II.6 FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF ALIGNMENTPurposeThe objective of this sub-section is to provide an overview of how the costs of alignmentwith EU requirements are to be covered. There are also revenues that may arise as aconsequence of accession – e.g. as a result of the alignment of certain taxes, or directlythrough agricultural policy and regional policy (affecting mainly Chapters 11, 14, 21, 22 and27, as well as 33).Costs and revenues can be defined at two levels: For the government and the public sector; For other stakeholders, the economy and society.In certain cases, alignment may have specific consequences for individual economicoperators, or institutions, which have a national significance. (For example, for majorenterprises being significant employers, or contributors to GDP). These effects should alsobe quantified, and, if possible, remedial measures should be conceived.Again, the writers of the Task Plan will not be able to perform all the necessary analyses. Itis sector strategies, action plans and regulatory impact assessments that shoulddeliver the data required to assess all financial impacts of EU accession. Where these arenot yet available, they should be noted as tasks in the Action Plan section.Who will do it?Technical co-ordinator of the chapter in co-operation with the EU department in the lineministry.Proposed lengthCa. 1 page explanation, and table(s).How to do it?Minimum requirements regarding the calculation of costs of alignment are defined by theNPEI 2018 methodology, (Section 2.3.2 – Costing).The Task Plan itself should, as a minimum, identify the costs and revenues related tothe key items of policy / legislation identified in Section 3. Typically, the types of costs toreckon with could include: The cost of studies and analyses preparing legal alignment, including LGAs and RIAs; The cost of institutional alignment – functional analyses, drafting regulations, organisational strategies, training needs assessments, hiring additional staff, 49
training staff, office space and infrastructure. (This part should also consider the costs related to the operation and capacity building (training, etc.) of the (members of) the IIWG); Review and further development of tools and methods (processes, IT support, etc.). Large scale public infrastructure investments as a result of alignment (e.g. environmental infrastructure, transport corridors, etc.) Effects on the state budget – expected additional state revenues (e.g. due to alignment of taxation), expected reductions of state revenues (e.g. disappearance of customs duties, elimination of permitting procedures, etc.), additional expenditure by the state (e.g. new types of subsidies to protect vulnerable groups).With respect to large scale investments, it should be noted that these might well give rise torequests for transitional periods at the negotiating table. These requests should beidentified early, and examined in detail – so that they can be put on the table, and justified,already at the bilateral screening stage.On the other side of financial impacts of alignment, the Task Plan should strive to identifythe budget resources available to cover costs. These might be enshrined in The NSDI and sector strategies Specific public investment programmes (underpinned by a parliamentary or government decision); The Medium-Term Budget Plan (MTBP) or the annual budget under the Integrated Planning System (IPS); Donor programmes.With regard to the latter, establishing a list of past, on-going and future donorprogrammes for the sector will be of high importance. On the one hand, the knowledge ofthose programmes is a basis for asking any further assistance. On the other, alignmenttasks completed with the assistance of a donor project also enjoy and added degree ofcredibility before the EU (provided of course, the relevant projects are successful). Donoractivities should be listed in a table, see the proposed format in Part Three – Section III.1.4 50
II.7 ACTION PLANPurposeBased on the preceding chapters, this section of the Task Plan provides an overview ofthe key tasks to be performed as part of preparations for the Screening.Unavoidably, the Action Plan will have to encompass tasks, the significance and timescaleof which goes beyond screening.Also, Task Plans are being proposed specifically with the aim of supporting the review ofthe National Plan for European Integration (NPEI). As such, they may intentionally gobeyond the level of detail, and the timescale of the NPEI.The structure and presentation of this task plan should be the same as that of the NPEI. Itshould also be stored in the ICT application supporting the monitoring of the NPEI.The decision on what should and should not be part of the Action Plan will have to bemade by the IIWGs. Consultations with the Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs arestrongly recommended.Who will do it?Inter-institutional working group in co-operation with the EU department of the lineministry(ies) involved, as well as the MEFA.Proposed lengthNot applicable. The Action Plan should be registered and presented through the ICTapplication of the NPEI (database form, Annex 3 of NPEI)How to do it?The Action Plan should be presented in two ways: A structured and itemised text Tabular form (in the Annex to the Task Plan)The two should be correspond to each other: each item in the table of actions should havea clearly identifiable explanation in the text, as explained below.The identification of tasks should take into account the results of the analyses in allprevious sections. If those have been done in line with the proposed methodology, thiswill also ensure that the Action Plan section will be in line with applicable governmentstrategies, in particular the NPEI, as well as the corresponding, establishedmethodologies and included into its ICT system. 51
