 22.85 % 34. Environmental infrastructure (including water) || 262,213,847 || 10.08 % || 257,449,175 || 10.09 % 34. Environmental infrastructure (including water) || 25,335,311 || 9.66 % || 22,030,446 || 8.56 % 341. Air || 11,993,491 || 4.57 % || 12,176,532 || 4.73 % 342. Noise || 8,196,539 || 3.13 % || 8,402,895 || 3.26 % 343. Urban and industrial waste (including hospital and dangerous waste) || 78,290,749 || 29.86 % || 78,929,108 || 30.66 % 344. Drinking water (collection, storage, treatment and distribution) || 78,501,866 || 29.94 % || 76,851,677 || 29.85 % 345. Sewerage and purification || 59,895,891 || 22.84 % || 59,058,517 || 22.94 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 2,600,517,431 || 22.27 % || 2,550,910,854 || 22.85 % 35. Planning and rehabilitation || 716,321,327 || 27.55 % || 710,584,893 || 27.86 % 35. Planning and rehabilitation || 133,559,176 || 18.65 % || 123,155,560 || 17.33 % 351. Upgrading and Rehabilitation of industrial and military sites || 51,740,587 || 7.22 % || 52,033,280 || 7.32 % 352. Rehabilitation of urban areas || 288,722,723 || 40.31 % || 292,303,468 || 41.14 % 353. Protection, improvement and regeneration of the natural environment || 129,047,223 || 18.02 % || 130,158,929 || 18.32 % 354. Maintenance and restoration of the cultural heritage || 113,251,618 || 15.81 % || 112,933,656 || 15.89 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 3. Basic Infrastructure || 2,600,517,431 || 22.27 % || 2,550,910,854 || 22.85 % 36. Social infrastructure and public health || 156,138,387 || 6.00 % || 158,273,674 || 6.20 % 36. Social infrastructure and public health || 156,138,387 || 100.00 % || 158,273,674 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 4. Miscelllaneous || 1,478,730,612 || 12.66 % || 1,320,648,636 || 11.83 % 40. Miscelllaneous || 1,315,101 || 0.09 % || 1,225,976 || 0.09 % 4. Miscelllaneous || 1,315,101 || 100.00 % || 1,225,976 || 100.00 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 4. Miscelllaneous || 1,478,730,612 || 12.66 % || 1,320,648,636 || 11.83 % 41. Technical assistance and innovative actions (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF, FIFG) || 1,411,676,742 || 95.47 % || 1,252,307,760 || 94.83 % 41. Technical assistance and innovative actions (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF, FIFG) || 196,332,833 || 13.91 % || 154,857,714 || 12.37 % 411. Preparation, implementation, monitoring, publicity || 217,444,696 || 15.40 % || 192,009,946 || 15.33 % 412. Evaluation || 40,668,139 || 2.88 % || 30,712,897 || 2.45 % 413. Studies || 360,767,416 || 25.56 % || 335,133,887 || 26.76 % 414. Innovative actions || 463,617,785 || 32.84 % || 418,996,497 || 33.46 % 415. Information to the public || 132,845,874 || 9.41 % || 120,596,820 || 9.63 % || || || || || Prog. complement (SF) || Total (%) || Cert. Expenditure (SF) || Total (%) 4. Miscelllaneous || 1,478,730,612 || 12.66 % || 1,320,648,636 || 11.83 % 49. || 65,738,768 || 4.45 % || 67,114,900 || 5.08 % 499. Data not available || 65,738,768 || 100.00 % || 67,114,900 || 100.00 % Source: Commission database SFC, data as of
December 2010 Part 6: Information on financial corrections and recoveries in the
Structural Funds
1.
