Accept Refuse

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 52018PC0472

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing the Internal Security Fund

COM/2018/472 final

Brussels,13.6.2018

COM(2018) 472 final

2018/0250(COD)

Proposal for a

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

establishing the Internal Security Fund

{SWD(2018) 347 final}
{SWD(2018) 348 final}
{SEC(2018) 315 final}


EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

1.CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL

Reasons for and objectives of the proposal

Over recent years, security threats have intensified and diversified in Europe. They have come in the form of terrorist attacks, new types of organised crime, as well as cybercrime. Security has an inherently cross-border dimension and therefore a strong, coordinated EU response is required. Beyond internal security challenges, Europe faces complex external threats that no Member State can meet on its own. EU action has provided a comprehensive and swift reaction which was formulated in the 2015 Agenda on Security. Security will remain a defining issue for the EU for years to come and Europe's citizens expect their Union and national governments to deliver security in a fast-changing and uncertain world.

The challenges the Union is facing, notably from international terrorism, cannot be managed by individual Member States alone and without the financial and technical support of the EU. In an era where terrorism and other serious crime operate across border, its Member States remain with a responsibility towards their citizens to deliver public security, in full compliance with EU fundamental rights, but the EU can support these actions. In this regard, the Treaties envisage the need to ensure a high level of security, including through preventive measure and through coordination and cooperation between police, judicial and other competent authorities.

The decentralised Agencies, European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) and the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) play key operational, coordination and supporting roles in the implementation of the EU priorities, objectives and activities in the security area.

The Internal Security Fund is set up to facilitate cross border cooperation and exchange of information between Member State law enforcement officials and other relevant authorities, in particular by enabling the interoperability of the different EU information systems for security making borders and migration management more effective and efficient and by facilitating joint operational actions as well as by providing support for training, for the construction of essential security-relevant facilities, for the setting up the collection and for processing of passenger name records in-line with the relevant EU acquis and the purchase of necessary technical equipment. It aims at intensifying cross-border operational cooperation in relation to the prevention, detection and investigation of cross-border crime and at supporting efforts aimed at strengthening the capabilities to prevent such crime including terrorism in particular through increased cooperation between public authorities, civil society and private partners from across the Member States.

In its Communication on A Modern Budget for a Union that Protects, Empowers and Defends 1 , the Commission proposes to multiply the Union funding to internal security by factor 1.8 as compared to the current period 2014-2020 to ensure a high level of security in the Union and at same time to reinforce the role of the decentralised Agencies in this area. This proposal however does not cover the funding allocated to the Agencies and regulates only the Internal Security Fund that will contribute to ensuring a high level of security in the Union. The financial envelope for the Internal Security Fund in the period 2021-2027 will be EUR 2.5 billion (in current prices).

The main challenge the proposal aims to address is the need for greater flexibility in managing the future Fund, as compared with the current programming period, but also tools to ensure that funding is steered towards EU priorities and actions with a significant added value to the Union. New mechanisms for the allocation of funding between shared, direct and indirect management are needed to address new challenges and priorities.

The funding is implemented though shared management by the Member States and direct/indirect management by the Commission.

The key for the distribution of funding is flexibility in determining the right delivery mode and the themes to which funding needs to be allocated, while maintaining a critical mass of upfront funding for structural and large, multiannual investments in line with Member States’ needs for the further development of their security systems. The allocation of funding will also take fully into account the need for Member States to be fully compliant with the Union acquis and the need to focus investments on key EU priorities.

The allocation of the funding to the programmes of the Member States will be based on a distribution key of three criteria 1) the gross domestic product, 2) size of the territory and 3) population of the state. It is proposed to weigh the different criteria as follows: 45% to inverse proportion to the gross domestic product, 40% to proportion to the size of population and 15% to proportion to the size of the territory of the Member State.

The share for Member States’ programmes is 60 % of the total envelope of the Fund. It is proposed that Member States be provided with 50 % of the envelope at the beginning of the programming period, while retaining the possibility of topping up the envelope periodically. It is envisaged that one fixed top-up of 10 % of the funding envelope will be made at mid-term (technical adjustment of the distribution key subject to financial performance, according to which a Member State should have submitted payment claims covering at least 10 % of the initial amount of payment appropriations).

The remaining 40 % of the overall financial envelope should be managed through the thematic facility, which will periodically provide funding for a number of priorities defined in the Commission financing decisions. This facility offers flexibility in the management of the Fund by disbursing funds to the technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission and to the following components:

support for specific actions, providing additional funding for dedicated actions with high EU added value, through the Member States’ national programmes;

support for Union actions, managed through direct and indirect management; and

emergency assistance.

The programming of the actions under the thematic facility would be implemented through annual and multiannual work programmes adopted by Commission Implementing Decision. The facility will make it possible to address new priorities or take urgent action and to implement them through the delivery mode that is best placed to achieve the policy objective.

Further simplification is needed in the implementation of the instrument, in particular by ensuring a coherent approach with rules applicable to the management of other Union Funds (‘single rule book’), providing better guidance on the management and control systems and audit requirements, and ensuring that the eligibility rules under shared management make full use of simplified cost options (SCOs). It is also important to maximise EU added value in the areas of intervention and to implement an improved monitoring and evaluation framework so as to strengthen the performancebased management of the funds.

This proposal provides for a date of application as of 1 January 2021 and is presented for a Union of 27 Member States, in line with the notification of the United Kingdom of its intention to withdraw from the European Union and Euratom based on Article 50 of the Treaty on the European Union received by the European Council on 29 March 2017.

Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area

The Internal Security Fund builds on the investments and achievements of its predecessor instruments:

(i) the ‘security and safeguarding liberties’ programme, which consisted of specific programmes for the ‘prevention of and fight against organised crime’ (ISEC) and for the ‘prevention, preparedness and consequence management of terrorism and other securityrelated risks’ (CIPS) in the period 2007-2013;

(ii) the instrument for police cooperation, preventing and combating crime and crisis management (ISF-P), which was established by Regulation (EU) No 513/2014 2 and formed part of the Internal Security Fund in the period 2014-2020 and

(iii)the drugs policy part of the Justice programme established by Regulation (EU) No 1382/2013 3 in the period 2014-2020.

The above instruments have supported overall EU policies in the area of internal security, e.g. on police cooperation, preventing and combating crime (including counterterrorism, reinforcing coordination and cooperation between Member States’ law enforcement authorities and Europol), and crisis management (protection of people and critical infrastructure) and combatting smuggling of drugs.

Work under the Internal Security Fund will need to be consistent with that of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) and the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA). The Fund will work in full complementarity with these agencies. In its Communication A Modern Budget for a Union that Protects, Empowers and Defends 4 , the Commission proposes to allocate an amount of EUR 1 128 000 000 (in current prices) to Union agencies in the area of security. This Regulation does not cover the funding for these agencies. Their funding is determined in the regular annual budgetary procedure.

Consistency with other Union policies

The scale and importance as well as the evolving and crosscutting nature of security threats requires a coordinated EU response and intervention of all EU instruments. Security is a cross-cutting issue and the Internal Security Fund without synergies with other funding instruments cannot provide an effective EU response. Security is therefore addressed in several Union programmes. In the first place, security will be addressed in synergy and coherence with the Asylum and Migration Fund and the Integrated Border Management Fund (consisting of the instrument for border management and visa and the customs control equipment instrument). Surveillance i.e. detection of smuggling of illegal goods, explosives, precursors, illegal migration and security screenings at the external borders are key to maintaining the EU's overall security. Another key element of synergy with migration and border policies will come with the major scaling up of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency to fully operational status, with a standing corps of around 10,000 border guards. 5

Furthermore synergy and coherence is important with Cohesion Policy Funds, with the security research part of Horizon Europe, the Digital Europe programme, the Justice programme and the Rights and Values programme. Given the intrinsic connections between security and justice on the ground, there will also be particular synergies between the Internal Security Fund and the Justice programme in terms of providing adequate protection to crime victims, funding joint investigation teams and judicial training, ensuring interoperability with the European criminal records information system, improving detention conditions and inter-agency cooperation in the fields of justice and security, including via justice-related agencies such as Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. In the area of drugs policy there are synergies with the European Social Fund+ in particular its health component. Synergies will be sought also in the area of security of infrastructure and public spaces, cybersecurity and the prevention of radicalisation. ESF+ can play an important role in preventing radicalisation through better integration and ERDF as well as InvestEU can play a key role in increasing the security of investments in infrastructure throughout the Union and cybersecurity can be addressed through increasing the security of IT systems. This issue is like security a cross-border and cross-sectoral phenomena and an important element of the Digital Europe programme and therefore synergies with the Internal Security Fund need to be ensured.

Security in global issues and actions beyond the borders of the Union can have a significant impact on the internal security of the Union. Therefore measures in and in relation to third countries will continue to be supported through the Fund but should be implemented in full synergy and coherence with and should complement other actions outside the Union supported through the Union's external financing instruments including the instrument for pre-accession assistance. In particular, in implementing such actions, full coherence should be sought with the principles and general objectives of the Union’s external action and foreign policy related to the country or region in question. In relation to the external dimension, the Fund should enhance cooperation with third countries in areas of interest to the Union’s internal security, such as countering terrorism and radicalisation, cooperation with third country law enforcement authorities in the fight against terrorism (including detachments and joint investigation teams), serious and organised crime and corruption, trafficking in human beings and migrant smuggling. Security is also closely linked to defence and in the area of defence the Union has to take greater responsibility for protecting its interest, values and the European way of life.

2.LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY

Legal basis

The EU’s right to act in the area of home affairs derives in particular from Article 3(2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), which states that ‘the Union shall offer its citizens an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to external border controls, asylum, immigration and the prevention and combating of crime’.

Union action is justified on the grounds of the objectives referred to in Article 67 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which sets out the means to constitute an area of freedom, security and justice. Attention is also drawn to Article 80 TFEU, which underlines that these Union policies and their implementation are to be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the Member States.

This Regulation is based on Articles 82(1), 84 and 87(2) TFEU, which constitute compatible legal bases in the light of the specific legal circumstances that apply to decisionmaking under Title V of the TFEU.

This Regulation will provide financial support on the basis of common Union policies (strategies, programmes and action plans), legislation, practical cooperation, and threat and risk assessments. Consequently, the programme that currently provides financial support in this policy area (ISF-Police) should be repealed with effect from 1 January 2021, subject to transitional rules.

Additionally, the Commission adopted on 29 May 2018 a proposal for a Common Provisions Regulation 6 in order to improve the coordination and harmonise the implementation of support under shared management, with the main aim of simplifying policy delivery. The shared management part of ISF is covered by these common provisions.

The different Funds in shared management pursue complementary objectives and share the same management mode, therefore Regulation (EU) No [CPR] sets out a series of common principles such as partnership. That Regulation also contains the common elements of strategic planning and programming, including provisions on the Partnership Agreement to be concluded with each Member State, and sets out a common approach to the performance orientation of the Funds. Accordingly, it includes enabling conditions and arrangements for monitoring, reporting and evaluation. Common provisions are also set out with regard to eligibility rules, financial management and management and control arrangements.

Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)

The management of security threats presents challenges that cannot be dealt with by the Member States acting alone. Overall, this is an area where there is clear added value in Union intervention and in mobilising the EU budget.

In the area of security, serious and organised crime, terrorism and other security-related threats are increasingly cross-border in nature. Transnational cooperation and coordination between law enforcement authorities is essential if these threats are to be prevented and addressed, for example through the exchange of information, joint investigations, interoperable technologies and common threat and risk assessments. Financial support under this Regulation will help to strengthen national and European capabilities in those policy areas, facilitating the establishment of a Union framework for expressing solidarity and a platform for the development of common IT systems underpinning these policies.

Dealing with the security of the EU requires substantial resources and capabilities from the Member States. Improved operational cooperation and coordination involving the pooling of Member States’ resources creates economies of scale and synergies, thereby ensuring more efficient use of public funds and reinforcing solidarity, mutual trust and responsibilitysharing for common EU policies. This is particularly relevant in the area of security, where financial support for all forms of cross-border joint operation is essential to improve cooperation between police, customs, border guards and judicial authorities.

In relation to the external dimension of home affairs, it is clear that the adoption of measures and the pooling of resources at EU level will increase significantly the leverage that the EU needs to persuade other countries to engage with it on those securityrelated issues that are primarily in the interest of the EU and the Member States.

This proposal respects the principle of subsidiarity, as most of the funding will be implemented under shared management in line with the institutional competencies of the Member States, while fully acknowledging that intervention should take place at an appropriate level and the role of the Union should not go beyond what is necessary.

Proportionality

The proposal complies with the proportionality principle, and falls within the scope for action in the area of freedom, security and justice, as defined in Title V of the TFEU. The objectives and corresponding funding levels are proportional to what the Fund aims to achieve. The actions envisaged by this proposal address the European dimension of police cooperation.

Choice of instrument

Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council to establish an Internal Security Fund.

3.RESULTS OF EX POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

Ex post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation

The proposal takes into account the results of evaluations of the previous funding instruments for police cooperation. It builds on the ex post evaluation of CIPS and ISEC, which were the instruments in the 2007-2013 programming period, and the interim evaluation of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for police cooperation, preventing and combating crime, and crisis management, which is the Fund in the current (2014-2020) period. In terms of the different evaluation criteria, the findings were as follows:

The police instrument (ISFP) has been mainly effective and has contributed to a high level of security in the Union by preventing and combating cross-border, serious and organised crime, including terrorism, and reinforcing coordination and cooperation between lawenforcement authorities. It has also helped to improve Member States’ ability to manage security-related risks and crises effectively and, to a lesser extent, to protect people and critical infrastructures against terrorist attacks and other security-related incidents. The evidence indicates that it has helped to enhance cooperation and coordination among Member States and European bodies, and to improve Member States’ ability to develop comprehensive threat and risk assessments, although it has funded relatively few projects at national and Union level. Several Union actions have been funded in the area of early warning and cooperation on crisis prevention (e.g. the ATLAS network).

However, to date the ISFP has made limited progress in reinforcing Member States’ administrative and operational ability to protect critical infrastructure, protecting victims, developing training schemes and exchange programmes, and taking action with nonEU countries and international organisations, although most projects relating to these operational objectives are still ongoing.