New methods and templates should only be used where there is a proper justification. Insuch cases, the IIWG should liaise with the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs, todiscuss the proposed new methodology or template and to decide about their application inother Chapters.What is, and what is not included into the Action Plan is a strategic decision to be madeby the Inter-ministerial Working Group. The Vade mecum does make suggestions asregards basic categories of tasks that should definitely be considered. But there may wellbe additional tasks included. The level of detail in the TP may well exceed that of the NPEI.it may also include tasks that go beyond the screening exercise – e.g. in case theclarification and assignment of these tasks is needed to make a convincing presentation ofAlbania’s plans and abilities to implement the Acquis at the screening table. (See Chapter2 of the Task Plan)Tasks can be identified in two ways: Top – down: on the basis of strategic considerations applying to the Chapter as a whole, based on the overall status of preparations, sector-level challenges and strategic documents. Bottom-up: based on an analysis of requirements at the level of individual EU policy documents, or legislative acts.Throughout the analysis, the Vade mecum has considered both types of approaches.Bringing them together in a single, coherent strategy is a matter of strategic planning.For this, there are standard methodologies. Task Plan writers may choose any appropriatetool. The Task Plan recommends, in particular: The SWOT analysis – as generally used in strategic planning; The Results Model – from GIZ’s Capacity Works handbook; The Logical Framework Method – as used by the European Union.A strategic approach to the Action Plan is required for at least two reasons. First,because an effective allocation of resources – which is in turn essential to produce actualresults – requires a clear understanding of what really matters during Screening and laterthe negotiating table. Second, because the range of tasks in any Chapter is likely to bevery extensive – and therefore, a simple enumeration of tasks will not provide a good basisfor results-based monitoring.In order to establish a good strategy, expressed in terms of a well-structured ActionPlan, planners should consider: The European Union’s priorities (specific expectations) for Albania, expressed, for example, in the latest EC Report, and the IPA Indicative Strategic Plan (Section II.4.1); Sector-level needs (SWOT) and priorities expressed in existing policy and strategy documents, identified in Section II.4.2) 52
Needs related to key EU policies and items of legislation, as reviewed in Section II.4.4)This information should then “be fed into” a results model, the logframe, or a comparableplanning tool, so that a strategically filtered and structured list of tasks for the ActionPlan can be found. (Naturally, tasks that were identified, but not included into the ActionPlan, should still be managed, ideally through delegating them to the responsibleinstitutions as an individual responsibility).Last but not least, the effective implementation of the Action Plan requires effectivemonitoring. Methodologies for the definition of measureable indicators are also well known.The Vade mecum recommends two of them: The Logical Framework Method (SMART indicators) The KIS method. (Key Implementation Steps)Considering the above, and recalling the aforementioned chapters, the typical range oftasks to be considered by the Action Plan is as follows:II.7.1 Sector Co-ordination FrameworkAs mentioned, the Target Group of the Vade mecum – and the main user of the Task Plansprepared on its basis – are the Inter-Institutional Working Groups. Therefore, each TaskPlan should start with the measures required to provide the IIWG itself with thenecessary mandate and resources. (See Section II.5): Securing a clear mandate for the IIWG Reviewing the IIWG’s membership Establishing / reviewing the IIWGs Rules of Procedures Establishing sub-groups (as required) Securing financial and technical resources for the IIWG Securing human resources for the IIWG Ensuring the flow of information, with special regard to monitoring.II.7.2 Sector-level analyses, policies and strategiesAs discussed in Section II.4.2, an effective management of pre-accession tasks requiresthe existence of appropriate national strategies, and well-founded analyses regardingneeds for reform and the impact of alignment in terms of Legislation Institution building Impact on the state budget Impact on the economy (including key sectors and operators) Impact on society (including vulnerable groups) 53