Introduction
It is important for the Commission to have reliable
information on all types of financial corrections and recoveries resulting from
Commission, European Court of Auditors and Member States audit activities. The
Commission needs this information to perform its supervisory role and to
provide evidence that the multi-annual control system is working, as financial
corrections and recoveries are generally carried out in years subsequent to the
one in which the respective payments from the Union budget were made. In its most recent annual reports the European
Court of Auditors noted weaknesses in the information provided by the
Commission on reporting of financial corrections by Member States. In the
Annual Report for 2009, the Court noted for the second consecutive year that
the Commission reports reliable information on financial corrections as long as
they result from its own audit activities. Based on
the Court’s observations, the European Parliament and the Council
have been consistently calling for detailed, complete and easily readable information
on financial corrections and recoveries to be published and regularly updated. The Commission now regularly publishes this
information. Figures on corrections and recoveries resulting from Commission
audit work, audit work by the Court of Auditors and OLAF investigations
have been provided in the explanatory notes to the Commission’s accounts since
2006. Since the beginning of 2008 the Commission has also been reporting
corrections resulting from its work and that of other EU bodies to the
Parliament on a quarterly basis, under the Action Plan to strengthen the
Commission’s supervisory role in the shared management of structural actions[16]. Information on corrections by the Member States
has been provided in annexes to the Annual Report on the Implementation of the
Structural Funds since 2006[17]. The Commission is also
publishing summary information on Member States’ financial corrections in the
Notes to its Annual Accounts (Note 6). The present annex contains detailed cumulative
information on Member States’ corrections for the period 2000-2006, and repeats
the data on corrections and recoveries resulting from its own and other EU
bodies’ work published in Note 6 to the Commission’s Annual Accounts for 2010,
in order to provide a complete picture of correction activity in the
Structural Funds. For a detailed explanation of the terminology
and procedures in the area of financial corrections and recoveries and the
reporting of irregularities, reference is made to Note 6 to the Commission's
Annual Accounts for 2010.
2.
Financial correction activity and recoveries by
Member States
2.1.
Execution of financial corrections (withdrawals
and recoveries) by Member States for the 2000-2006 period
In the previous years, the Commission required
Member States to provide information on their financial corrections (reported
as withdrawals, recoveries and pending recoveries) of Structural Funds both for
the year in question and cumulatively for the whole 2000‑2006 period, and for
all four funds (ERDF, ESF, EAGGF and FIFG). In their reports on financial corrections, the
Member States were asked to distinguish between ‘withdrawals’ and ‘recoveries’.
The distinction is as follows. When correcting irregular expenditure Member
States have a choice between: –
withdrawing the
expenditure affected from the programme immediately by deducting it from the
next statement of expenditure submitted to the Commission, thereby immediately
releasing the EU funding for commitment to other operations; or –
leaving the
expenditure for the time being in the programme pending the outcome of
proceedings to recover the unduly paid amount from the beneficiaries and
removing the expenditure once the recovery has been effected[18].
Recovery is made either by obtaining repayment of the sums concerned from the
beneficiary or setting off the sums to be repaid against further payments due
to the same beneficiary. In addition, Member States were required to
report the amounts awaiting recovery (i.e. subject to a recovery procedure but
not yet recovered), or ‘pending recoveries’. As the period 2000-2006 is now at closure
phase, during which proof of deduction is requested in relation to all
irregularities, Member States were not required to separately submit to the
Commission information on withdrawals, recoveries and pending recoveries. The
information in point 2.1.1 below presents cumulative information submitted by
the Member States in the previous years for the whole programming period
2000-2006, complemented by additional information received in March 2011 from Greece,
Belgium, Hungary, Portugal and regarding Inter-regional programmes. Based on data received so far, in terms of EU
contribution, Member States have reported a total of some EUR 5,1 billion of
cumulative financial corrections resulting from their national audit work for
the 2000-2006 programmes (total withdrawals of some EUR 4 billion and
recoveries of some EUR 1,1 billion).
2.1.1.
