1.7. Ideas a Defender
2.2.1.9. Impuestos al fisco y los arrendamientos
Questionnaires for Policy Ministries
10.1.1.
INTERVIEW GUIDE – POLICY MINISTRY
1. Name of respondent, organisation/department, position2. Role of respondent in programming, negotiations, implementation
PROGRAMMING
3. In what role is your ministry involved in the programming process of the OP? 4. What added value does the ERDF bring in reaching inclusive growth objectives above the activities co-funded from the ESF?
5. Which advantages of the CPR were experienced in designing inclusive growth measures? Were these due to synergies with other measures?
6. What were the main hurdles your ministry experienced in putting forward your suggestions for inclusive growth priorities?
7. Did you use European Commission or external assistance during the programming process? If yes, through which channels, and how useful did you find it?
8. Are any development needs in connection with inclusive growth which should be covered, but are currently not covered by the programme(s) (i.e. a case for programme modification)?
NEGOTIATION
10. How were you involved in the negotiation process of the OP?
11. Are there any national/regional strategies pertaining to inclusive growth that were used as support for the negotiations?
12. Were specific target groups (marginalised groups, migrants or refugees, etc) prioritised in the negotiation process of inclusive growth provisions? If yes, how were these chosen?
14. Were there discussions on how to achieve synergies or complementarities between national and ESIF support for inclusive growth? If yes, what type of integrated approaches were agreed upon?
15. What were the main advantages of the new regulation in allowing you to streamline the negotiations on inclusive growth priorities between ESI Funds or other national programmes?
16. In your view, how important was the input of private and third party partners in developing the OP’s strategy for inclusive growth?
IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS
Analysis of ERDF support for inclusive growth in the 2014-2020 programming period
Questionnaire – EC country desk officers (ESF)
18. Was your ministry consulted in launching calls for proposals or guidance documents to final beneficiaries concerning inclusive growth actions? If yes, how did you contribute?
Questionnaires for Managing authorities
10.1.2.
INTERVIEW GUIDE - MANAGING AUTHORITIES
1. Name of respondent, organisation/department, position2. Role of respondent in programming, negotiations, implementation
PROGRAMMING
3. Which national authorities were in leading roles in relation to programming inclusive growth in your OP (inputs and coordination)? Were there any strong or weak points in their collaboration?
4. Which of the new regulatory provisions concerning inclusive growth made a difference – as improvement or limitation – in how inclusive growth is programmed into the OP and why?
5. Which of the new regulatory provisions concerning inclusive growth were difficult or burdensome to implement and why?
6. What are the effects of the current regulatory framework for mixing ESF and ERDF co-financing for inclusive growth measures on the programming process? What are its strengths and weaknesses?
7. What type of system does the OP have in place to safeguard horizontal principles?
GUIDANCE
8. What were the strong and weak points of DG REGIO’s guidance documents? 9. What were the strong and weak points of the help given by the Commission?
PARTNERSHIPS
10. To what extent did consultations with social partners influence how inclusive growth has been programmed into the OP? What were the strong and weak points of the partnership process in this regard?
11. Was there cooperation during programming with stakeholders (public or private) in neighbouring regions/countries facing the same problems related to inclusive growth? If yes, how was it conducted, and how useful was it?
NEGOTIATION PROCESS
12. What elements were difficult to agree on with regard to inclusive growth in the negotiations? How did the positions of national authorities and the Commission diverge and how were the disagreements resolved (if at all)?
IMPLEMENTATION
projects already been selected and launched?
15. Where have difficulties been experienced with applying the new elements in the calls and why? How did you discuss and resolve problems with national stakeholders and the Commission (if at all)?
16. Where did project promoters have problems with complying with the new elements and why? How could these problems be mitigated?
17. How are social partners involved in the implementation and monitoring activities for the measures concerning inclusive growth (the OP Monitoring Committee and other solutions)? How do they contribute?
18. Was there final beneficiary guidance created specifically for inclusive growth measures? If so, which and why?
19. Were there any first or second-level intermediate bodies appointed due to their knowledge of one/several inclusive growth measures?