Territorial impacts.Existing strategic documents should be identified, placed into a library (knowledge-base)accessible to all IIWG members, and analysed / extracted for the Action Plan. See alsoPart One, Section I.5)II.7.3 Tasks related to specific elements of the AcquisAs discussed in Section II.4.4, the Action Plan should take into account specific needs andcommitments applicable to the most important elements of the Acquis. In particular asregards: Legal alignment (Gap analyses, regulatory impact assessments, translation, drafting, etc.) Institution building (Functional reviews, organisational development, etc.) Human capacity (Training needs assessments, training planning, use of other human capacity building tools, HR management and retention policy) Key investment projects (identification, preparation and selection of projects, implementation).II.7.4 Securing Funding – national budget and donor projectsAny action plan is only feasible and useful if there the required resources are ensured. InSection II.6, Task Plans are due to identify the sources that are needed to prepare for thescreening, and further on, to implement the key tasks of alignment with EU requirements.In the task plan section, the Action Plan should identify the tasks, deadlines andresponsibilities with regard to securing those resources. In particular, the AP shouldinclude: Key milestones of the budget planning process (in line with the Integrated Planning System); Milestones of on-going donor projects, which are to be met in order to ensure the effective utilisation of donor funds already allocated. Milestones related to the planning of future IPA and donor projects;II.7.5 Planning, Monitoring, Negotiations with the EULast but not least, the Action Plan should include measures regarding: Reporting by the owners of tasks in the Action Plan; Monitoring and reports to be sent to the Government, Key meetings with the European Union, especially in the framework of the SAA process (Association Council, Committee, Sub-committees)The format to be used for the compilation of the Action Plan is provided in Part Three,Section III.1.1 – in line with the NPEI’s corresponding Annex 3. 54
55
III. ANNEXES 56
III.1 TEMPLATESIII.1.1 Action Plan template(To be filled in according to the NPEI 2018 methodology (Annex 3), andClassification Measures Responsi Criterion Chapter Sub- Area Measure Type of Responsib Heading measure institutio 57
to be included in the NPEI’s ICT system.)ible institutions Deadlines Monitoringble Technical Unit Start date End Status % of Indicators Incurredon date realisation Expenditures7
III.1.2 Screening List(To be filled in according to the NPEI 2018 methodology, and to be incluChapter / CELEX no EU Measure Title Responsib Authority 58
uded in the NPEI’s ICT system.)ble Suggested Type of support needed Level ofy Collaborating. Resp. (Trainings/Workshops) transposition Authority8
III.1.3 List of sector strategies(To be filled in according to the NPEI 2018 methodology, and to be incluTitle Lead Institution 59
uded in the NPEI’s ICT system.) Reference/ link Reference period (start – end)9
III.1.4 List of donor programmes(To be filled in according to the NPEI 2018 methodology, and to be incluDonor Ref. No. Title 60
uded in the NPEI’s ICT system.) Start / end year Budget Programm document (link or insert)0
III.1.5 IIWG members’ list template (with status)No. Name Position Role in IIWG 61
Institution represented e-mail Telephone1
III.1.6 Stakeholders’ table Stakeholder’s role in EU access process Stakeholder 62
sion EU accession’s impact on Awareness of the EU stakeholder accession process2
III.1.7 Budget(To be filled in according to the NPEI 2018 methodology, and to be incluClassification Measures Responsible Dea institutions ineCrit Ch Sub A Me Ty Link Link to Resp Tec Invo Tec Sterio apt - re asu pe to nationa onsib hnic lved hnic arn er Hea a re of EU l le al insti al tdin me legis legislat instit Unit tutio Unit dag asu lativ ive ution n te re e measur mea e (for sure imple mentati on measur es) 63
uded in the NPEI’s ICT system – Table 3)adl Costing Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Followinges years Co mmE To Type of Nat Projec Nat Projec Nat Projec Nat Projec entn tal cost ion ts/oth ion ts/oth ion ts/oth ion ts/othd Co (Capital/ al er al er al er al erd st operativ fun foreig fun foreig fun foreig fun foreigat (E e) ds n ds n ds n ds neU funds funds funds funds R)3
III.1.8 Donor ProgrammesDonor Programme Governmental function the acquis assisted 64
n in Term (years) Assistance Budgetary co- financing amount (in M EUR)4
III.2 METHODOLOGY SHEETSIII.2.1 SWOT analysisTo assess the situation regarding the acquis chapter, and to define the integration strategy, it isrecommended to use a suitable strategic planning method like SWOT analysis. To prepare aSWOT table and define the suitable strategy, the planner has to follow a sequence of proceduralsteps as follows:i) Define the strategic objective (EU integration) and the significant (favourable or adverse) internal factors relevant for the objective (strengths and weaknesses);ii) Define trends (external factors) that have significant (favourable or adverse) impacts (opportunities or threats) relevant for the objective (a specific external factor may have favourable and adverse impacts at the same time);iii) Identify opportunities that may enhance strengths and related strategic actions (matching strategies);iv) Identify weaknesses that may worsen weaknesses and strategic actions that are needed to limit or offset deterioration (conversion strategies);v) Group matching and conversion strategies to strategic directions by topic;vi) Group strategic directions to strategies or programmes by implementing authorities (if more than one strategy is needed with different authorities implementing them).SWOT is a Strategic issues Strategymethodology withseveral different matchingimplementations; strategiesfor a specificmethodology and some generalremarks, see the Opportunities ThreatsEvalSED … …Sourcebook15 … … … … conversion strategies Strategic objective: EU integration (relevant for the Chapter) 15 European Commission, DG Regio. (2013, 9). EVALSED: The resource for the evaluation of Socio-EconomicDevelopment. Sourcebook: Method and techniques. pp. 161-164. Retrieved 9 24, 2014, from Inforegio:http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/guide/evaluation_sourcebook.pdf