Cumulative totals of withdrawals and recoveries
for the entire 2000–2006 period up to the end of 2010
Below are the data submitted for the cumulative
totals of withdrawals and recoveries for the entire 2000-2006 period. The data
for a number of Member States are incomplete as they do not cover the earlier
years of the programming period. Totals by Fund EUR million Fund || Cumulative total of withdrawals || Cumulative total of recoveries Total public funding* || EU contribution || Total public funding* || EU contribution ERDF || 4 727.32 || 2 803.65 || 1 153.17 || 824.89 ESF || 1 648.07 || 1 014.22 || 487.50 || 214.54 EAGGF || 192.85 || 129.17 || 136.69 || 61.94 FIFG || 27.04 || 18.78 || 12.54 || 8.52 Total || 6 595.28 || 3 965.83 || 1 789.91.89 || 1 109.88 Source: Member States (rounded figures) * Total public funding
includes national public funding and the EU contribution Total by Member
State (all Funds) and for INTERREG/PEACE EUR million Member State || Cumulative total of withdrawals || Cumulative total of recoveries Total public funding* || EU contribution || Total public funding* || EU contribution BE || 63.84 || 22.75 || 12.13 || 8.24 CZ || 21.26 || 15.69 || 2.84 || 1.67 DK || 0 || 0 || 5.16 || 1.59 DE || 238.62 || 128.51 || 266.92 || 172.04 EE || 2.60 || 1.57 || 0 || 0 IE || 132.24 || 65.49 || 0.27 || 0.21 EL || 2 227.45 || 1 587.13 || 0 || 0 ES || 2 072.97 || 1 267.63 || 6.89 || 4.84 FR || 155.00 || 36.34 || 3.36 || 0.91 IT || 1 025.07 || 587.21 || 459.28 || 133.14 CY || 0.51 || 0.25 || 0 || 0 LV || 3.84 || 2.84 || 0.86 || 0.65 LT || 3.54 || 2.57 || 0.57 || 0.40 LU || 16.88 || 4.25 || 0 || 0 HU || 15.22 || 11.45 || 5.74 || 4.63 MT || 0 || 0 || 1.51 || 1.11 NL || 74.12 || 19.90 || 28.91 || 31.52 AT || 0 || 0 || 39.12 || 20.90 PL || 0 || 0 || 27.73 || 22.42 PT || 0 || 0 || 549.21 || 521.34 SI || 2.51 || 1.88 || 2.05 || 1.54 SK || 1.41 || 0.98 || 4.64 || 3.17 FI || 12.38 || 4.71 || 6.90 || 3.12 SE || 1.26 || 0.45 || 11.47 || 6.29 UK || 476.99 || 171.78 || 327.26 || 151.45 INTERREG and PEACE || 47.55 || 34.43 || 27.73 || 18.70 Total || 6 595.28 || 3 965.83 || 1 789.91 || 1 109.88 Source: Member States (update 06/2011, rounded figures) * Total public funding includes national public funding and the EU
contribution
2.2.
Verifications of reported data on corrections
The on-the-spot audit work undertaken by DG
Regional Policy under the 2008 Action Plan to audit the national systems for
recoveries for 2000-2006 programmes was completed in 2010 for the last six
Member States, having covered thus all 25 concerned Member States (there was no
reporting obligation for Bulgaria and Romania for the 2000-2006 period). Even
if the latest results are still preliminary, the results of the whole enquiry
as well as the audits carried out by the Court of Auditors in the last two
annual reports showed that Member States' authorities generally follow the
requirements, although significant weaknesses still existed in respect of the
completeness of data and the system for recording and reporting irregularities
for some 2000-2006 programmes in Italy, Spain, France and the Netherlands. To a
lesser extent, weaknesses also existed in programmes in the UK, Slovenia,
Finland, Sweden and Latvia. Even if improvements have been identified in all
Member States during the years 2007-2010 by the Commission audits, the
Commission remains prudent at closure and requested all programmes authorities
to report the follow-up (including financial corrections) that was given at
national level to all irregularities registered in the debtor's ledger for each
programme. The Commission will not close programmes until it assesses this
information as coherent and complete.
3.
Financial correction activity and recoveries by the
Commission
3.1. Financial
corrections The financial corrections (EC contribution)
made to Structural Fund programmes over the last eight years (2003 to 2010),
resulting from Commission audit work, audit work by the Court of Auditors,
OLAF investigations and the closure process for 1994-1999 programmes are given
below for each programming period. The Commission published figures for financial
corrections in the Structural Funds resulting from its own and other EU bodies’
audit work for the first time in the 2006 Annual Accounts, distinguishing
between corrections by formal Commission decision and those accepted by Member
States without a decision. Under a commitment given in the 2006 discharge
procedure, from 2008 onwards the Commission has been reporting information on
corrections on a quarterly basis to the European Parliament. The financial corrections for 2010 and
cumulatively for both programming periods 1994-1999 and 2000-2006, as reported
in the notes to the Commission’s 2010 Annual Accounts, are reproduced below
with a breakdown by Member State. There is a risk of overlap between the figures
reported for financial corrections resulting from the work of EU bodies
presented here and those reported by Member States shown in section 2. This is
because a large proportion of the financial corrections resulting from the work
of the Commission and the Court of Auditors and from OLAF investigations are
accepted by the Member States and implemented by them without a formal
Commission decision by withdrawing the expenditure concerned from their
expenditure declarations. As Member States are not obliged to distinguish
corrections resulting from EU bodies’ work from those due to their own controls
and audits, the extent of this overlap cannot be precisely quantified.