Concerning efficiency, overall, within the limits of available data, the evaluation indicated that the results of the instrument were achieved at reasonable costs in terms of both human and financial resources. Some Member States have put in place national efficiency measures. However, most Member States face problems with the EU guidance, common indicators and reporting/monitoring calendar. Despite simplification improvements, the perceived administrative burden can be considered to have undermined efficiency.

The single set of procedures for the three funds (Internal Security FundPolice, Internal Security Fund - Borders and Visa instrument (ISF-BV) and the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF)) was found to lead to simplification. The few Member States that used the simplified cost option acknowledged its efficiency in reducing the administrative burden. However, the simplification measures and measures to reduce administrative burden have only partially achieved their intended goals. In spite of simplification improvements, there is little evidence, at this stage, of a significant reduction in the administrative burden. Monitoring, reporting and control measures are still perceived as burdensome and Member States have asked for further guidance to comply with EU requirements. The reporting requirements and the irrelevance of some indicators were also reported as adding to the administrative burden.

The instrument’s original rationale and objectives are still relevant in the aftermath of the migratory and security crisis. Appropriate mechanisms have been put in place to address the changing needs at both the programming and the implementation stages. The flexibility offered by the instrument (possibility of transferring funding between objectives) helped in addressing the changing needs; however, Member States would appreciate the even greater flexibility that would come from reducing the number of national objectives and abandoning minimum allocation levels per objective.

The instrument is considered to be coherent and its objectives complementary to those of other national policies. Coherence and complementarity with other EU financing instruments were ensured at the design, programming and implementation stages. Coordinating mechanisms have been put in place to ensure coherence and complementarity at the implementation stage. The monitoring committee and the responsible authorities play key roles in ensuring coherence. Different implementation modes have been mutually complementary. However, there appears to be some room for improvement in relation to EU agencies and to internal coherence, as there is little awareness among beneficiaries about actions and projects in the ISF framework.

Overall, the instrument has ensured EU added value in terms of improving cross-border cooperation, exchange of knowledge and best practices, trust among Member States’ law enforcement authorities and the application and implementation of key EU policies (process effects). It has also helped to broaden the scope and improve the quality of the actions in terms of investment in under-prioritised or highly specialised areas. The purchase of state-of-the-art equipment has enhanced the national authorities’ ability to perform specialised interventions with a wider scope. The instrument has also led to a broadening of the types of knowledgeexchange and lawenforcement training (scope effects). It has contributed to the harmonisation of EU-level research on crime prevention, facilitated increased investments and focused on long-term measures in this area. It has also enabled high-volume investments, especially in IT systems, training and specialised equipment (volume effects). The absence of ISF-P funding would have been detrimental to the quality of the EU response to cross-border cooperation and to Member States’ ability to implement innovative solutions (role effects).

The instrument’s sustainability has been ensured through the alignment and complementarity of its actions with actions developed in response to national priorities or EU requirements. Comprehensive measures and mechanisms ensuring sustainability were put in place at the programming and implementation stages, under both shared and direct management. However, the ongoing implementation of most projects makes it difficult to establish whether the effects on the target groups and on specific areas will continue to last.

Stakeholder consultations

Two dedicated open public consultations on EU funds in the areas of migration and security ran from 10 January to 9 March 2018. Overall, respondents strongly emphasised the need for simplification in the delivery of home affairs funding instruments, greater flexibility (specifically in relation to the ability to respond to migration and securityrelated crises) and increased funding and support in areas with high levels of responsibility-sharing (asylum and border management) and/or cooperation between Member States and with home affairs agencies. Responses demonstrate that these measures can improve the effectiveness and efficiency of instruments, and EU added value. Stakeholders also pointed to the need for greater home affairs policy leverage in third countries.

Member States’ responsible authorities were consulted in the framework of the AMIF-ISF Committee. Member States provided input on the main funding priorities, problems, the architecture of the funds and delivery modes. Other key stakeholders and beneficiaries of AMIF and ISF funding through direct and indirect management, such as international organisations and civil society organisations, were also consulted, as were home affairs agencies.

Stakeholders concurred that in order to maximise EU added value, EU spending should reflect EUlevel priorities and policy commitments and support the implementation of the EU home affairs acquis. They called for sufficient funding to be made available to face current and newly emerging challenges. Sufficient funding should also be made available for home affairs agencies, in line with their increasing activities. Stakeholders agreed on the need for more flexibility to be built into the structure of the funds. They found that, in order to retain sufficient flexibility to be able to react to changing circumstances, the multiannual national programmes should be maintained. Non-governmental organisations were of the view that direct management should also be continued.

These consultations confirmed an overall consensus among key stakeholders on the need to retain a wide scope of action for EU funding, including as regards its external dimension, enhancing the impact of home affairs policies, more simplification in delivery mechanisms and greater flexibility, in particular to respond to emergencies.

Collection and use of expertise

Work on the preparation of the future financial instruments for home affairs started in 2016 and continued into 2017 and 2018. As part of this work, MFF studies were carried out in 2017 to support the impact assessment which was launched in September 2017. These studies brought together available results from evaluations of the existing financial instruments and from the stakeholder consultations, and explored the problems, objectives and policy options, including their likely impact, as examined in the impact assessment.

Impact assessment

An impact assessment has been carried out for the proposal. The impact assessment covered the following: the Asylum and Migration Fund, Internal Security Fund and the Integrated Border Management Fund, which is composed of the Instrument for Border Management and Visa and the Instrument for Customs Control Equipment. The summary sheet of the impact assessment and the positive opinion of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board can be found on the following website http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/?fuseaction=ia .

The impact assessment report analyses different policy options in terms of how the funding will be delivered, addressing the coherence and complementarities with other EU funding instruments, the external dimension of the migration and security funding, flexibility in a stable financial environment (including thematic facility), implementation modalities (shared, direct and indirect management), the possibility to provide emergency assistance as well as the mid-term review mechanism. The preferred option is a mix of options building on results and recommendations of the ex-post evaluation of the previous Funds (2007-2013 programming period) and the interim evaluations of the current Funds (2014-2020 programming period).

The impact assessment addresses the recommendations made by the Regulatory Scrutiny Board. The table below outlines the main considerations and recommendations for improvement received for the Asylum and Migration Fund, the Border Management and Visa Instrument (as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund) and the Internal Security Fund and how the impact assessment report was amended to reflect these.

Main considerations Regulatory Scrutiny Board

Modifications impact assessment report

The report does not explain how increasing EU competence in these areas [of home affairs] and expanded role of agencies will affect the overall system.

For the Asylum and Migration Fund, the Border Management and Visa Instrument (as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund) and the Internal Security Fund, the report has been revised to explain how the extension of EU competence and larger role of Agencies affects the roles of the respective Funds (section 3.2). Having a key role in the implementation of Union migration and security policies, Home Affairs Agencies will have an important role during the programming phase of national programmes while their monitoring activities would feed into the mid-term review. An expanded mandate of the Agencies would not have as purpose to substitute the current tasks performed by Member States but rather to enhance and upgrade actions of the Union and its Member States in the area of migration, border management and security

Further considerations and recommendations for improvement

Modifications impact assessment report

(1) The report should present the main changes in the programme structure and the priorities compared to the current programming period. Moreover, the report should clarify the scope of the external component of the programme, i.e. its complementarity with the external instruments.

The report has been revised to present the main changes to the programme structure compared to the current programming period (section 3.2) and to clarify the scope of the external component and its complementarity with the external instruments (section 3.3). The objectives of the Funds are based on the scope of their predecessors which, in general, were considered sufficiently broad to support the implementation of EU policy priorities, providing EU added value. Adaptations to priorities and actions reflect policy developments and the need for synergies with other EU Funds. Interventions in the external dimension will be designed and implemented in coherence with EU external action and foreign policy, in particular with the EU’s external Instrument.

(2) The report should also explain how the extension of EU competence and larger role for agencies affects the roles of the respective programmes. Does it increase the need for actions at national level, for delegation to the agencies, or reduce the priority of some interventions?

Please see the modifications made to the report accommodating the main consideration by the Regulatory Scrutiny Board presented above.

(3) The Board understands that the new mechanism for performance reserves was still under development when drafting the report. Its final version should however update and clarify the chosen mechanism and justify it in the light of experience from other EU funds (as orally explained to the Board).

The report has been revised to update and clarify the preferred mechanism, taking into account experience from other EU Funds and developments in the framework of preparing the future Common Provisions Regulation for shared management (section 4.1.4). No dedicated performance reserve is presented in the preferred option. A minimum level of financial implementation is included for allocating top-up funding in the technical adjustment at mid-term while performance elements would be taken into account when providing additional funds via the thematic facility.

(4) The report should clarify how the new emergency mechanism will function within the envelopes of each of the three funds for migration and security, and that the use of emergency assistance should be limited due to the new flexibility provided by the thematic facility. It should explain the advantage of this mechanism over emergency funding in the previous programming period.

The report has been revised to provide clarifications on how the new emergency mechanism will function (section 4.1.3). Emergency assistance provided through the Funds should be complementary to the Emergency Aid Reserve (at the level of the EU budget) and be used in clearly defined situations. Due to the flexibility embedded in the thematic facility, the use of emergency assistance is expected to be more limited than in the current programming period. Emergency assistance may be implemented through shared, direct or indirect management.

(5) The monitoring arrangements are not well developed. The report should clarify how the programmes’ success will be defined and measured.

The report has been revised (section 5.1) to present the measurement of the success of the programmes. This will be based on objectives set between Commission and Member States, to be agreed in the national programmes, and the subsequent measurement of achievements towards those objectives, through output and result indicators included in the legal proposals. Reporting requirements for shared management are laid down in the Common Provisions Regulation.

Regulatory fitness and simplification

The Common Provisions Regulation 7 (common to all shared management policy areas) will ensure simplification of the Fund through the use, as far as possible, of common rules for the implementation of programmes. Furthermore, Member States will be encouraged to increase the use of simplified cost options. The audit approach will be streamlined to focus more on risk-based audit sampling and to follow the ‘single audit’ principle in order to reduce administrative burden.

Further simplification under direct management will be achieved through the use of common Commission-wide IT tools (eGrants management system).

Fundamental rights

Financial support from the Union budget is indispensable to the implementation of the ISF to support Member States in their efforts to ensure a high level of security in the Union, in particular by tackling terrorism and radicalisation, serious and organised crime and cybercrime and by assisting and protecting victims of crime while acting in full respect of fundamental rights. These objectives will be pursued in full compliance with the Union’s commitments on fundamental rights. This will be monitored closely during the implementation of the Fund.

4.BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS

The Commission’s proposal for a multiannual financial framework includes EUR 2 500 000 000 (in current prices) for the Internal Security Fund for the 2021-2027 period.

Implementation will be by means of shared or direct/indirect management. The financial envelope shall be used as follows: 60% will be allocated to the Member States’ programmes to be implemented under shared management, while 40% will be allocated to the thematic facility and used for specific actions at national or transnational level, Union actions and emergency assistance. The thematic facility envelope will be used also for the technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission.

5.OTHER ELEMENTS

Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements

The monitoring and evaluation framework, including an improved tracking methodology for investments across relevant EU funds, will be improved to stimulate timely performance and to ensure that evaluations can provide effective input for any future revisions of policy interventions. This will be done through better indicators, closer cooperation with relevant partners and mechanisms to incentivise performance. A mid-term evaluation and a retrospective evaluation will be carried out by the Commission. These will be carried out in line with paragraph 22 and 23 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016, where the three institutions confirmed that evaluations of existing legislation and policy should provide the basis for impact assessment of options for further action. The evaluations will assess the Fund’s effects on the ground based on indicators and targets and on a detailed analysis of the degree to which the fund can be deemed relevant, effective, efficient, provides enough EU added value and is coherent with other EU policies. They will include lessons learnt to identify any lacks, problems or any potential to further improve the actions or their results and to help maximise their impact.

In term of reporting, the Member States are expected to report on the implementation of their programmes in accordance with the modalities set out in this Regulation and in the Common Provisions Regulation.

Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal

Chapter I — General provisions of the proposed Regulation sets out its purpose, scope and key definitions. It also sets out the objectives of the Regulation and the scope of the support to be provided. The proposed scope of these Articles builds largely on the current Regulation for the Internal Security Fund-Police, while taking into account new policy developments, such as the European agenda on security, the fight against terrorism, serious and organised crime and cybercrime, and the new interoperability agenda.

Chapter II — Financial and implementation framework sets out general principles for the support provided under the Regulation and conveys the importance of consistency and complementarity with relevant EU funding instruments. The chapter furthermore stipulates the delivery modes for the actions supported under the Regulation: shared, direct and indirect management. The proposed mix of delivery modes is based on the positive experience with this combination in the implementation of the current funding instrument.

The first section of the chapter lays down the financial framework. The proposal indicates an amount for the financial envelope for the Fund and its use through various implementation arrangements.

The second, third and fourth sections describe the implementation framework for the Fund, such as programmes from the Commission and the Member States. The conditions applying to actions supported under the Regulation are also set out, such as those relating to the purchase of equipment and training activities. The section sets out detailed arrangements for the midterm review of Member States’ programmes and for the implementation of specific actions, Union actions, emergency assistance, technical assistance, blending operations, and operating support.

The fifth and final section sets out the necessary provisions on annual performance reports by Member States, monitoring and evaluation.

Chapter III — Transitional and final provisions contains provisions on the delegation of power to the Commission to adopt delegated acts, and on the Committee procedure. The date of entry into force of the proposed Regulation is set and it is stipulated that the Regulation will be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States in accordance with the Treaties, from 1 January 2021.

2018/0250 (COD)

Proposal for a

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

establishing the Internal Security Fund

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 82(1), 84 and 87(2) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee 8 ,

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions 9 ,

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure,

Whereas:

(1)Ensuring internal security, which is a competence of the Member States, is a shared endeavour to which the EU institutions, relevant Union agencies and Member States should jointly contribute. In the period 2015 to 2020, the Commission, the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament have defined common priorities as set out in the European Agenda on Security of April 2015 10 , which were reaffirmed by the Council in the renewed Internal Security Strategy of June 2015 11 and by the European Parliament in its Resolution of July 2015 12 . That shared strategy aimed at providing the strategic framework for the work at Union level in the area of internal security, and defined the main priorities for action to ensure an effective Union response to security threats for the period 2015-2020, namely tackling terrorism and preventing radicalisation, disrupting organised crime and fighting cybercrime.