III.2.2 General action planning method – Results ModelTo prepare an Action Plan, the planner has to identify objectives of the plan, actions that are needed and therelevant contextual factors that may influence both implementation and results of the plan. There are severalways to do it; an option is the results model16, characterised by the following features: The results model presents an intended change process in the whole area affected by the acquis chapter. It describes the changes (results) that are causally related. Positive changes can affect each other. This means that mutual feedback loops may arise that sustainably reinforce change processes. Activities to be implemented are identified for leveraging change. Activities help achieve different results. Through the agreed activities, actors influence changes, and thus the achievement of objectives. The changes that activities aim to influence are only a segment of the change process. This segment denotes the radius of action within which the project activities are steered and implemented. Other actors may be active in further segments of the area. (The full picture that emerges in the results model identifies alternative options for action that need to be discussed and decided on through dialogue.) Steps of change located outside the radius of action are less susceptible to influence, but are in the interests of the project. The actors have to keep this in view and monitor these changes, making the general conditions and risks more clearly visible.To prepare the results model, the planner has to implement the following sequence of procedural steps: i) Establish who or what needs to change so that goals can be achieved. Build and map out the (intended) change process in the area. ii) Any result can be turned into an objective within a results model, but the working group members have to agree on a realistic project objective that can be achieved within a specific time frame (possibly on the basis of the agreed strategy prepared by using SWOT analysis). iii) Define the internal and external key actors. There may be actors crucial to attaining the objective, and who should therefore be considered and possibly involved. iv) Identify the radius of action for which the working group assumes responsibility. v) Define and agree on the contributions to be made by the working group members in order to achieve the results and the objective.16 Tool 07. Results model (GIZ GmbH. (2015). Cooperation Management for Practitioners. Managing Social Change withCapacity WORKS. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler, pp. 116-121) 66
III.2.3 Logical Framework MethodTo define a task of the Action Plan, project cycle management tools17 are to be used. An option(called the Logical Framework Approach) is as follows: vii) Problem Analysis involves identifying what the main problems are and establishing the cause and effect relationships which result in, and flow from, these problems (see also problem and preference ranking, or problem tree analysis as methods for problem identification). viii) Stakeholder Analysis is then, having identified the main problems and the cause and effect relationship between them, performed to give further consideration to who these problems actually impact on most, and what the roles and interests of different stakeholders might be in addressing the problems and reaching solutions (see also stakeholder identification). ix) Analysis of Objectives. Objective trees should be prepared after the problem tree has been completed and an initial stakeholder analysis has been undertaken. This will give an image of an improved situation in the future. x) Analysis of Strategies involves comparison of different options to address a given situation and selection of the optimal alternative.The results of the stakeholder, problem, objectives and strategy analysis are used as the basis forpreparing the Logical Framework Matrix. The Logical Framework Matrix (or more briefly thelogframe) consists of a matrix with four columns and four major rows (broken down and outlinenumbered) which summarise the key elements of a project plan and should generally be one(double) page in length. Project Indicators Sources of Assumptions description verificationOverall objective 1 8 9Purpose 2 10 11 7Results 2 12 13 6Activities 4 Means 14 Costs 15 5(numbers denote the usual sequence of filling in the table).17 for further guidance, see: (European Commission, 2004) 67
III.2.4 Stakeholder Analysis (Capacity WORKS)To define the potential extension of the Working Group, originally composed of the authoritiesdirectly responsible for the topics defined in planning the Task Plan, actors are to be mapped.Private, civil society and state actors may be key actors (generally, state authorities involved in making decisions on legal harmonisation and other tasks of the Action Plan) are able to use their skills, knowledge or position of power to significantly influence European integration in these topics; primary actors are directly affected by accession because they stand to gain – or lose – power and privilege. This category includes those who are negatively affected. secondary actors are those actors whose involvement is instrumental just during the preparations for accession, for instance technical assistance providers. veto players are actors without whose support and participation the preparations for the screening cannot be completed, or the screening negotiations cannot be completed successfully are termed veto players. Veto players can be key, primary or secondary actors.To prepare a map of actors, the planner has to implement the following sequence of