3.1.1.
Financial corrections for the 1994-1999 and
2000-2006 programming periods up to the end of 2010
Financial corrections confirmed – cumulative figures (EUR
millions) Fund || 1994-1999 Period || 2000-2006 Period ERDF || 1.758 || 4.165 Cohesion Fund || 273 || 490 ESF || 397 || 1.174 FIFG || 100 || 96 EAGGF Guidance || 124 || 41 Total || 2.652 || 5.965 Total financial corrections confirmed in 2010
for Structural Actions: Breakdown per
Member State (EUR millions) EUR millions Member State || Cumulative end 2009 || Financial corrections confirmed in 2010 || Cumulative end 2010 ERDF || CF || ESF || FIFG || EAGGF Guidance || Total Year 2010 1994-1999 || 2 516 || 125 || 0 || 4 || 3 || 3 || 136 || 2 652 Belgium || 5 || || || || || || 0 || 5 Denmark || 3 || || || || || || 0 || 3 Germany || 339 || 0 || || || 0 || 1 || 1 || 340 Ireland || 42 || || || || || || 0 || 42 Greece || 526 || 1 || 0 || || || 0 || 2 || 528 Spain || 548 || 116 || 0 || 0 || || 1 || 117 || 664 France || 84 || || || 4 || || 0 || 4 || 88 Italy || 505 || 0 || || || || 0 || 0 || 505 Luxembourg || 5 || || || || || || 0 || 5 Netherlands || 177 || || || || || || 0 || 177 Austria || 2 || || || || || || 0 || 2 Portugal || 137 || 2 || || || 1 || 1 || 4 || 141 Finland || 1 || || || || || || 0 || 1 Sweden || 1 || || || || || || 0 || 1 United Kingdom || 131 || 6 || || || 1 || 0 || 7 || 138 INTERREG || 10 || 0 || || || || || 0 || 10 2000-2006 || 5 178 || 368 || 258 || 43 || 89 || 30 || 788 || 5 965 Belgium || 10 || 0 || || || || || 0 || 10 Bulgaria || 2 || || 18 || || || || 18 || 21 Czech Republic || 0 || 4 || 7 || || || || 11 || 11 Denmark || 0 || || || || || || 0 || 0 Germany || 12 || 0 || || 0 || 0 || || 1 || 13 Estonia || 0 || 0 || || 0 || || || 0 || 0 Ireland || 42 || 2 || 1 || || || || 2 || 44 Greece || 920 || 40 || 0 || 0 || || || 40 || 961 Spain || 2 503 || 170 || 104 || 2 || 87 || || 363 || 2 865 France || 261 || 16 || || 0 || || 9 || 26 || 287 Italy || 825 || 97 || || 4 || 1 || 2 || 105 || 930 Cyprus || || || || || || || 0 || 0 Latvia || 4 || || 1 || || 0 || || 1 || 4 Lithuania || 2 || || 0 || || || || 0 || 2 Luxembourg || 2 || || || || || || 0 || 2 Hungary || 52 || 0 || || || || || 0 || 52 Malta || || || || || || || 0 || 0 Netherlands || 2 || || || || || || 0 || 2 Austria || || || || || || || 0 || 0 Poland || 134 || 0 || 111 || 1 || 0 || || 112 || 246 Portugal || 126 || 0 || 13 || 0 || || 18 || 31 || 157 Romania || 10 || || 2 || || || || 2 || 12 Slovenia || 2 || || || || || || 0 || 2 Slovakia || 39 || 0 || 2 || || || || 2 || 41 Finland || 0 || || || || 0 || || 0 || 1 Sweden || 11 || 0 || || || || || 0 || 11 United Kingdom || 217 || 29 || || 36 || || 1 || 65 || 283 INTERREG || 1 || 9 || || || || || 9 || 10 The amount of financial corrections confirmed
in the year and implemented by issuance of a recovery order by the Commission
(i.e. cash reimbursed to the Commission) is EUR 158 million (compared to EUR
146 million in 2009). It should be noted that implementation by means of a recovery
order represent only a limited amount of financial corrections (i.e. 20% of the
amount implemented in 2010) since the applicable sectoral legislation foresees
the possibility for the Member State to replace the irregular expenditure by a
regular one, if it accepts the financial correction proposed by the Commission
- thus meaning that no recovery order needs to be issued. Recovery orders are
only issued in the cases where the Member State refuses the financial
correction or at the stage of the programme closure, when it is no longer
possible for the Member State to submit other expenditure to replace the
irregular one. For
ERDF, the large difference between confirmed/decided corrections in 2009 and
2010 is due to a large correction in Spain (approximately EUR 1.5 billion),
which was confirmed at the end of 2009. This correction concluded an important action plan
initiated in 2004 and increased significantly the amounts of corrections
reported in 2009. From 2010 onwards, the amounts linked to the 2000-2006 period
will decrease as the closure period is winding down. Corrections reported will
be linked to finalisation of procedures started in previous years, as well
as to the results of closure proceedings and audits.