(2)In the Rome Declaration signed on 25 September 2017, leaders of 27 Member States affirmed their determination to a safe and secure Europe and to build a Union where all citizens feel safe and can move freely, where the external borders are secured, with an efficient, responsible and sustainable migration policy, respecting international norms, as well as a Europe determined to fight terrorism and organised crime.

(3)The European Council of 15 December 2016 called for continued delivery on the interoperability of EU information systems and databases. The European Council of 23 June 2017 underlined the need to improve the interoperability between databases and on 12 December 2017, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Regulation on establishing a framework for interoperability between EU information systems (Police and judicial cooperation, asylum and migration) 13 .

(4)The Union’s objective of ensuring a high level of security within an area of freedom, security and justice pursuant to Article 67(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) should be achieved, among others, through measures to prevent and combat crime as well as through measures for coordination and cooperation between law enforcement authorities and other national authorities of Member States, including with relevant Union agencies and other relevant Union bodies, and with relevant third countries and international organisations.

(5)To achieve this objective, actions should be taken at Union level to protect people and goods from increasingly transnational threats and to support the work carried out by Member States’ competent authorities. Terrorism, serious and organised crime, itinerant crime, drug trafficking, corruption, cybercrime, trafficking in human beings and arms, among others, continue to challenge the internal security of the Union.

(6)Funding from the Union budget should concentrate on activities where Union intervention can bring added value compared to action by Member States alone. In-line with Articles 84 and 87(2) of the TFEU, funding should support measures to promote and support the action of Member States in the field of crime prevention and police cooperation involving all the Member States’ competent authorities concerning especially information exchange, increased operational cooperation and supporting efforts to strengthen capabilities to combat and to prevent crime. The Fund should not support operating costs and activities related to the essential functions of the Member States concerning the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal and national security as referred to in Article 72 of the TFEU.

(7)To preserve the Schengen acquis and to strengthen its functioning, Member States have, since 6 April 2017, been obliged to carry out systematic checks against relevant databases on EU citizens who are crossing the EU’s external borders. Furthermore, the Commission issued a Recommendation to Member States to make better use of police checks and cross-border cooperation. Solidarity among Member States, clarity about the division of tasks, respect for fundamental rights and freedoms and the rule of law, a strong attention to the global perspective and the necessary coherence with the external dimension of security should be key principles guiding the Union and Member States’ action towards the development of an effective and genuine security union.

(8)To contribute to the development and implementation of an effective and genuine security union aiming at ensuring a high level of internal security throughout the European Union, Member States should be provided with adequate Union financial support by setting up and managing an Internal Security Fund (‘the Fund’).

(9)The Fund should be implemented in full compliance with the rights and principles enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and with the Union’s international obligations as regards fundamental rights.

(10)Pursuant to Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), the Fund should support activities which ensure the protection of children against violence, abuse, exploitation and neglect. The Fund should also support safeguards and assistance for child witnesses and victims, in particular those who are unaccompanied or otherwise in need of guardianship.

(11)In line with the shared priorities identified at Union level to ensure a high level of security in the Union, the Fund will support actions aimed at addressing the main security threats and in particular tackling terrorism and radicalisation, serious and organised crime and cybercrime and assisting and protecting victims of crime. The Fund will ensure that the Union and its Member States are well equipped also to address evolving and emerging threats with a view to implementing a genuine security union. This should be pursued through financial assistance to support better information exchange, increase operational cooperation and improve national and collective capabilities.

(12)Within the comprehensive framework of the Fund, the financial assistance provided through the Fund should in particular support police and judicial cooperation and prevention in the fields of serious and organised crime, illicit arms trafficking, corruption, money laundering, drug trafficking, environmental crime, exchange of and access to information, terrorism, trafficking in human beings, exploitation of illegal immigration, child sexual exploitation, distribution of child abuse images and child pornography, and cybercrime. The Fund should also support the protection of people, public spaces and critical infrastructure against security-related incidents and the effective management of security-related risks and crises, including through the development of common policies (strategies, policy cycles, programmes and action plans), legislation and practical cooperation.

(13)The Fund should build on the results and investments of its predecessors: the Prevention and fight against crime (ISEC) programme and the Prevention, preparedness and consequence management of terrorism and other security-related risks (CIPS) programme for the period 2007-2013 and the instrument for police cooperation, preventing and combating crime, and crisis management as part of the Internal Security Fund for the period 2014-2020, established by Regulation (EU) No 513/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council 14 , and should be extended it to take into account new developments.

(14)There is a need to maximise the impact of Union funding by mobilising, pooling and leveraging public and private financial resources. The Fund should promote and encourage the active and meaningful participation and involvement of civil society, including non-governmental organisations, as well as the industrial sector in the development and implementation of security policy, including where relevant with involvement of other relevant actors, Union agencies and other Union bodies, third countries and international organisations in relation to the objective of the Fund.

(15)Within the comprehensive framework of the Union’s anti-drugs strategy, which advocates a balanced approach based on a simultaneous reduction in supply and demand, the financial assistance provided under this Fund should support all actions aimed at preventing and combating trafficking in drugs (supply and demand reduction), and in particular measures targeting the production, manufacture, extraction, sale, transport, importation and exportation of illegal drugs, including possession and purchase with a view to engaging in drug trafficking activities. The Fund should in particular cover the prevention aspects of the drugs policy. To bring further synergies and clarity in the drugs-related area, these elements of drugs-related objectives — which in 2014-2020 were covered by the Justice programme — should be incorporated into the Fund.

(16)With a view to ensuring that the Fund makes an effective contribution to a higher level of internal security throughout the European Union, to the development of a genuine security union, it should be used in a way that adds most value to the action of the Member States.

(17)In the interests of solidarity within the Union, and in the spirit of shared responsibility for the security therein, where weaknesses or risks are identified, in particular following a Schengen evaluation, the Member State concerned should adequately address the matter by using resources under its programme to implement recommendations adopted pursuant to Council Regulation (EU) No 1053/2013 15 .

(18)To contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the Fund, Member States should ensure that the priorities of their programmes address the specific objectives of the Fund, that the priorities chosen are in-line with the implementing measures as set out in Annex II and that the allocation of resources between objectives ensures that the overall policy objective can be met.

(19)Synergies, consistency and efficiency should be sought with other EU funds and overlap between the actions should be avoided.

(20)The Fund should be coherent with and complementary to other Union financial programmes in the field of security. Synergies will be sought ensured in particular with the Asylum and Migration Fund, the Integrated Border Management Fund consisting of the border management and visa instrument established by Regulation (EU) X and the customs control equipment instrument established by Regulation (EU) X as well as the other Cohesion Policy Funds covered by Regulation (EU) X [CPR], the security research part of the Horizon Europe programme established by Regulation (EU) X, the Rights and Values programme established by Regulation X, the Justice programme established by Regulation EU X, the Digital Europe programme established by Regulation EU X and the InvestEU programme established by Regulation EU X. Synergies should be sought in particular on security of infrastructure and public spaces, cybersecurity and the prevention of radicalisation. Effective coordination mechanisms are essential to maximise the effective achievement of policy objectives, exploit economies of scale and avoid overlaps between actions.

(21)Measures in and in relation to third countries supported through the Fund should be implemented in full synergy and coherence with and should complement other actions outside the Union supported through the Union's external financing instruments. In particular, in implementing such actions, full coherence should be sought with the principles and general objectives of the Union’s external action and foreign policy related to the country or region in question. In relation to the external dimension, the Fund should enhance cooperation with third countries in areas of interest to the Union’s internal security, such as countering terrorism and radicalisation, cooperation with third country law enforcement authorities in the fight against terrorism (including detachments and joint investigation teams), serious and organised crime and corruption, trafficking in human beings and migrant smuggling.

(22)Funding from the Union budget should concentrate on activities where Union intervention can bring added value as compared to actions by Member States alone. Security has an inherently cross-border dimension and therefore a strong, coordinated Union response is required. Financial support provided under this Regulation will contribute in particular to strengthening national and Union capabilities in the security area.

(23)A Member State may be deemed not to be compliant with the relevant Union acquis as regards the use of operating support under this Fund if it has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaties in the area, of security if there is a clear risk of a serious breach by the Member State of the Union’s values when implementing the acquis on security or if an evaluation report under the Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism identified deficiencies in the relevant area.

(24)The Fund should reflect the need for increased flexibility and simplification while respecting requirements in terms of predictability, and ensuring a fair and transparent distribution of resources to meet the objectives laid down in this Regulation.

(25)This Regulation should establish the initial amounts to Member States calculated on the basis of criteria laid down in Annex I.

(26)These initial amounts should form the basis for Member States’ longterm investments in security. To take account of changes in security threats or in the baseline situation, an additional amount should be allocated to the Member States at mid-term based on the latest available statistical data, as set out in the distribution key, taking into account the state of programme implementation.

(27)As challenges in the area of security are constantly evolving, there is a need to adapt the allocation of funding to changes in security threats and steer funding towards the priorities with the highest added value for the Union. To respond to pressing needs, changes in policy and Union priorities and to steer funding towards actions with a high level of Union added value, part of the funding will be periodically allocated to specific actions, Union actions and emergency assistance via a thematic facility.

(28)Member States should be encouraged to use part of their programme allocation to fund actions listed in Annex IV benefiting from a higher Union contribution.

(29)Part of the available resources under the Fund could also be distributed for the implementation of specific actions which require cooperative effort amongst Member States or where new developments in the Union require additional funding to be made available to one or more Member States. These specific actions should be defined by the Commission in its work programmes.

(30)The Fund should contribute to supporting operating costs related to internal security and enable Member States to maintain capabilities which are crucial to the Union as a whole. Such support consists of full reimbursement of a selection of specific costs related to the objectives under the Fund and should form an integral part of the Member States’ programmes.

(31)To complement the implementation of its policy objective at national level through Member States’ programmes, the Fund should also provide support for actions at Union level. Such actions should serve overall strategic purposes within the scope of intervention of the Fund relating to policy analysis and innovation, transnational mutual learning and partnerships and the testing of new initiatives and actions across the Union.

(32)In order to strengthen the Union’s capacity to react immediately to security-related incidents or newly emerging threats to the Union, it should be possible to provide emergency assistance in accordance with the framework set out in this Regulation. Emergency assistance should therefore not be provided to support mere contingency and long-term measures or to address situations where the urgency to act results from inadequate administrative organisation and insufficient operational planning on the part of the competent authorities.

(33)In order to ensure the necessary flexibility of action and respond to emerging needs, it should be made possible for decentralised agencies to be provided with the appropriate additional financial means to carry out certain emergency tasks. In instances where the task to be undertaken is of such urgent nature that an amendment of their budgets could not be finalised in time, decentralised agencies should be eligible as beneficiaries of emergency assistance, including in the form of grants, consistent with priorities and initiatives identified at Union level by the EU institutions.

(34)The policy objective of this Fund will be also addressed through financial instruments and budgetary guarantee under the policy windows of the InvestEU. Financial support should be used to address market failures or sub-optimal investment situations, in a proportionate manner and actions should not duplicate or crowd out private financing or distort competition in the Internal market. Actions should have a clear European added value.

(35)This Regulation lays down a financial envelope for the Internal Security Fund (ISF) which is to constitute the prime reference amount, within the meaning ofparagraph X of the Interinstitutional Agreement of X between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management 16 , for the European Parliament and the Council during the annual budgetary procedure.

(36)Regulation (EU, Euratom) No [the new FR] 17 (the ‘Financial Regulation’) applies to this Fund. It lays down rules on the implementation of the Union budget, including the rules on grants, prizes, procurement, indirect implementation, financial assistance, financial instruments and budgetary guarantees. In order to ensure coherence in the implementation of Union funding programmes, the Financial Regulation is to apply to the actions to be implemented in direct or indirect management under ISF.

(37)For the purpose of implementation of actions under shared management, the Fund should form part of a coherent framework consisting of this Regulation, the Financial Regulation and the Common Provisions Regulation (EU) No X 18 .

(38)Regulation (EU) No X [CPR] establishes the framework for action by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+), the Cohesion Fund, the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), the Asylum and Migration Fund (AMIF), Internal Security Fund (ISF) and the instrument for border management and visa (BMVI), as a part of the Integrated Border Management Fund (IBMF), and it lays down, in particular, the rules concerning programming, monitoring and evaluation, management and control for EU funds implemented under shared management. Additionally it is necessary to specify the objectives of the Internal Security Fund in this Regulation, and to lay down specific provisions concerning the activities that may be financed with the support of this Fund.

(39)The types of financing and the methods of implementation under this Regulation should be chosen on the basis of their ability to achieve the objectives of the actions and to deliver results, taking into account, in particular, the costs of control, the administrative burden, and then expected risk of non-compliance. This should include consideration of the use of lump sums, flat rates and unit costs, as well as financing not linked to costs as referred to in Article 125(1) of the Financial Regulation.

(40)In accordance with the Financial Regulation, Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council 19 , Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2988/95 20 , Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 21 and Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 22 , the financial interests of the Union are to be protected through proportionate measures, including the prevention, detection, correction and investigation of irregularities and fraud, the recovery of funds lost, wrongly paid or incorrectly used and, where appropriate, the imposition of administrative sanctions. In particular, in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 and Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) may carry out administrate investigations, including on-the-spot checks and inspections, with a view to establishing whether there has been fraud, corruption or any other criminal offences affecting the financial interests of the Union. In accordance with Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office may investigate and prosecute fraud and other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Union as provided for in Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council 23 . In accordance with the Financial Regulation, any person or entity receiving Union funds is to fully cooperate in the protection of the Union’s financial interests to grant the necessary rights and access to the Commission, OLAF, the EPPO and the European Court of Auditors (ECA) and to ensure that any third parties involved in the implementation of Union funds grant equivalent rights.

(41)Horizontal financial rules adopted by the European Parliament and the Council on the basis of Article 322 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union apply to this Regulation. These rules are laid down in the Financial Regulation and determine in particular the procedure for establishing and implementing the budget through grants, procurement, prizes, indirect implementation, and provide for checks on the responsibility of financial actors. Rules adopted on the basis of Article 322 TFEU also concern the protection of the Union's budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States, as the respect for the rule of law is an essential precondition for sound financial management and effective EU funding.

(42)Pursuant to Article 94 of Council Decision 2013/755/EU 24 , persons and entities established in overseas countries and territories (OCTs) are eligible for funding subject to the rules and objectives of the Fund and possible arrangements applicable to the Member State to which the relevant overseas country or territory is linked.