proceduralsteps:vi) Start with (draft) Task plan and the list of topics State Private identified there. sectorvii) Identify all the actors relevant to any of the topics, Topics then assign each of them to one of three groups, Key actors namely key actors, primary actors and secondary Primary actors actors, and identify veto players.viii) Put the actors on the “onion” using coherent symbols (like a round for primary actors and a rectangle for secondary ones).ix) Prepare the list of actors and the recommended involvement (regular or occasional invitees, or kept informed) of theirs.To create a map that will yield useful information remember to include all the main actors, withoutoverloading it with too many visualised elements. The map of actors can be completed withrepresenting the (closeness, eventual dominance and tensions of) relationships between actors andmap their interests (with a special emphasis on potential conflicts).1818 for further guidance, see: Tool 09: Map of Actors. (Capacity WORKS, pp. 129-133)
III.2.5 (Regulatory) Impact AssessmentsImpact assessment is about gathering and analysing evidence to support policymaking19. It verifiesthe existence of a problem, identifies its underlying causes, assesses whether a legislative action isneeded, and analyses the advantages and disadvantages of available solutions. Impact assessmentpromotes more informed decision-making and contributes to better regulation which delivers the fullbenefits of policies at minimum cost while respecting the principles of subsidiarity andproportionality. However, impact assessment is only an aid to decision-making and not a substitutefor it.Impact assessment is not a list of tasks to tick off, there is no recipe for the perfect impactassessment. However, any impact assessment should be comprehensive, proportionate, evidence-based, open to stakeholders' views, unbiased, prepared collectively with all relevant services,embedded in the policy cycle, transparent and be of a high quality. The following should guide theprocess: When making choices about the focus and depth of the analysis, the impact assessment should concentrate on what is relevant to inform decision-making, leaving out what is not. The results of any relevant evaluations of the existing framework should be used as the starting point. The most appropriate methods20 should be identified to collect data and analyse impacts. Where necessary, external studies may be contracted out to provide input on specific elements. Conclusions should be substantiated with evidence (e.g. data, estimations, scientific findings) together with appropriate citations and, if this is not possible, it should be explained why. A consultation strategy should be designed, keeping in mind the need to consult on all key issues. Stakeholder views should also be referred to.An impact assessment should answer at least the following questions: i) What is the problem and why is it a problem? Why to act? What should be achieved? ii) What are the various options to achieve the objectives? What are their economic, social and environmental impacts and who will be affected? iii) How do the different options compare (effectiveness, efficiency and coherence)? iv) How will monitoring and subsequent retrospective evaluation be organised?The process of finding answers to these questions is necessarily iterative. The process should startfrom broad definitions of the problem, the objectives and the possible solutions and then narrowthem down to what is most relevant. The questions are also interrelated.19 For further details, see https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process/planning-and-proposing-law/impact-assessments_en#need-for-impact-assessments20 For selected methods, see European Commission. (2009, 1 15). Part III. Annexes to Impact Assessment Guidelines.Retrieved 08 23, 2012, from Europa Smart Regulation: http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/impact/commission_guidelines/docs/ia_guidelines_annexes_en.pdf
III.2.6 Functional analyses and Training Needs AssessmentsTraining Needs Assessment (TNA)21 is the process of collecting information about the organizationalneed – in our case: to perform throughout the preparations for the screening, the negotiations andthe period right before and after accession, relevant for the chapter of the acquis – that can be metby conducting training. The TNA is not only important to structure and plan the audience, thecontents and the delivery of the trainings – it also protects available funds by filtering outdeficiencies that cannot be efficiently cured by training. TNA is to be compiled in a sequence ofspecific analyses: i) Functions forecast. The European integration process is a lengthy one with different skills and knowledge needed for the different governmental functions, and certain functions are to be performed only at a later stage of accession. It is just a waste of public money to train someone on a function that is not to be performed during the forthcoming five years. Thus, governmental functions identified in Section 3 shall be scheduled. ii) Functional analysis. TNA can be conducted on the level of the institution or department that has a governmental function to perform during the integration process or after accession, or on the level of the individuals that are foreseen to perform that function. Training should be offered only for governmental functions that will be performed in the immediately forthcoming period; others shall be addressed later on. iii) Job analysis. For the individual needs, the pieces of knowledge and skills required are to be identified. iv) Needs versus wants analysis. It