3.1.2.
Corrections implemented
Financial corrections implemented – cumulative figures (EUR millions) || 1994-1999Period || 2000-2006 Period ERDF || 1.736 || 1.972 Cohesion Fund || 266 || 227 ESF || 395 || 1.146 FIFG || 100 || 94 EAGGF Guidance || 124 || 41 Total || 2.621 || 3.480 Concerning the programming period 2000-2006,
the implementation rate is explained by the ongoing closure process whereby
payment claims received end of 2010 are not yet authorised, and the related
financial corrections for a total amount of EUR 2,3 billion cannot be taken
into account in the 2010 implementation figures. As regards ERDF, it should be noted that a
large correction in Spain totalling EUR 1.5 billion was certified by the
Member State in February 2010 as accounted for in the local accounting systems
of the relevant programmes. This amount was then deducted from the 20 final
payment claims introduced in September 2010. However these payment claims being
still under authorising process, they have not been taken into account in the
above implementation figures. So are the majority of the claims received for
the 2000-2006 closure. In relation to the ESF, all financial
corrections confirmed in 2010 for the programming period 1994-1999 have been
implemented in the same year. Moreover there are no outstanding amounts of
financial corrections to be implemented concerning that programming period. The
amounts of financial corrections for the programming period 2000-2006 confirmed
in previous years will be identified and cleared within the closure process
that is ongoing. Total financial corrections implemented in
2010: Structural Actions Breakdown per Member State (EUR millions) Member State || Cumulative end 2009 || Financial corrections implemented in 2010 || Cumulative end 2010 ERDF || CF || ESF || FIFG || Guidance || Total 2010 1994-1999 || 2 144 || 462 || 4 || 5 || 3 || 3 || 476 || 2 621 Belgium || 6 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 6 Denmark || 4 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 4 Germany || 300 || 37 || - || - || 0 || 1 || 38 || 338 Ireland || 40 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 40 Greece || 521 || 1 || 3 || - || - || 0 || 4 || 525 Spain || 293 || 363 || 1 || 0 || - || 1 || 365 || 658 France || 85 || - || - || 4 || - || 0 || 4 || 89 Italy || 483 || 21 || - || - || - || - || 21 || 504 Luxembourg || 4 || - || - || 1 || - || - || 1 || 5 Netherlands || 177 || - || - || - || - || - || 0 || 177 Austria || 2 || - || - || - || - || - || 0 || 2 Portugal || 118 || 20 || - || - || 1 || 1 || 23 || 141 Finland || 1 || 0 || - || - || - || - || 0 || 1 Sweden || 1 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 1 United Kingdom || 108 || 11 || - || - || 1 || 0 || 13 || 120 INTERREG || 2 || 7 || - || - || - || - || 7 || 9 2000-2006 || 3 222 || 80 || 18 || 36 || 87 || 38 || 259 || 3 480 Belgium || 8 || - || - || 0 || - || - || 0 || 8 Bulgaria || 2 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 2 Czech Republic || 0 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 0 Denmark || 0 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 0 Germany || 10 || 0 || - || - || - || - || 0 || 10 Estonia || 0 || - || - || 0 || - || - || 0 || 0 Ireland || 26 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 26 Greece || 904 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 904 Spain || 940 || - || 16 || 0 || 87 || 8 || 111 || 1 051 France || 239 || - || - || - || - || 9 || 9 || 248 Italy || 686 || 79 || - || 0 || - || 2 || 82 || 786 Cyprus || 0 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 0 Latvia || 3 || - || 1 || - || - || - || 1 || 4 Lithuania || 1 || - || 0 || - || - || - || 0 || 1 Luxembourg || 2 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 2 Hungary || 41 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 41 Malta || 0 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 0 Netherlands || 0 || 0 || - || - || - || 1 || 1 || 1 Austria || 0 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 0 Poland || 90 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 90 Portugal || 95 || - || 1 || - || - || 18 || 18 || 113 Romania || 8 || - || 0 || - || - || - || 0 || 8 Slovenia || 2 || - || - || - || - || - || 0 || 2 Slovakia || 1 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 1 Finland || 0 || - || - || - || - || - || - || 0 Sweden || 11 || - || - || - || - || - || 0 || 11 United Kingdom || 151 || - || - || 36 || - || 1 || 37 || 188 INTERREG || 0 || 0 || - || - || - || - || 0 || 6
4.