(43)Pursuant to Article 349 of the TFEU and in line with the Commission Communication "A stronger and renewed strategic partnership with the EU's outermost regions 25 ", endorsed by the Council in its conclusion of 12 April 2018, relevant Member States should ensure that their programmes address the specific challenges the outermost regions face. The Fund supports these Member States with adequate resources to help these regions as appropriate.

(44)Pursuant to paragraph 22 and 23 of the Interinstitutional Agreement for Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016 26 , there is a need to evaluate this Fund on the basis of information collected through specific monitoring requirements, while avoiding overregulation and administrative burden, in particular on Member States. These requirements, where appropriate, can include measurable indicators, as a basis for evaluating the effects of the Fund on the ground. In order to measure the achievements of the Fund, indicators and related targets should be established in relation to each specific objective of the Fund.

(45)Reflecting the importance of tackling climate change in line with the Union's commitments to implement the Paris Agreement and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, this Fund will contribute to mainstream climate actions and to the achievement of an overall target of 25% of the EU budget expenditures supporting climate objectives. Relevant actions will be identified during the Fund's preparation and implementation, and reassessed in the context of the relevant evaluations and review processes.

(46)Through these indicators and financial reporting, the Commission and the Member States should monitor the implementation of the Fund in accordance with the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) No X [CPR] and this Regulation.

(47)In order to supplement and amend non-essential elements in this Regulation, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the list of actions eligible for higher co-financing as listed in Annex IV, operating support and in order to further develop the monitoring and evaluation framework. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law Making of 13 April 2016.

(48)In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred to the Commission. These powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers 27 . The examination procedure should be used for implementing acts that lay down common obligations on Member States, in particular on the provision of information to the Commission, and the advisory procedure should be used for the adoption of implementing acts relating to the modalities of providing information to the Commission in the framework of programming and reporting, given their purely technical nature.

(49)In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

(50)In accordance with Article 3 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland [is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application / has notified its wish to take part in the adoption and application of this Regulation].

(51)It is appropriate to align the period of application of this Regulation with that of Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No X laying down the multiannual financial framework 28 ,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

CHAPTER I

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Article 1

Subject matter

1.This Regulation establishes the Internal Security Fund (‘the Fund’).

2.It lays down the objectives of the Fund, the budget for the period 2021-2027, the forms of Union funding and the rules providing for such funding.

Article 2

Definitions

For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions shall apply:

(a)'blending operation' means actions supported by the Union budget, including within blending facilities pursuant to Article 2(6) of the Financial Regulation, combining non-repayable forms of support and/or financial instruments from the Union budget with repayable forms of support from development or other public finance institutions, as well as from commercial finance institutions and investors;

(b) ‘crime prevention’ means all measures that are intended to reduce or otherwise contribute to reducing crime and citizens’ feeling of insecurity, as referred to in Article 2(2) of Council Decision 2009/902/JHA 29 ;

(c)‘critical infrastructure’ means an asset, network, system or part thereof which is essential for the maintenance of vital societal functions, health, safety, security, economic or social wellbeing of people, and the disruption, breach or destruction of which would have a significant impact in a Member State or in the Union as a result of the failure to maintain those functions;

(d)‘cybercrime’ means cyber-dependent crimes, that is to say crimes that can be committed only through the use of information and communications technology (ICT) devices and systems, where the devices and systems are either tools for committing the crime or the primary targets of the crime; and cyber-enabled crimes, that is to say traditional crimes, such as child sexual exploitation, which can be increased in scale or reach by the use of computers, computer networks or other forms of ICT;

(e)‘EMPACT actions’ means actions undertaken in the framework of the European multidisciplinary platform against criminal threats (EMPACT) 30 . EMPACT is a structured multidisciplinary cooperation platform of the relevant Member States, Union institutions and agencies, as well as third countries, international organisations and other public and private partners to address prioritised threats of organised and serious international crime under the EU Policy Cycle;

(f)‘EU Policy Cycle’ refers to an intelligence-led and multidisciplinary initiative with the aim to fight the most important serious and organised crime threats to the Union by encouraging cooperation between the Member States, the Union institutions, the agencies and where relevant third countries and organisations;

(g)‘exchange of and access to information’ means the secure collection, storage, processing, analysis and exchange of information relevant to the authorities referred to in Article 87 TFEU as well as to Europol in relation to the prevention, detection, investigation, and prosecution of criminal offences, in particular cross-border organised crime;

(h)‘judicial cooperation’ means judicial cooperation in criminal matters;

(i)‘LETS’ means the European Law Enforcement Training Scheme, aimed at equipping law enforcement officers with the knowledge and skills they need to prevent and combat cross-border crime effectively through efficient cooperation, as outlined in the Commission Communication of 27 March 2013 on establishing a European LETS 31 and further referred to in the CEPOL Regulation 32 ;

(j)‘organised crime’ means punishable conduct relating to participation in a criminal organisation, as defined in Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA 33 ;

(k) ‘preparedness’ means any measure aimed at preventing or reducing risks linked to possible terrorist attacks or other security-related incidents;

(l) ‘Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism’ means the verification of the correct application of the Schengen acquis as laid down in Regulation (EU) No 1053/2013, including in the area of police cooperation;

(m)‘tackling corruption’ covers all areas outlined in the United Nations Convention against corruption, including prevention, criminalisation and law enforcement measures, international cooperation, asset recovery, technical assistance and information exchange;

(n)terrorism’ means any of the intentional acts and offences as defined in Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating terrorism 34 .

Article 3

Objectives of the Fund

1.The policy objective of the Fund shall be to contribute to ensuring a high level of security in the Union, in particular by tackling terrorism and radicalisation, serious and organised crime and cybercrime and by assisting and protecting victims of crime.

2.Within the policy objective set out in paragraph 1, the Fund shall contribute to the following specific objectives:

(a)to increase the exchange of information among and within the Union law enforcement and other competent authorities and other relevant Union bodies as well as with third countries and international organisations;

(b)to intensify cross-border joint operations among and within the Union law enforcement and other competent authorities in relation to serious and organised crime with a cross-border dimension; and

(c)to support effort at strengthening the capabilities in relation to combatting and preventing crime including terrorism in particular through increased cooperation between public authorities, civil society and private partners across the Member States.

3.Within the specific objectives set out in paragraph 2, the Fund shall be implemented through the implementation measures listed in Annex II.

4.Actions funded shall be implemented in full respect for fundamental rights and human dignity. In particular, actions shall comply with the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Union data protection law and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR). In particular, wherever possible, special attention shall be given by Member States when implementing actions to the assistance and protection of vulnerable persons, in particular children and unaccompanied minors.

Article 4

Scope of support

1.Within the objectives referred to in Article 3 and in-line with the implementation measures listed in Annex II, the Fund shall in particular support the actions listed in Annex III.

2.To achieve the objectives of this Regulation, the Fund may support the actions in-line with Union priorities as referred to in Annex III in relation to and in third countries, where appropriate, in accordance with Article 5.

3.The following actions shall not be eligible:

(a)actions limited to the maintenance of public order at national level;

(b)actions covering the purchase or maintenance of standard equipment, standard means of transport or standard facilities of the lawenforcement and other competent authorities referred to in Article 87 TFEU;

(c)actions with a military or defence purpose;

(d)equipment of which at least one of the purposes is customs control;

(e)coercive equipment, including weapons, ammunition, explosives and riot sticks, except for training;

(f)informant rewards and flash money 35 outside the framework of an EMPACT action.

Where an emergency situation occurs, non-eligible actions referred to in this paragraph may be considered eligible.

Article 5

Eligible entities

1.The following entities may be eligible:

(a)legal entities established in any of the following countries:

(i)a Member State or an overseas country or territory linked to it;

(ii)third country listed in the work programme under the conditions specified therein.

(b)any legal entity created under Union law or any international organisation.

2.Natural persons are not eligible.

3.Legal entities established in a third country are exceptionally eligible to participate where this is necessary for the achievement of the objectives of a given action.

4.Legal entities participating in consortia of at least two independent entities, established in different Member States or overseas countries or territories linked to those states or in third countries, are eligible.

CHAPTER II

FINANCIAL AND IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK

SECTION 1

Common provisions

Article 6

General principles

1.Support provided under this Regulation shall complement national, regional and local intervention, and shall focus on bringing added value to the objectives of this Regulation.

2.The Commission and the Member States shall ensure that the support provided under this Regulation and by the Member States is consistent with the relevant activities, policies and priorities of the Union and is complementary to other Union instruments.

3.The Fund shall be implemented under shared, direct or indirect management in accordance with Articles 62(1)(a), (b) and (c) of the Financial Regulation.

Article 7

Budget

1.The financial envelope for the implementation of the Fund for the period 2021-2027 shall be EUR 2 500 000 000 in current prices.

2.The financial envelope shall be used as follows:

(a)EUR 1 500 000 000 shall be allocated to the programmes implemented under shared management;

(b)EUR 1 000 000 000 shall be allocated to the thematic facility.

3.Up to 0.84 % of the financial envelope shall be allocated for technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission for the implementation of the Fund.

Article 8

General provisions on the implementation of the thematic facility

1.The financial envelope referred to in Article 7(2)(b) shall be allocated flexibly through the thematic facility using shared, direct and indirect management as set out in work programmes. Funding from the thematic facility shall be used for its components:

(a)specific actions;

(a)Union actions; and

(b)emergency assistance.

Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission shall also be supported from the financial envelope for the thematic facility.

2.Funding from the thematic facility shall address priorities with a high added value to the Union or to be used to respond to urgent needs, in line with agreed Union priorities as outlined in Annex II.

3.When funding from the thematic facility is granted in direct or indirect management to Member States, it shall be ensured that selected projects are not affected by a reasoned opinion by the Commission in respect of an infringement under Article 258 of the TFEU that puts at risk the legality and regularity of expenditure or the performance of projects.

4.When funding from the thematic facility is implemented in shared management, the Commission shall, for the purposes of Article 18 and Article 19(2) of the Regulation (EU) No [CPR], assess whether the foreseen actions are not affected by a reasoned opinion by the Commission in respect of an infringement under Article 258 of the TFEU that puts at risk the legality and regularity of expenditure or the performance of the projects.

5.The Commission shall establish the overall amount made available for the thematic facility at under the annual appropriations of the Union budget. The Commission shall adopt financing decisions as referred to in Article [110] of the Financial Regulation for the thematic facility identifying the objectives and actions to be supported and specifying the amounts for each of its components as referred to paragraph 1. Financing decisions shall set out, where applicable, the overall amount reserved for blending operations.

6.Following the adopting of the financing decision as referred to in paragraph 3, the Commission may amend the programmes implemented under shared management accordingly.

7.These financing decisions may be annual or multiannual and may cover one or more components of the thematic facility.

SECTION 2

Support and implementation under shared management

Article 9

Scope

1.This section applies to the part of the financial envelope referred to in Article 7(2)(a) and the additional resources to the implemented under shared management according to the Commission decision for the thematic facility referred to in Article 8.

2.Support under this section shall be implemented under shared management in accordance with Article 63 of the Financial Regulation and the Regulation (EU) No [CPR].

Article 10

Budgetary resources

3.Resources referred to in Article 7(2)(a) shall be allocated to the national programmes implemented by Member States under shared management (‘the programmes’) indicatively as follows:

(a)EUR 1 250 000 000 to the Member States in accordance with the criteria in Annex I;

(b)EUR 250 000 000 to the Member States for the adjustment of the allocations for the programmes as referred to in Article 13(1).

4.Where the amount referred to in paragraph 1(b) is not allocated, the remaining amount may be added to the amount referred to in Article 7(2)(b).

Article 11

Co-financing rates

1.The contribution from the Union budget shall not exceed 75 % of the total eligible expenditure of a project.

2.The contribution from the Union budget may be increased to 90 % of the total eligible expenditure for projects implemented under specific actions.

3.The contribution from the Union budget may be increased to 90 % of the total eligible expenditure for actions listed in Annex IV.

4.The contribution from the Union budget may be increased to 100 % of the total eligible expenditure for operating support.

5.The contribution from the Union budget may be increased to 100 % of the total eligible expenditure for emergency assistance.

6.The Commission decision approving a programme shall set the co-financing rate and the maximum amount of support from this Fund for the types of actions referred to in paragraphs 1 to 5.

7.For each specific objective, the Commission decision shall set out whether the co-financing rate for the specific objective is to be applied to:

(a)the total contribution, including the public and private contributions; or

(b)the public contribution only.

Article 12

Programmes

1.Each Member State shall ensure that the priorities addressed in its programmes are consistent with and respond to Union priorities and challenges in the area of security and are fully in line with the relevant Union acquis and agreed Union priorities. In defining these priorities of their programmes, Member States shall ensure that the implementing measures as set out in Annex II are adequately addressed in the programme.

2.The Commission shall ensure that the Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) and the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) are associated to the development of the programmes at an early stage, as regards the areas of their competence. Specifically, Member States shall consult Europol on the design of their actions in particular when including EU policy cycle or EMPACT actions or actions coordinated by the Joint Cybercrime Action Taskforce (J-CAT) in their programmes. Prior to including training in their programmes, Member States shall coordinate with CEPOL in order to avoid overlaps.

3.The Commission may associate the Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) and the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) where appropriate in the monitoring and evaluation tasks as specified in Section 5 in particular in view of ensuring that the actions implemented with the support of the Fund are compliant with the relevant Union acquis and agreed Union priorities.

4.A maximum of 15 % of the allocation of a Member State programme may be used for the purchase of equipment, means of transport or the construction of security-relevant facilities. This ceiling may be exceeded only in duly justified cases.

5.In their programmes, Member States shall give priority to addressing:

(a)Union priorities and acquis in the area of security in particular information exchange and interoperability of IT systems;

(b)recommendations with financial implications made in the framework of Regulation (EU) No 1053/2013 on the Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism in the area of police cooperation;

(c)country-specific deficiencies with financial implications identified in the framework of needs assessments such as European Semester recommendations in the area of corruption.

6.Where necessary, the programme shall be amended to take into account the recommendations referred to in paragraph 5. Depending on the impact of the adjustment, the revised programme may be approved by the Commission.

7.Member States shall pursue in particular the actions listed in Annex IV. In the event of unforeseen or new circumstances or to ensure the effective implementation of funding, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 28 to amend Annex IV.