20. What are the main challenges in monitoring and reporting multi-fund measures? Did the new regulatory framework have an effect on this?
CALLS FOR PROPOSALS
General progress21.Which calls have been published? Would be helpful to get a list, but I assume they are all on a website. If this website is not known yet, MA should identify it. 22.Is progress in publishing the calls good and as planned? Are there any delays? Content of calls
23.What external stakeholders (especially groups representing vulnerable groups and women) were involved in co-designing the calls? What was their role? 24.Were there any deviations from the original OP content, its approach or
emphases, when designing the calls? If yes, what were these and why? 25.Were there any discussions around the content of calls with the Commission
(policy content, concrete requirements etc.)? Or disagreements within the country or region?
Reception and views
26.How were the calls received by applicants? Did they have any problems with them?
27.How satisfied are you with the calls as they are? Do you plan to make amendments in the future?
Analysis of ERDF support for inclusive growth in the 2014-2020 programming period
Questionnaire – EC country desk officers (ESF)
Questionnaires for Third Sector Organisations
10.1.3.
INTERVIEW GUIDE – THIRD SECTOR ORGANISATIONS
1. Name of respondent, organisation/department, position 2. Organisation
1. To what extent were you involved in the programming of ERDF co-funded Operational Programmes and/or the Partnership Agreement in your country,
representing the needs of persons with
disabilities/Roma/Women/Migrants/Other?
2. Were you involved in designing specific actions under the Operational Programmes that target the needs of persons with disabilities/Roma/Women/Migrants/Other? Were you involved in designing more general issues such as preventing discrimination during implementation?
3. What type of ERDF co-financed measures target persons with disabilities/Roma/Women/Migrants/Other in your country? If they target certain sub-groups, please mention them.
4. Do you have any involvement in designing calls for proposals, and/or selecting individual projects to be financed?
5. To what extent are you involved in implementing, monitoring or evaluating specific targeted measures (if any) and what is your role in this process? 6. What is the current implementation status of these specific targeted
measures? How satisfied are you with progress?
7. Do the targeted beneficiaries consider the application process and implementation requirements (including administrative) feasible? Are they provided any assistance to fulfil them (e.g. free advice from national/regional authorities, workshops, easy-to-read forms, financial assistance, etc)?
8. Do you think the approach adopted in your country for using ERDF for
supporting the inclusion of persons with
disabilities/Roma/Women/Migrants/Other is adequate? Or do you think it should have been programmed differently? Should calls for proposals be designed differently?
9. Do you have any more comments on how ERDF could contribute more in the future to the objective of persons with
disabilities/Roma/Women/Migrants/Other inclusion in your country?
10.To what extent were you involved in the programming of ERDF co-funded Operational Programmes and/or the Partnership Agreement in your country,
representing the needs of persons with
disabilities/Roma/Women/Migrants/Other?
11.Were you involved in designing specific actions under the Operational Programmes that target the needs of persons with
disabilities/Roma/Women/Migrants/Other? Were you involved in designing more general issues such as preventing discrimination during implementation?
12.What type of ERDF co-financed measures target persons with disabilities/Roma/Women/Migrants/Other in your country? If they target certain sub-groups, please mention them.
13.Do you have any involvement in designing calls for proposals, and/or selecting individual projects to be financed?
14.To what extent are you involved in implementing, monitoring or evaluating specific targeted measures (if any) and what is your role in this process? 15.What is the current implementation status of these specific targeted
measures? How satisfied are you with progress?
16.Do the targeted beneficiaries consider the application process and implementation requirements (including administrative) feasible? Are they provided any assistance to fulfil them (e.g. free advice from national/regional authorities, workshops, easy-to-read forms, financial assistance, etc)?
17.Do you think the approach adopted in your country for using ERDF for
supporting the inclusion of persons with
disabilities/Roma/Women/Migrants/Other is adequate? Or do you think it should have been programmed differently? Should calls for proposals be designed differently?
18.Do you have any more comments on how ERDF could contribute more in the future to the objective of persons with