Conclusion
The measures taken by the Commission over the
past years have led to a substantial improvement in the quality and
completeness of the information on financial corrections and recoveries that is
available in the Commission. The internal procedures set up to ensure
reliable recording and reporting of financial corrections resulting from the
audit work of the Commission and other EU bodies in the cohesion policy area
now work satisfactorily; a fact that has been acknowledged by the Court of
Auditors in its Annual Report for 2008 and 2009. The Commission routinely
reports on a quarterly basis with a review and any necessary adjustments at the
end of the year. Progress has also been made regarding the
reliability and completeness of the reporting by Member States on their own
financial corrections and those they have accepted as a result of EU work. This
has been achieved by streamlining the requirements from the original system
linked to expenditure declarations and irregularity reports to OLAF, to one
modelled on the 2007-2013 legislation whereby Member States submit the figures
as a single manageable package once a year. Thanks to the new reporting system
and careful analysis of the data submitted and follow-up with Member States to
resolve anomalies and obtain missing data, the Commission has observed a
gradual improvement in the quality of the data over the three annual reporting
cycles since the new procedure was introduced. The audits carried out in 2008,
2009 and 2010 have confirmed the improvement but also shown the need for
further efforts in certain countries, for which appropriate recommendations
have been issued. The Member States have received further guidance through the
guidance note[19] on the reporting of
financial corrections by Member States in the 2007-2013 programming period and
the remainder of the 2000-2006 period that was issued in early 2010. [1] See Communication on the results of negotiations on
strategies and programmes for the programming period 2007-2013. [2] published on: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/expost_reaction_en.htm. [3] Published on: http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/documentation/studies/fifg_evaluation/index_en.htm [4] Article 105(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006. [5] In accordance with Article 37(1) of Council
Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 [6] 26 cases were excluded from the total of 379 because
WUD were not received or no opinion was available in the Winding-up
declaration. [7] Under the Action Plan to strengthen the Commission’s
supervisory role — COM(2008) 97 of 19 February 2009. [8] Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors - Impact of the action plan
to strengthen the Commission's supervisory role under shared management of
structural actions. COM (2010) 52 of 18 February 2010. [9] Regulation (EC) N° 2185/1996, OJ L 292, 15.10.1996,
p. 2 [10] OJ L 178, 12.07.1994, p.43 [11] By Regulation (EC) N°2035/2005, JO L 328, 15.12.2005,
p; 8 [12] OJ L 371, 27.12.2006, p,1 [13] By Regulation (EC) N° 846/2009, JO L 250, 23.09.2009,
p.1 [14] 2009: number of communicated cases 4.858; overall amount
related to the communications € 1.161.865.730. [15] Guadeloupe, Guyane, Martinique, Réunion. [16] See final impact report on the Action Plan in COM(2010)
52. [17] See Commission staff working document SEC(2007) 1456:
Annex to the 18th Annual Report on Implementation of the Structural Funds
(2006) (COM(2007) 676 final), Part 7 ‘Information on financial corrections and
recoveries in the Structural Funds’. See Commission staff working document
SEC(2008) 2649: Annex to the 19th Annual Report on Implementation of the
Structural Funds (2007) (COM(2008) 659 final), Part 6 ‘Information on financial
corrections and recoveries in the Structural Funds’. See Commission staff
working document SEC(2009) 1495: Annex to the 20th Annual Report on
Implementation of the Structural Funds (2008) (COM(2009) 617 final), Part 6
‘Information on financial corrections and recoveries in the Structural Funds’. [18] If the unduly paid amounts cannot be recovered and the
Member State wishes the EU contribution to be borne by the Community budget, it
does not remove the expenditure but leaves it in the declaration. [19] COCOF Note #10/002/00/EN.