8.Whenever a Member State decides to implement projects with or in a third country, with the support of the Fund, the Member State concerned shall consult the Commission prior to the start of the project.

9.Programming as referred to in Article 17(5) of Regulation (EU) No [CPR] shall be based on the types of intervention set out in Table 1 of Annex VI.

Article 13

Mid-term review

1.In 2024, the Commission shall allocate to the programmes of the Member States concerned the additional amount referred to in Article 10(1)(b) in accordance with the criteria referred to in paragraph 2 of Annex I. Funding shall be effective for the period as of the calendar year 2025.

2.If at least 10 % of the initial allocation of a programme referred to in Article 10(1)(a) has not been covered by interim payment applications submitted in accordance with Article 85 of Regulation (EU) No [CPR], the Member State concerned shall not be eligible to receive the additional allocation for the programme referred to in paragraph 1.

3.The allocation of the funds from the thematic facility as from 2025 shall, where appropriate, take into account the progress made in achieving the milestones of the performance framework as referred to in Article 12 of Regulation (EU) No [CPR] and identified implementation shortcomings.

Article 14

Specific actions

1.Specific actions are transnational or national projects in line with the objectives of this Regulation for which one, several or all Member States may receive an additional allocation to their programmes.

2.Member States may, in addition to their allocation calculated in accordance with Article 10(1), receive funding for specific actions, provided that it is earmarked as such in the programme and is used to contribute to the implementation of the objectives of this Regulation, including covering newly emerging threats.

3.The funding shall not be used for other actions in the programme except in duly justified circumstances and as approved by the Commission through the amendment of the programme.

Article 15

Operating support

1.Operating support is a part of a Member State’s allocation which may be used as support to the public authorities responsible for accomplishing the tasks and services which constitute a public service for the Union.

2.A Member State may use up to 10 % of the amount allocated under the Fund to its programme to finance operating support for the public authorities responsible for accomplishing the tasks and services which constitute a public service for the Union.

3.A Member State using operating support shall comply with the Union acquis on security.

4.Member States shall justify in the programme and in the annual performance reports, as referred to in Article 26, the use of operating support to achieve the objectives of this Regulation. Before the approval of the programme, the Commission shall assess the baseline situation in the Member States which have indicated their intention to request operating support, taking into account the information provided by those Member States as well as recommendations from quality control and evaluation mechanisms such as the Schengen evaluation mechanism and other quality control and evaluation mechanisms.

5.Operating support shall be concentrated on specific tasks and services as laid down in Annex VII.

6.To address unforeseen or new circumstances or to ensure the effective implementation of funding, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 28 to amend the specific tasks and services in Annex VII.

Section 3

Support and implementation under direct and indirect management

Article 16

Scope

Support under this section shall be implemented either directly by the Commission in accordance with point (a) of Article 62(1) of the Financial Regulation or indirectly in accordance with point (c) of that Article.

Article 17

Union actions

1.Union actions are transnational project or projects of particular interest to the Union, in line with the objectives of this Regulation.

2.At the Commission’s initiative, the Fund may be used to finance Union actions concerning the objectives of this Regulation as referred to in Article 3 and in accordance with Annex III.

3.Union actions may provide funding in any of the forms laid down in the Financial Regulation, in particular grants, prizes and procurement. It may also provide financing in the form or financial instruments within blending operations.

4.Grants implemented under direct management shall be awarded and managed in accordance with Title VIII of the Financial Regulation.

5.The evaluation committee, assessing the proposals, may be composed of external experts.

6.Contributions to a mutual insurance mechanism may cover the risk associated with the recovery of funds due by recipients and shall be considered a sufficient guarantee under the Financial Regulation. The provisions laid down in [Article X of] Regulation X [successor of the Regulation on the Guarantee Fund] shall apply.

Article 18

Blending operations

Blending operation decided under this Fund shall be implemented in accordance with the InvestEU Regulation 36 and Title X of the Financial Regulation.

Article 19

Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission

The Fund may support technical assistance measures implemented at the initiative of, or on behalf of, the Commission. Those measures may be financed at the rate of 100%.

Article 20

Audits

Audits on the use of Union contribution carried out by persons or entities, including by other than those mandated by the Union institutions or bodies, shall form the basis of the overall assurance pursuant to Article 127 of the Regulation (EU) No [Regulation on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union].

Article 21

Information, communication and publicity

1.The recipient of Union funding shall acknowledge the origin and ensure the visibility of the Union funding, in particular when promoting the actions and their results by providing coherent, effective and proportionate targeted information to multiple audiences, including media and the public.

2.The Commission shall implement information and communication actions relating to the Fund and its actions and results. Financial resources allocated to the Fund shall also contribute to the corporate communication of the political priorities of the Union, as far as they are related to the objectives of this Regulation.

Section 4

Support and implementation under shared, direct and indirect management

Article 22

Emergency assistance

1.The Fund shall provide financial assistance to address urgent and specific needs in the event of an emergency situation resulting from a security-related incident or newly emerging threat within the scope of this Regulation which has or may have a significant adverse impact on the security of people in one or more Member States;

2.Emergency assistance may take the form of grants awarded directly to the decentralised agencies.

3.Emergency assistance may be allocated to Member States’ programmes in addition to their allocation calculated in accordance with Article 10(1), provided that it is earmarked as such in the programme. This funding shall not be used for other actions in the programme except in duly justified circumstances and as approved by the Commission through the amendment of the programme.

4.Grants implemented under direct management shall be awarded and managed in accordance with Title VIII of the Financial Regulation.

Article 23

Cumulative, complementary and combined funding

1.An action that has received a contribution under the Fund may also receive a contribution from any other Union programme, including Funds under shared management, provided that the contributions do not cover the same costs. The rules of each contributing Union programme shall apply to its respective contribution to the action. The cumulative funding shall not exceed the total eligible costs of the action and the support from the different Union programmes may be calculated on a pro-rata basis in accordance with the documents setting out the conditions for support.

2.Actions awarded a seal of Excellence certification, or which comply with the following cumulative comparable conditions:

(a)they have been assessed in a call for proposals under the Fund;

(b)they comply with the minimum quality requirements of that call for proposals;

(c)they may not be financed under that call for proposals due to budgetary constraints.

may receive support from the European Regional Development Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Social Fund+ or the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article [67] of Regulation (EU) X [CPR] and Article [8] or Regulation (EU) X [Financing, management and monitoring of the Common Agricultural Policy], provided that such actions are consistent with the objectives of the programme concerned. The rules of the Fund providing support shall apply.

Section 5

Monitoring, reporting and evaluation

Sub-section 1 Common provisions

Article 24

Monitoring and reporting

1.In compliance with its reporting requirements pursuant to Article [43(3)(h)(i)(iii)] of the Financial Regulation, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament and the Council information on performance in accordance with Annex V.

2.The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 28 to amend Annex V in order to make the necessary adjustments to the information on performance to be provided to the European Parliament and the Council. 

3.The indicators to report on progress of the Fund, towards the achievement of the specific objectives set out in Article 3, are set out in Annex VIII. For output indicators, baselines shall be set at zero. The milestones set for 2024 and targets set for 2029 shall be cumulative.

4.The performance reporting system shall ensure that data for monitoring programme implementation and results are collected efficiently, effectively, and in a timely manner. To that end, proportionate reporting requirements shall be imposed on recipients of Union funds and where relevant Member States.

5.In order to ensure effective assessment of the progress of the Fund towards the achievement of its objectives, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 28 to amend Annex VIII to review and complement the indicators where necessary and to supplement this Regulation with provisions on the establishment of a monitoring and evaluation framework, including for project information to be provided by the Member States.

Article 25

Evaluation

1.The Commission shall carry out a midterm and a retrospective evaluation of this Regulation, including the actions implemented under this Fund.

2.The mid-term and the retrospective evaluation shall be carried out in a timely manner to feed into the decision-making process in accordance with the timeline set out Article 40 of Regulation (EU) No [CPR].

Sub-section 2 Rules for shared management

Article 26

Annual performance reports

1.By 15 February 2023 and by the same date of each subsequent year up to and including 2031, Member States shall submit to the Commission the annual performance report as referred to in Article 36(6) of Regulation (EU) No [CPR]. The report submitted in 2023 shall cover the implementation of the programme until 30 June 2022.

2.The annual performance report shall in particular include information on:

(a)the progress in the implementation of the programme and in achieving the milestones and targets, taking into account the latest data as required by Article 37 of Regulation (EU) No [CPR];

(b)any issues affecting the performance of the programme and the actions taken to address them;

(c)the complementarity between the actions supported by the Fund and support provided by other Union funds, in particular those in or in relation to third countries;

(d)the contribution of the programme to the implementation of the relevant Union acquis and action plans;

(e)the implementation of communication and visibility actions;

(f)the fulfilment of the enabling conditions and their application throughout the programming period.

3.The Commission may make observations on the annual performance report within two months of the date of its receipt. Where the Commission does not provide observations within that deadline, the report shall be deemed to have been accepted.

4.In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Article, the Commission shall adopt an implementing act establishing the template for the annual performance report. This implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 29(2).

Article 27

Monitoring and reporting

1.Monitoring and reporting, in accordance with Title IV of Regulation (EU) No [CPR], shall be based on types of intervention set out in Tables 1, 2 and 3 of Annex VI. To address unforeseen or new circumstances or to ensure the effective implementation of funding, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts to amend Annex VI in accordance with Article 28.

2.The indicators shall be used in accordance with Articles 12(1), 17 and 37 of Regulation (EU) No [CPR].

CHAPTER III

TRANSITIONAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS

Article 28

Exercise of the delegation

1.The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article.

2.The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 12, 15, 24 and 27 shall be conferred on the Commission until 31 December 2028.

3.The European Parliament or the Council may revoke the delegation of powers referred to in Articles 12, 15, 24 and 27 at any time. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.

4.Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016.

5.As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council thereof.

6.A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 12, 15, 24 and 27 shall enter into force only if neither the European Parliament nor the Council has expressed an objection within two months of being notified of it or if, before the expiry of that period, they have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council.

Article 29

Committee procedure

1.The Commission shall be assisted by a Coordination Committee for the Asylum and Migration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Border Management and Visa. That Committee shall be a Committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.

2.Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.

3.Where the Committee delivers no opinion, the Commission shall not adopt the draft implementing act. This shall not apply to the implementing act referred to in Article 26(4).

Article 30

Transitional provisions

1.Regulation (EU) No 513/2014 is repealed with effect from 1 January 2021.

2.Without prejudice to paragraph 1, this Regulation shall not affect the continuation or modification of the actions concerned, until their closure, under the Police Instrument of the Internal Security Fund, which shall continue to apply to those actions concerned until their closure.

3.The financial envelope for the Fund may also cover technical and administrative assistance expenses necessary to ensure the transition between the Fund and the measures adopted under its predecessor, the Police Instrument of the Internal Security Fund established by Regulation (EU) No 513/2014.

Article 31

Entry into force and application

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall apply from 1 January 2021.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the Member States in accordance with the Treaties.

Done at Brussels,

For the European Parliament    For the Council

The President    The President

LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT

1.FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE

1.1.Title of the proposal/initiative

1.2.Policy area(s) concerned (programme cluster)

1.3.Nature of the proposal/initiative

1.4.Grounds for the proposal/initiative

1.5.Duration and financial impact

1.6.Management mode(s) planned

2.MANAGEMENT MEASURES

2.1.Monitoring and reporting rules

2.2.Management and control system

2.3.Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities

3.ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE

3.1.Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected

3.2.Estimated impact on expenditure

3.2.1.Summary of estimated impact on expenditure

3.2.2.Estimated impact on appropriations of an administrative nature

3.2.3.Third-party contributions

3.3.Estimated impact on revenue

LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT

1.FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE

1.1.Title of the proposal/initiative

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the Internal Security Fund (ISF)

1.2.Policy area(s) concerned (Programme cluster)

Heading 5 (Security and defence); Title 12. Security

1.3.The proposal/initiative relates to:

 a new action

 a new action following a pilot project/preparatory action 37

 the extension of an existing action

 a merger or redirection of one or more actions towards another/a new action

1.4.Grounds for the proposal/initiative

1.4.1.Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term, including a detailed timeline for roll-out of the implementation of the initiative

The Fund should build on the results and investments made with the support of its predecessors, namely supporting the overall EU policies in the area of internal security, such as police cooperation, preventing and combating crime and crisis management (protection of people, public spaces and critical infrastructure), fight against drugs.

In addition, EU funding should be able to address situations resulting from newly emerging security threats or other situations that require immediate action which cannot be addressed by Member States acting alone.

Without prejudice to any future policy development, any future proposal in this area will include its own separate legislative financial statement for which the corresponding financial resources could be covered either by the envelope of this Fund or by any other additional funding available in the MFF envelope.

1.4.2.Added value of Union involvement (it may result from different factors, e.g. coordination gains, legal certainty, greater effectiveness or complementarities). For the purposes of this point ‘added value of Union involvement’ is the value resulting from Union intervention which is additional to the value that would have been otherwise created by Member States alone.

The management of security threats presents challenges which cannot be dealt with by the Member States acting alone.

In the area of security, serious and organised crime, terrorism and other securityrelated threats are increasingly cross-border in nature. Transnational cooperation and coordination between lawenforcement authorities is essential to successfully prevent and fight these crimes, for example through the exchange of information, joint investigations, interoperable technologies and common threat and risk assessments. The financial support provided under this Regulation contributes in particular to strengthening national and European capabilities in those policy areas, putting the Union in a better position to provide a framework for expressing Union solidarity and to provide a platform for the development of common IT systems underpinning these policies.

Dealing with the security of the EU requires substantial resources and capabilities from the Member States. Improved operational cooperation and coordination involving the pooling of resources in areas such as training and equipment creates economies of scale and synergies, thereby ensuring a more efficient use of public funds and reinforcing solidarity, mutual trust and responsibilitysharing for common EU policies among Member States. This is particularly relevant in the area of security, where financial support for all forms of cross-border joint operation is essential to improve cooperation between police, customs, border guards and judicial authorities.

In relation to the external dimension of home affairs, it is clear that the adoption of measures and the pooling of resources at EU level will increase significantly the EU leverage necessary to persuade third countries to engage with the EU on securityrelated issues that are primarily in the interest of the EU and the Member States.

1.4.3.Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past

The interim evaluation of the ISF-P of the 2014-2020 programming period and the ex post evaluations of funds of the 2007-2013 period (‘prevention of and the fight against crime’ (ISEC) and ‘prevention, preparedness and consequence management of terrorism and other security-related risks’ (CIPS)) produced the findings indicated below. It is worth noting that ISF-P is the first EU funding programme in this policy field implemented also through shared management with the Member States; previous funds were implemented only directly by the Commission.

Relevance, scope and size

The broad scope of the current ISF-P ensured it could support the implementation of the necessary actions at EU level in the area of security. The flexibility offered by the Fund (possibility of transferring funding between objectives) helped to address the changing needs, but Member States would appreciate even more flexibility by abandoning the minimum allocations of funds to objectives and reducing the number of national objectives. Furthermore, allocations fixed at the beginning of the programming period, on the basis of statistical data, do not reflect changes in the needs of Member States during the implementation period. When providing additional financial support during the programming period, the distribution key established at the beginning of the programming period does not allow for flexibility, potentially affecting the effectiveness and efficiency of the Fund.

- Effectiveness

The current ISF-P is considered effective, contributing to its objectives. The evaluations show that a mix of delivery modes in the areas of security, migration and border management allowed for an effective way to achieve the objectives of the Funds. The holistic design of the delivery mechanisms should be maintained. On the other hand, the evaluations point to the remaining lack of flexibility, to be balanced with predictability as Member States authorities and beneficiaries need financial and legal certainty to plan the implementation of the Fund throughout the programming period, as a limitation to their effectiveness. The current ISF-P does not include a financial envelope to be distributed across the national programmes in the framework of the mid-term review, limiting the possibility to provide additional funding to the national programmes. Another limitation relates to the fact that the mid-term review can be used only at a pre-defined time during the implementation period. The migration crisis and the increased security threats in the EU in recent years have shown that flexibility was needed from the beginning of the programming period onwards to be able to react to changes on the ground. The interim evaluations also noted the need for a clear intervention logic, and that more focused national programmes would increase the effectiveness by allowing for some objectives to be prioritised, and the importance of a full monitoring and evaluation system, for both direct and shared management. Designed at an early stage, it ensures a consistent and uniform monitoring of progress and effectiveness from the outset.

- Efficiency (including simplification and reduction of administrative burden)

Stakeholders have noted progress in the simplification of the procedures. Innovative measures (simplified cost options, multiannual programming) are considered beneficial. Establishing common rules on the implementation of AMIF and the ISF supported the links of the management of the three funding instruments, leading to close cooperation between — and in some cases the unification of — the entities responsible for the management of the two funds.

However, the administrative burden is still perceived to be high by both administrations and beneficiaries, undermining the efficiency of the Funds. For example, even though the use of national eligibility rules has the potential to reduce administrative burden, eligibility rules that are applied at times remain too heavy. Simplified cost options are not applied to the full extent. There is also a relatively high administrative burden for both Member States and the Commission in the provision of emergency assistance through direct management. This entails setting up a detailed grant agreement in a short period of time and more detailed reporting requirements towards the Commission for the beneficiaries (compared to shared management). There is a need for a sufficient level of technical assistance to facilitate the successful management of the Fund and for further efforts to simplify access to the Funds for potential beneficiaries by providing information regarding actions and funding opportunities. Furthermore, in the current ISF-P there is no mechanism aiming at improving performance, such as, for example, a system of incentives which would further improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the Funds. In the absence of such a mechanism, Member States that perform well in the implementation of the Funds could not be rewarded. This could have increased the effectiveness of the Funds to achieve their objectives.

- Coherence

The Fund is considered to be coherent and its objectives are complementary to other national policies. Coherence and complementarity with other EU financing instruments have been ensured during the design, programming and implementation stages. Coordinating mechanisms have been put in place to ensure coherence and complementarity at the implementation stage. The format of the funds (national programmes aiming at longterm capacities, emergency assistance aiming at alleviating immediate pressure and Union actions designed to support transnational cooperation) was considered as positive. Nevertheless, ensuring coherence and synergies remains challenging in three main areas: supporting asylum and integration objectives through the ESIFs, supporting border management, and return and reintegration measures as well as developing protection systems in third countries and, finally, ensuring coherence between the interventions of EU funds in the area of security.

1.4.4.Compatibility and possible synergy with other appropriate instruments

The objectives of the Fund in the area of security will be supported through a fully coordinated set of funding instruments, including both their internal and external aspects. It is important to avoid overlaps with funding provided through other EU instruments by establishing dividing lines and effective coordination mechanisms.

The future ISF will act as the Union’s dedicated instrument in the area of security. Complementarities will be ensured in particular with the Cohesion Policy, the Integrated Border Management Fund consisting of the instrument for border management and visa and the customs control equipment instrument, the security research part of Horizon Europe and the future ‘rights and values’ programme. Synergies will be sought in particular on border management and customs control equipment, security of infrastructure and public spaces, cybersecurity and the prevention of radicalisation. Effective coordination mechanisms are essential to maximise the effectiveness in the achievement of policy objectives, exploit economies of scale and avoid overlaps between actions.

Measures in and in relation to third countries supported through the Fund should be taken in synergy and coherence with other actions outside the Union supported through Union external assistance instruments. In particular, in implementing such actions, coherence should be sought with the principles and general objectives of Union external action and foreign policy related to the country or region in question. In relation to the external dimension, the Fund will target support to improve cooperation with third countries in areas of interest to the Union’s internal security, such as in particular countering terrorism and radicalisation, trade and transport security, cooperation with third country law enforcement authorities in the fight against terrorism (including detachments and joint investigation teams), organised crime and corruption as well as trafficking in human beings and migrant smuggling.

1.5.Duration and financial impact

 limited duration

   in effect from 1.1.2021 to 31.12.2027

   Financial impact from 2021 to 2027 for commitment appropriations and from 2021 for payment appropriations.

 unlimited duration

Implementation with a start-up period from YYYY to YYYY,

followed by full-scale operation.

1.6.Management mode(s) planned 38

 Direct management by the Commission

by its departments, including by its staff in the Union delegations;

   by the executive agencies 39

 Shared management with the Member States

 Indirect management by entrusting budget implementation tasks to:

third countries or the bodies they have designated;

international organisations and their agencies (to be specified);

the EIB and the European Investment Fund;

bodies referred to in Articles 70 and 71 of the Financial Regulation;

public law bodies;

bodies governed by private law with a public service mission to the extent that they provide adequate financial guarantees;

bodies governed by the private law of a Member State that are entrusted with the implementation of a public-private partnership and that provide adequate financial guarantees;

persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions in the CFSP pursuant to Title V of the TEU, and identified in the relevant basic act.

If more than one management mode is indicated, please provide details in the ‘Comments’ section.

Comments

The proposed Fund will be implemented in shared, or direct or indirect management. The largest part of the resources will be allocated to the national programmes in shared management. The remaining part will be allocated to a thematic facility and could be used for specific actions (implemented by the Member States nationally or transnationally), Union actions (direct/indirect management) and emergency assistance (shared, or direct or indirect management).

Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission will be implemented by direct management.

2.MANAGEMENT MEASURES

2.1.Monitoring and reporting rules

Specify frequency and conditions.

Direct/indirect management:

The Commission will directly monitor the implementation of the actions according to the arrangements set out in the respective grant agreements, delegated agreements with international organisations where applicable and contracts with the beneficiaries.

Shared management:

Each Member State will establish a management and control systems for its programme and ensure the quality and the reliability of the monitoring system and of data on indicators, in accordance with the Common Provision Regulation (CPR). In order to facilitate a swift start of implementation, it is possible to ‘roll-over’ existing well-functioning management and control systems to the next programming period.

In this context, Member States will be asked to set up a monitoring committee in which the Commission shall participate in an advisory capacity. The monitoring committee will meet at least once a year. It will review all issues that affect programme progress towards achieving its objectives.

The Member States will send an annual performance report, which should set out information on the progress in the implementation of the programme and in achieving the milestones and targets. It should also raise any issues affecting the performance of the programme and describe the action taken to address them.

At the end of the period, each Member States will submit a final performance report. The final report should focus on the progress made towards achieving the objectives of the programme and should give an overview of the key issues that affected the programme’s performance, the measures taken to address those issues and the assessment of the effectiveness of those measures. In addition, it should present the contribution of the programme to tackling the challenges identified in the relevant EU recommendations addressed to the Member State, the progress made in achieving the targets set out in the performance framework, the findings of the relevant evaluations and the follow-up given to those findings and the results of the communication actions.

According to the draft CPR proposal, the Member States will send each year an assurance package, which includes the annual accounts, the management declaration and the audit authority’s opinions on the accounts, the management and control system and the legality and regularity of the expenditure declared in the annual accounts. This assurance package will be used by the Commission to determine the amount chargeable to the Fund for the accounting year.

A review meeting between the Commission and each Member State will be organised every two years to examine the performance of each programmes.

The Member States send six times per year data for each programme broken down by specific objectives. These data refer to the cost of operations and the values of common output and result indicators.

In general:

The Commission will carry out a mid-term and a retrospective evaluation of the actions implemented under this Fund, in line with the CPR. The mid-term evaluation should be based in particular on the mid-term evaluation of programmes submitted to the Commission by the Member States by 31 December 2024.

2.2.Management and control system(s)

2.2.1.Justification of the management mode(s), the funding implementation mechanism(s), the payment modalities and the control strategy proposed

Both the ex post evaluations of the DG HOME 2007-2013 funds and the interim evaluations of the current DG HOME funds show that a mix of delivery modes in the areas of migration and home affairs allowed for an effective way to achieve the objectives of the funds. The holistic design of the delivery mechanisms is maintained and includes shared, direct and indirect management.

Through shared management, Member States implement programmes that contribute to the policy objectives of the Union and are tailor-made to their national context. Shared management ensures that financial support is available in all participating States. Furthermore, shared management allows for funding predictability and for Member States, who are most knowledgeable of the challenges they are faced with, to plan their long-term endowments accordingly. Top-up funding for specific actions (which require cooperative effort among Member States or where new developments in the Union require additional funding to be made available to one or more Member States) and for resettlement and transfer activities can be implemented through shared management. In a new development, the Fund can also provide emergency assistance through shared management, in addition to direct and indirect management.

Through direct management, the Commission supports other actions that contribute to the common policy objectives of the Union. The actions enable tailormade support for urgent and specific needs in individual Member States (‘emergency assistance’), support transnational networks and activities, test innovative activities that could be scaled up under national programmes and cover studies in the interest of the Union as a whole (‘Union actions’).

Through indirect management, the Fund retains the possibility to delegate budget implementation tasks to, among others, international organisations and home affairs agencies for particular purposes.

Bearing in mind the different objectives and needs, a thematic facility is proposed under the Fund as a way to balance the predictability of multiannual allocation of funding to the national programmes with flexibility in disbursing funding periodically to actions with a high level of added value to the Union. The thematic facility will be used for specific actions in and among Member States, Union actions, emergency assistance, resettlement and relocation. It will ensure that funds can be allocated and transferred among the different modalities above, on the basis of a twoyear programming cycle.

The payment arrangements for shared management are described in the draft CPR proposal, which provides for annual pre-financing, followed by a maximum of four interim payments per programme and year based on the payment applications sent by the Member States during the accounting year. As per the draft CPR proposal, the pre-financing is cleared within the final accounting year of the programmes.

The control strategy will be based on the new Financial Regulation and on the CPR. The new Financial Regulation and the draft proposal for the CPR should extend the use of the simplified forms of grants such as lump-sums, flat rates and unit costs. They also introduce new forms of payments, based on the results achieved, instead of the cost. Beneficiaries will be able to receive a fixed amount of money if they prove that certain actions such as training courses or delivery of emergency assistance have taken place. This is expected to simplify the control burden both at beneficiary and Member State level (e.g. check of bills and receipts for costs).

For shared management, the draft CPR proposal builds on the management and control strategy in place for the 2014-2020 programming period but introduces some measures aimed at simplifying the implementation and reducing the control burden at the level of both beneficiaries and Member States. The new developments include:

- the removal of the designation procedure (which should make it possible to speed up the implementation of the programmes);

- management verifications (administrative and on-the-spot) to be carried out by the managing authority on a risk basis (compared to the 100 % administrative controls required in the 2014-2020 programming period). Furthermore, under certain conditions, the managing authorities may apply proportionate control arrangements in line with the national procedures;

- conditions to avoid multiple audits on the same operation/expenditure.

The programme authorities will submit to the Commission interim payment claims based on expenditure incurred by beneficiaries. The draft CPR proposal allows the managing authorities to carry out management verifications on a risk basis and also provides for specific controls (e.g. on-the-spot controls by the managing authority and audits of operations/expenditure by the audit authority) after the associated expenditure has been declared to the Commission in the interim payment claims. In order to mitigate the risk of reimbursing ineligible expenditure, the draft CPR caps the Commission’s interim payments at 90 %, given that at this moment only part of the national controls have been carried out. The Commission will pay the remaining balance following the annual clearance of accounts exercise, upon receipt of the assurance package from the programme authorities. Any irregularities detected by the Commission or the European Court of Auditors after the transmission of the annual assurance package may lead to a net financial correction.

2.2.2.Information concerning the risks identified and the internal control system(s) set up to mitigate them

Shared management:

DG HOME has not been facing important risks of errors in its spending programmes. This is confirmed by the recurrent absence of significant findings in the annual reports of the Court of Auditors. Furthermore, DG HOME has already revised its legal basis (Regulation (EU) 2015/378 and Delegated Regulation (EU) 1042/2014) to align further to the control framework of the Cohesion Policy and its assurance model and to continue to maintain a low level errors in its spending programmes. This effort of alignment continues with the current proposal, where the Control Framework is consistent with the Cohesion Policy DGs.

In shared management, the general risks in relation to the implementation of the current programmes concern the under-implementation of the Fund by the Member States and the possible errors derived from the complexity of rules and weaknesses in management and control systems. The draft CPR simplifies the regulatory framework by harmonising the rules and management and control systems across the different Funds implemented under shared management. It also enables risk-differentiated control requirements (e.g. risk-based management verifications, possibility for proportionate control arrangements based on national procedures, limitations of audit work in terms of timing and/or specific operations).

Direct/indirect management:

Based on the recent analysis of the main causes and types of most commonly detected errors in ex post audits, the main areas of non-compliances stem from poor financial management of the grants awarded to the beneficiaries, missing or inadequate supporting documents, incorrect public procurement, and costs not budgeted.

Consequently the risks are mainly due to

– ensuring quality of selected projects and their subsequent technical implementation, unclear or incomplete guidance provided to beneficiaries or insufficient monitoring;

– risk of inefficient or non-economic use of funds awarded, both for grants (complexity of reimbursing actual eligible costs coupled with limited possibilities to check eligible costs at the desk) and for procurement (sometimes limited number of economic providers with the required specialist knowledge, entailing insufficient possibilities to compare price offers);

– risk relating to the capacity of (especially) smaller organisations to effectively control expenditure as well as to ensure the transparency of operations carried out;

– reputational risk for the Commission, if fraud or criminal activities are discovered; only partial assurance can be drawn from the third parties’ internal control systems due to the rather large number of heterogeneous contractors and beneficiaries, each operating their own control system, often rather small in size.

Most of these risks are expected to be reduced thanks to a better design of calls for proposals, guidance to beneficiaries, targeting of proposals and the better use simplified costs and cross-reliance on audits and assessments as included in the new Financial Regulation.

2.2.3.Estimation and justification of the cost-effectiveness of the controls (ratio of ‘control costs ÷ value of the related funds managed’), and assessment of the expected levels of risk of error (at payment & at closure)

Shared management:

The cost of controls is expected to remain the same or potentially be reduced for Member States. For the present (2014-2020) programming cycle, as of 2017, the cumulative cost of control by the Member States is estimated at approximately 5 % of the total amount of payments requested by the Member States for the year 2017.

This percentage is expected to decrease with efficiency gains in implementation of the programmes and increase in payments to Member States.

With the risk-based approach to management and controls being introduced in the draft CPR coupled with enhanced drive to adopt simplified cost options (SCOs), the cost of controls for Member States is expected to be reduced further.

Direct/indirect management:

The cost of controls amounts to approximately 2.5 % of the payments made by DG HOME. This is expected to stay stable, or decrease slightly in the event of the broader use being made of SCOs in the next programming period.

2.3.Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities

Specify existing or envisaged prevention and protection measures, e.g. from the Anti-Fraud Strategy.

Fraud prevention and detection is one of the objectives of internal control as stipulated in the Financial Regulation and a key governance issue, which the Commission has to address throughout the whole expenditure life cycle.

In addition, DG HOME’s anti-fraud strategy (ASF) mainly aims at the prevention, detection and reparation of fraud ensuring inter alia that its internal anti-fraud related controls are fully aligned with the Commission’s anti-fraud strategy (CAFS) and that its fraud risk management approach is geared to identifying fraud risk areas and adequate responses.

As regards shared management, Member States will ensure the legality and regularity of expenditure included in their accounts submitted to the Commission. In this context, Member States will take all required actions to prevent, detect and correct irregularities, including fraud. As in the present (2014-2020) programming cycle 40 , Member States will be obliged to put in place procedures for detection of irregularities and anti-fraud and to report to the Commission irregularities, including suspected fraud and established fraud in the areas of shared management. Anti-fraud measures will remain a cross-cutting principle and obligation for Member States.

3.ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE

3.1.Heading of the multiannual financial framework and new expenditure budget line(s) proposed

Heading of multiannual financial framework

Budget line

Type of
expenditure

Contribution

Heading No 5: ‘Security and Defence’

Diff./Non-diff 41 .

from EFTA countries 42

from candidate countries 43

from third countries

within the meaning of Article [21(2)(b)] of the Financial Regulation

5

12.02.01 — Internal Security Fund (ISF) 44

Diff.

NO

NO

NO

NO

5

12.01.01 — Support expenditure for Internal Security Fund (Technical Assistance)

Non-diff.

NO

NO

NO

NO

3.2.Estimated impact on expenditure

3.2.1.Summary of estimated impact on expenditure

EUR million (to three decimal places)

Heading of multiannual financial
framework

5

‘Security and Defence’

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

Post 2027

TOTAL

Operational appropriations (split according to the budget lines listed under 3.1)

Commitments

(1)

224.811

341.107

345.694

384.921

389.693

394.560

398.214

2 479.000

Payments

(2)

23.212

51.821

105.901

265.329

373.387

371.677

369.230

918.443

2 479.000

Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope of the programme 45  

Commitments = Payments

(3)

2.827

2.884

2.941

3.000

3.060

3.121

3.167

21.000

TOTAL appropriations for the envelope of the programme

Commitments

=1+3

227.638

343.991

348.635

387.921

392.753

397.681

401.381

2 500.000

Payments

=2+3

26.039

54.705

108.842

268.329

376.447

374.798

372.397

918.443

2 500.000



Heading of multiannual financial
framework

7

‘Administrative expenditure’

This section should be filled in using the ‘budget data of an administrative nature’ to be firstly introduced in the Annex to the Legislative Financial Statement , which is uploaded to DECIDE for interservice consultation purposes.

EUR million (to three decimal places)

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

Post 2027

TOTAL

Human resources

5.942

6.943

6.943

6.943

6.943

6.943

6.943

 

47.600

Other administrative expenditure

0.202

0.202

0.202

0.202

0.202

0.202

0.202

 

1.412

TOTAL appropriations under HEADING 7 of the multiannual financial framework

(Total commitments = Total payments)

6.144

7.145

7.145

7.145

7.145

7.145

7.145

 

49.012

EUR million (to three decimal places)

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

Post 2027

TOTAL

TOTAL appropriations
across HEADINGS
of the multiannual financial framework
 

Commitments

233.782

351.136

355.780

395.066

399.898

404.826

408.526

-

2 549.012

Payments

32.182

61.849

115.987

275.474

383.592

381.943

379.542

918.443

2 549.012

3.2.2.Summary of estimated impact on appropriations of an administrative nature

   The proposal/initiative does not require the use of appropriations of an administrative nature

   The proposal/initiative requires the use of appropriations of an administrative nature, as explained below:

EUR million (to three decimal places)

Years

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

TOTAL

HEADING 7
of the multiannual financial framework

Human resources

5.942

6.943

6.943

6.943

6.943

6.943

6.943

47.600

Other administrative expenditure

0.202

0.202

0.202

0.202

0.202

0.202

0.202

1.412

Subtotal HEADING 7
of the multiannual financial framework

6.144

7.145

7.145

7.145

7.145

7.145

7.145

49.012

Outside HEADING 7
of the multiannual financial framework

Human resources

Other expenditure
of an administrative nature

2.827

2.884

2.941

3.000

3.060

3.121

3.167

21.000

Subtotal
outside HEADING 7
of the multiannual financial framework

2.827

2.884

2.941

3.000

3.060

3.121

3.167

21.000

TOTAL

8.971

10.029

10.086

10.145

10.205

10.266

10.312

70.012

The appropriations required for human resources and other expenditure of an administrative nature will be met by appropriations from the DG that are already assigned to management of the action and/or have been redeployed within the DG, together if necessary with any additional allocation which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary constraints.

[For guidance related to possible delegation of programme implementation tasks to executive agencies, see p. 8/9 above].

3.2.2.1.Estimated requirements of human resources

   The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human resources.

   The proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as explained below:

Estimate to be expressed in full time equivalent units

Years

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

• Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary staff)

Headquarters and Commission’s Representation Offices

38

45

45

45

45

45

45

Delegations

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

Research

• External staff (in Full Time Equivalent unit: FTE) — AC, AL, END, INT and JED 

Heading 7

Financed from HEADING 7 of the multiannual financial framework 

- at Headquarters

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

- in Delegations

Financed from the envelope of the programme 

- at Headquarters

- in Delegations

Research

Other (specify)

TOTAL

43

50

50

50

50

50

50

The human resources required will be met by staff from the DG who are already assigned to management of the action and/or have been redeployed within the DG, together if necessary with any additional allocation which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary constraints.

Description of tasks to be carried out:

Officials and temporary staff

The staff of 50 FTE by 2027 represents the overall staff needed for the implementation and the management of the Fund. It is composed of staff already working in DG HOME for the ISF (baseline: 33 FTE = 3 CA, 11 AST, 19 AD) as of April 2018 and additional staff (+3 AST, +14 AD of which 2 for the Delegations). Please see below the description of tasks for these additional staff:

Planning, programming, relation with agencies (+ 1 AD):

- providing input to the budgetary procedure,

- making a link between funds and agencies (e.g. grants/delegation agreements to agencies)

Audits, OLAF, ECA (+3 AD):

- performing controls, as described above (ex ante verification, procurement committee, ex post audits, internal audit, clearance of accounts),

- to follow up the audits managed by the IAS and the CoA.

Direct management (+1 AST, +2 AD):

- preparing annual work programmes/financing decisions, establishing annual priorities,

- communicating with stakeholders (potential/actual beneficiaries, Member States, etc.),

- managing calls for proposals and calls for tenders and the subsequent selection procedures,

- operational management of projects.

Shared management (including TF) (+1 AST, + 3AD):

- conducting the policy dialogue with Member States,

- managing national programmes,

- drafting guidelines to Member States,

- developing and managing grant and national programme management IT tools.

Synergies with other funds (+1 AD):

- coordination with the external dimension funds,

- coordination in the context of the CPR,

- synergies and complementarity with other funds.

Financial management (+1 AST):

- financial initiation and financial verification,

- accounting,

- monitoring and reporting on achievement of objectives, including in annual activity report and authorising officer by sub-delegation reports.

Staff for other directorates working on funding matters (+ 2 AD):

- Policy officers involved in the implementation of the funds (e.g. evaluation of technical reports from direct management beneficiaries, review of annual implementation reports for shared management, operational management of projects).

External staff

The tasks are similar to those of officials and temporary agents, except for tasks that cannot be fulfilled by external personnel.

Personnel in delegations

+ 2 AD: To accompany the development of policy implementation in the home affairs area, and in particular its external dimension, EU delegations will need to be equipped with sufficient home affairs expertise. This could be staff from the European Commission and/or the European External Action Service.

3.2.3.Third-party contributions

The proposal/initiative:

   does not provide for co-financing by third parties

   provides for the co-financing by third parties estimated below:

Appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places)

Years

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

TOTAL

Specify the co-financing body 

MS

MS

MS

MS

MS

MS

MS

TOTAL appropriations co-financed

tbd

tbd

tbd

tbd

tbd

tbd

tbd

3.3.Estimated impact on revenue

   The proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.

   The proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:

   on own resources

    on other revenue

please indicate if the revenue is assigned to expenditure lines    

EUR million (to three decimal places)

Budget revenue line:

Impact of the proposal/initiative 46

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

Article …………

For assigned revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.

Other remarks (e.g. method/formula used for calculating the impact on revenue or any other information).

(1)    COM(2018) 321 final of 2 May 2018.
(2)    Regulation (EU) No 513/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 establishing, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for police cooperation, preventing and combating crime, and crisis management and repealing Council Decision 2007/125/JHA (OJ L 150, 20.5.2014, p. 93).
(3)    Regulation (EU) No 1382/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a Justice Programme for the period 2014 to 2020.
(4)    COM(2018) 321 final (2.5.2018).
(5)    "A Modern Budget for a Union that Protects, Empowers and Defends: The Multiannual Financial Framework for 2021-2027", COM(2018) 321, 2.5.2018.
(6)    COM(2018) 375 of 29 May 2018.
(7)    Regulation (EU) X
(8)    COM(2015) 185 final of 28 April 2015.
(9)    Council Conclusions of 16 June 2015 on the renewed European Union Internal Security Strategy 2015-2020.
(10)    European Parliament resolution of 9 July 2015 on the European Agenda on Security (2015/2697(RSP)).
(11)    COM(2017) 794 final.
(12)    Regulation (EU) No 513/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 establishing, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for police cooperation, preventing and combating crime, and crisis management and repealing Council Decision 2007/125/JHA (OJ L 150, 20.5.2014, p. 93).
(13)    Council Regulation (EU) No 1053/2013 of 7 October 2013 establishing an evaluation and monitoring mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen acquis and repealing the Decision of the Executive Committee of 16 September 1998 setting up a Standing Committee on the evaluation and implementation of Schengen (OJ L 295, 6.11.2013, p. 27).
(14)    OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 1.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.C_.2013.373.01.0001.01.ENG&toc=OJ:C:2013:373:TOC
(15)    Full reference
(16)    Full reference
(17)    Regulation (EU, Euratom ) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 September 2013 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999 (OJ L 248 18.9.2013, p. 1).
(18)    Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities financial interests (OJ L 312, 23.12.95, p. 1).
(19)    Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 of 11 November 1996 concerning on-the-spot checks and inspections carried out by the Commission in order to protect the European Communities' financial interests against fraud and other irregularities (OJ L 292, 15.11.1996, p. 2).
(20)    Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘the EPPO’) (OJ L 283, 31.10.2017, p. 1).
(21)    Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law (OJ L 198, 28.7.2017, p. 29).
(22)    Council Decision 2013/755/EU of 25 November 2013 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Union (Overseas Association Decision) (OJ L 344, 19.12.2013, p. 1).
(23)    COM (2017)623 final.
(24)    Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016; OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1–14.
(25)    OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13.
(26)

   Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No XXX.

(27)    Council Decision 2009/902/JHA of 30 November 2009 setting up a European Crime Prevention Network (EUCPN) and repealing Decision 2001/427/JHA (OJ L 321, 8.12.2009, p. 44).
(28)    Conclusions of the Council of Justice and Home Affairs Ministers, 8 and 9 November 2010.
(29)    COM(2013) 172 establishing a European Law Enforcement Training Scheme (LETS).
(30)    Regulation (EU) 2015/2219 of 25 November 2015 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL).
(31)    Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008 on the fight against organised crime (OJ L 300, 11.11.2008, p. 42).
(32)    Directive (EU) 2017/741 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA (OJ L 88, 31.3.2017, p. 6).
(33)    ‘Flash money’ is genuine cash which is shown (exhibited) during a criminal investigation as proof of liquidity and solvency to the suspects or other persons who have information about availability or delivery or who act as intermediaries, in order to carry out a fictitious purchase aimed at arresting suspects, identifying illegal production sites or otherwise dismantling an organised crime group.
(34)    Full reference.
(35)    As referred to in Article 58(2)(a) or (b) of the Financial Regulation.
(36)    Details of management modes and references to the Financial Regulation may be found on the BudgWeb site:     https://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/budgweb/EN/man/budgmanag/Pages/budgmanag.aspx
(37)    The programme might be (partially) delegated to an executive agency, subject to the outcome of the cost/benefit analysis and related decisions to be taken, and to the related administrative appropriations for programme implementation in the Commission and the executive agency being adapted accordingly.
(38)    Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) N 1042/2014 of 25 July 2014, Annex I; Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) N°2015/1973 of 8 July 2015.
(39)    Diff. = differentiated appropriations / Non-diff. = non-differentiated appropriations.
(40)    EFTA: European Free Trade Association.
(41)    Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential candidates from the Western Balkans.
(42)    In the context of CIS, DG BUDG suggested a further breakdown into specific objectives. Given the existence of the thematic facility, DG HOME does not agree to take this suggestion on board at this stage.
(43)    Technical and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research.
(44)    As regards traditional own resources (customs duties, sugar levies), the amounts indicated must be net amounts, i.e. gross amounts after the relevant deduction for collection costs.
Top

Brussels,13.6.2018

COM(2018) 472 final

ANNEXES

to the

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council

establishing the Internal Security Fund

{SWD(2018) 347 final}
{SWD(2018) 348 final}
{SEC(2018) 315 final}


ANNEX I

Criteria for the allocation of funding to the programmes under shared management

The financial envelope referred to in Article 10 shall be allocated to the Member States programmes as follows:

(1)a one-time fixed amount of EUR 5 000 000 will be allocated to each Member State at the start of the programming period to ensure a critical mass for each programme and to cover needs that would not be directly expressed through the criteria indicated below;

(2)the remaining resources will be distributed according to the following criteria:

(a)45 % in inverse proportion to their gross domestic product (purchasing power standard per inhabitant),

(b)40 % in proportion to the size of their population,

(c)15 % in proportion to the size of their territory.

The initial allocation shall be based on the latest annual statistical data produced by the Commission (Eurostat) covering the preceding calendar year. For the mid-term review, the reference figures shall be the latest annual statistical data produced by the Commission (Eurostat) covering the preceding calendar year available at the time of the mid-term review in 2024.

ANNEX II

Implementation measures

The Fund shall contribute to the specific objective set out in Article 3(2)(a) by focusing on the following implementation measures:

(a)to ensure the uniform application of the Union acquis on security supporting information exchange for example via Prüm, EU PNR and SIS II, including through the implementation of recommendations from quality control and evaluation mechanisms such as the Schengen evaluation mechanism and other quality control and evaluation mechanisms;

(b)to set up, adapt and maintain security relevant Union IT systems and communication networks, including their interoperability, and to develop appropriate tools to address identified gaps;

(c)to increase the active use of Union security relevant information exchange tools, systems and databases ensuring that these are fed with high quality data;

(d)to support relevant national measures if relevant to implement the specific objectives set out in Article 3(2)(a).

The Fund shall contribute to the specific objective set out in Article 3(2)(b), by focusing on the following implementation measures:

(a)to increase law enforcement operations between Member States, including when appropriate with other relevant actors, in particular to facilitate and improve the use of joint investigation teams, joint patrols, hot pursuits, discreet surveillance and other operational cooperation mechanisms in the context of the EU Policy Cycle (EMPACT), with special emphasis on cross-border operations;

(b)to increase coordination and cooperation of law enforcement and other competent authorities within and between Member States and with other relevant actors, for example through networks of specialised national units, Union networks and cooperation structures, Union centres;

(c)to improve inter-agency cooperation and at Union level between the Member States, or between Member States, on the one hand, and the relevant Union bodies, offices and agencies on the other hand as well as at national level among the national authorities in each Member State.

The Fund shall contribute to the specific objective set out in Article 3(2)(c), by focusing on the following implementation measures:

(a)to increase law enforcement training, exercises, mutual learning, specialised exchange programmes and sharing of best practice including in and with third countries and other relevant actors;

(b)to exploit synergies by pooling resources and knowledge among Member States and other relevant actors, including civil society through, for instance, the creation of joint centres of excellence, the development of joint risk assessments, or common operational support centres for jointly conducted operations;

(c)to promote and develop measures, safeguards, mechanisms and best practices for the early identification, protection and support of witnesses, whistle-blowers and victims of crime and to develop partnerships between public authorities and other relevant actors to this effect;

(d)to acquire relevant equipment and to set up or upgrade specialised training facilities and other essential security relevant infrastructure to increase preparedness, resilience, public awareness and adequate response to security threats.



ANNEX III

Actions to be supported by the Fund in-line with Article 4

·IT systems and networks contributing to the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation, training on the use of such systems, testing and improving interoperability and data quality of such systems;

·monitoring of the implementation of Union law and Union policy objectives in the Member States in the area of security information systems;

·EMPACT actions implementing or facilitating the implementation of the EU Policy Cycle;

·actions supporting an effective and coordinated response to crisis linking up existing sector-specific capabilities, expertise centres and situation awareness centres, including those for health, civil protection and terrorism;

·actions developing innovative methods or deploying new technologies with a potential for transferability to other Member States, especially projects aiming at testing and validating the outcome of Union-funded security research projects;

·support to thematic or cross-theme networks of specialised national units to improve mutual confidence, exchange and dissemination of know-how, information, experiences and best practices, pooling of resources and expertise in joint centres of excellence;

·education and training of staff and experts of relevant lawenforcement and judicial authorities and administrative agencies taking into account operational needs and risk analyses, based on the LETS and in cooperation with CEPOL and, when applicable, the European Judicial Training Network;

·cooperation with the private sector in order to build trust and improve coordination, contingency planning and the exchange and dissemination of information and best practices among public and private actors including in the protection of public spaces and critical infrastructure;

·actions empowering communities to develop local approaches and prevention policies, and awareness-raising and communication activities among stakeholders and the general public on Union security policies;

·equipment, means of transport, communication systems and essential security-relevant facilities;

·cost of staff involved in the actions that are supported by the Fund or actions requiring involvement of staff for technical or security-related reasons.



ANNEX IV

Actions eligible for higher co-financing in-line with Articles 11(2) and 12(6)

·Projects which aim to prevent and counter radicalisation.

·Projects which aim at improving the interoperability of IT systems and communication networks. 1



ANNEX V

Core performance indicators referred to in Article 24(1)

Specific Objective 1:    Better information exchange

(1)Use of EU information exchange mechanisms,.

data source: Europol, EU-LISA, Council, Member States

Specific Objective 2:    Increased operational cooperation

(1)Number of joint operational actions supported by the Fund.

data source: Europol, Eurojust, Member States

(2)The estimated value of assets frozen, estimated value of assets confiscated with the help of the Fund.

data source: Member States

(3)Value of illicit drug seizures achieved with involvement of cross-border cooperation between law enforcement agencies.

data source: Member States, Union action grant beneficiaries

(4)Number of Schengen Evaluation Recommendations with a financial implication in the area of security addressed with the support of the Fund, as compared to the total number of recommendations with a financial implication in the area of security.

data source: Member States

Specific Objective 3:    Strengthened capabilities to combat and to prevent crime

(5)Number of law enforcement officials that completed training, exercises, mutual learning or specialised exchange programmes on cross-border related topics provided with the support of the Fund.

data source: Member States

(6)Number of critical infrastructures and public spaces of which the protection against security-related incidents has been improved with the help of the Fund.

data source: Member States

(7)Number of initiatives to prevent radicalisation leading to violent extremism.

data source: RAN



ANNEX VI

Types of intervention

TABLE 1:   CODES FOR THE INTERVENTION FIELD DIMENSION

1

TER-Countering Terrorist Financing

2

TER-Prevention and countering of radicalisation

3

TER-Protection and resilience of public spaces and other soft targets

4

TER- Protection and resilience of critical infrastructure

5

TER-Chemical Biological Radioactive Nuclear

6

TER-Explosives

7

TER-Crisis Management

8

TER-Other

9

OC-Corruption

10

OC-Economic and Financial Crime

11

OC-Drugs

12

OC-Firearms trafficking

13

OC-Trafficking in Human Beings

14

OC-Migrant Smuggling

15

OC-Environmental Crime

16

OC-Organised Property Crime

17

OC-Other

18

CC-Cybercrime - Other

19

CC-Cybercrime – Prevention

20

CC-Cybercrime - Facilitating investigations

21

CC-Cybercrime - Victims assistance

22

CC-Child Sexual Exploitation - Prevention

23

CC-Child Sexual Exploitation – Facilitating investigations

24

CC-Child Sexual Exploitation - Victims assistance

25

CC- Child Sexual Exploitation – Other

26

CC-Other

27

GEN-Information exchange

28

GEN-Police or interagency cooperation (customs, border guards, intelligence services)

29

GEN-Forensics

30

GEN-Victim support

31

GEN-Operating support

32

TA-Technical assistance - information and communication

33

TA-Technical assistance - preparation, implementation, monitoring and control

34

TA-Technical assistance - evaluation and studies, data collection

35

TA-Technical assistance - capacity building

TABLE 2:   CODES FOR THE TYPE OF ACTION DIMENSION

1

IT-systems, interoperability, data quality, communication systems (excluding equipment)

2

Networks, centres of excellence, cooperation structures, joint actions and operations

3

Joint Investigation Teams (JITs) or other joint operations

4

Secondment or deployment of experts

5

Training

6

Exchange of best practices, workshops, conferences, events, awareness raising campaigns, communication activities

7

Studies, pilot projects, risk assessments

8

Equipment (included in calculation of 15% cap)

9

Means of transport (included in calculation of 15% cap)

10

Buildings, facilities (included in calculation of 15% cap)

11

Deployment or other follow-up of research projects

TABLE 3:   CODES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION MODALITIES DIMENSION

1

Cooperation with third countries

2

Actions in third countries

3

Implementation of Schengen evaluation recommendations in the area of police cooperation

4

Specific Actions (not known at programming stage)

5

Emergency Assistance (not known at programming stage)

6

Actions listed in Annex IV



ANNEX VII

Eligible actions for operating support

Within specific objective better information exchange, operating support within the programmes shall cover:

·maintenance and helpdesk of Union and where relevant national IT systems contributing to the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation. 

·staff costs contributing to the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation

Within specific objective increased operational cooperation, operating support within the national programmes shall cover:

·maintenance of technical equipment or means of transport used for actions in the area of prevention, detection and investigation of serious and organised crime with a cross-border dimension.

·staff costs contributing to the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation

Within specific objective strengthened capabilities to prevent and to combat crime, operating support within the national programmes shall cover:

·maintenance of technical equipment or means of transport used for actions in the area of prevention, detection and investigation of serious and organised crime with a cross-border dimension.

·staff costs contributing to the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation

Actions which are not eligible under Article 4(3) shall not be covered.



ANNEX VIII

Output and result indicators referred to in Article 24(3)

Specific Objective 1:    Better information exchange

(1)Use of EU information exchange mechanisms measured through the:

(a)number of searches performed in the Schengen Information System (SIS);

(b)number of searches in the system for transnational exchange of forensic data (DNA, fingerprints, number plates) between Member States (Prüm automated data exchange system);

(c)number of messages exchanged through Europol's Secure Information Exchange Network Application (SIENA);

(d)number of searches performed in Europol's Information System (EIS);

(e)total number of passengers whose EU Passenger Name Record (PNR) data have been collected and exchanged;

data source: Europol, EU-LISA, Council, Member States

(2)Number of new connections between security-relevant databases made with support of the Fund:

(a)with EU and where relevant international databases;

(b)within the Member State;

(c)with one or more other Member States;

(d)with one or more third countries.

data source: Member States

(3)Number of active users of EU and where relevant national security relevant information exchange tools, systems and databases added with support from the Fund, as compared to number of total users.

data source: Member States

Specific Objective 2:    Increased operational cooperation

(4)Number of joint operational actions supported by the Fund, including the participating Member States and authorities and broken down by area (counter-terrorism, organised crime general, organised crime firearms, cybercrime, other):

(a)number of joint investigation teams (JITs);

(b)number of European Multidisciplinary Platform against Criminal Threats (EMPACT) operational projects;

(c)other joint operational actions.

data source: Europol, Eurojust, Member States

(5)Participation in transnational networks operating with support of the Fund.

data source: Member States, Union action or EMAS grant beneficiaries

(6)The estimated value of assets frozen, estimated value of assets confiscated with the help of the Fund.

data source: Member States

(7)Value of illicit drug seizures achieved with involvement of cross-border cooperation between law enforcement agencies.

data source: Member States, Union action grant beneficiaries

(8)Number of outputs of existing transnational networks generated with the help of the Fund, such as for example manuals on best practices, workshops, common exercises.

data source: Union action grant beneficiaries

(9)Number of Schengen Evaluation Recommendations with a financial implication in the area of security addressed with the support of the Fund, as compared to the total number of recommendations with a financial implication in the area of security.

data source: Member States

Specific Objective 3:    Strengthened capabilities to combat and to prevent crime

(10)Number of law enforcement officials that completed training, exercises, mutual learning or specialised exchange programmes on cross-border related topics provided with the support of the Fund, broken down by the following areas:

(a)counter terrorism;

(b)organised crime;

(c)cybercrime;

(d)other areas of operational cooperation.

data source: Member States

(11)Number of manuals on best practices and investigation techniques, standard operating procedures and other tools developed with support of the Fund as a result of interaction between different organisations across the EU.

data source: Member States, Union action or EMAS grant beneficiaries

(12)Number of victims of crime assisted with the support of the Fund, broken down by type of crime (trafficking in human beings, migrant smuggling, terrorism, serious and organised crime, cybercrime, child sexual exploitation).

data source: Member States

(13)Number of critical infrastructures and public spaces of which the protection against security-related incidents has been improved with the help of the Fund.

data source: Member States

(14)Number of initiatives to prevent radicalisation leading to violent extremism:

(a)number of hits on the website of the Radicalisation Awareness Network (RAN);

(b)number of participants in the RAN broken down by type of expert;

(c)number of study visits, trainings, workshops and counselling completed in Member States in close coordination with national Authorities broken down by beneficiaries (law enforcement authorities, other).

data source: RAN

(15)Number of partnerships established with the support of the Fund contributing to improving support of witnesses, whistle-blowers and victims of crime:

(a)with the private sector;

(b)with civil society.

data source: Member States, Union action or EMAS grant beneficiaries

(1)    In line with the Commission Communication on stronger and smarter information systems for borders and security COM(2016) 205.
Top