is to be defined whether a specific individual who is (or will be) entitled to perform the governmental function in question possess the required knowledge and skills. Usually, this is defined by means of a questionnaire that involves the potential audience and others that are reasonably expected to have an opinion about them possessing the knowledge and skills required. The analysis results in a shortlist of topics with the list of people who need them. v) Feasibility analysis. The needs identified are tested whether it is feasible (possible, efficient and economical) to meet them by means of training.The Training Needs Assessment forms the normative basis for a Training Plan. The Training Plan isthe positive definition of training courses, learning goals and module descriptions.21 Several manuals are available that list and describe available methods, e.g. (Barbazette, 2006) 70
III.2.7 BudgetingThe Action Plan is to be budgeted using performance-based budgeting (also known as ‘programmebudgeting’) tools. Performance-based budgeting enable better decision-making on alternativespending options and offer line ministries and other budget beneficiaries more freedom and flexibilityto manage their own expenditure. This contrasts with input-based budgeting, where spending plansare prepared on an inputs basis (salaries, equipment, consumables, etc.) for each governmentalinstitution (budget beneficiary)22.To that end, the planner has to follow a sequence of proceduralsteps as follows: i) Programming. For each individual task, the output has to be identified. This output may be expert (already employed or additional) staff, a new piece of legislation, a technical document or a facility established. The list has to be completed with timing, i.e. the deadline for the output to be produced is to be added. ii) Costing. The cost for each output has to be estimated using (at least) one of the following options: market price: purchase price or contract value of a similar exercise (e.g. price of procuring a study, or the nominal value of a technical assistance project, on a similar subject); unit cost: costs for established on a legal or historical basis (hiring able and experienced staff plus costs of lay-off, or costs of a training of similar nature) per units of the output (number of staff, number of training days etc.) multiplied by the number of units programmed; shadow prices23: use either inputs-based (for tradable goods, border prices; for non-tradable goods, foreign prices with the Standard Conversion Factor, i.e. average difference between world and Albanian prices, 43.34 as of 2014; for manpower, the Shadow Wage) or possibly output-based (marginal Willingness-To- Pay) calculations; then the cost has to be adjusted for specific factors and, if more than one estimation is calculated, the most economical option is to be selected. iii) Provisioning. Implementation time has to be added to each output identified in the programme (see step i) above). For implementation times shorter than a year, the possibility commit in a given year and to disburse in the following year is to be offered. For implementation times spanning over more than a year (a training programme, an investment into a facility), a payment schedule is to be calculated. Specific attention is to be paid to meet public procurement deadlines. Using these implementation times or payment schedules, the costs for the outputs are to be converted into a budgetary programme. The budgetary programme also has to refer to tasks financed from donor sources.22 cited from: (Public Administration Toolbox, p. 178)23 for detailed guidance, refer to (CBA Guide)
III.2.8 Indicators (KIS)The main device for monitoring progress in the implementation of the Task Plan, also used inprogramming and evaluation, is the set of objectively verifiable indicators. Major role is with theoutput indicators (results indicators, i.e. progress in the European integration process and itsconsequences) are heavily influenced by European Union and Member State institutions’ decisionsand activities). The main applicable output indicators, i.e. opening and closing benchmarks) are notyet known, opinion of the Albanian and the Commission authorities on their attainment may divergeand any dispute will be solved during the negotiations themselves – and several actions in the TaskPlan are just implementation steps towards the benchmarks. Thus, immediate indicators thatmeasure progress and are objectively verifiable24 have to be defined: key implementation steps. A key implementation step25 is an important stage in the attainment of one or more milestones. Its completion is verifiable and may be expressed by a number or percentage. Depending on the nature of the intervention, it may refer to different stages of implementation, for example: hiring new officials (“number of officials”), the beginning of the adoption of a new piece of legislation (“government draft submitted to the Parliament”) or the progress in the implementation process (“number of kilometres of roads upgraded to conform the relevant EU legislation”).A key implementation step is to complement the information provided by the benchmarks(administrative capacity able to perform the authoritative function; full harmonization on the area; %of roads conforming the EU legislation), not to replace them. A key implementation step may beused – for example – where no outputs related to fully implemented operations are expected by theend of 2020. In such a situation, a milestone may be set for a key implementation step, referring tothe number of projects selected to deliver the outputs or to the outputs generated by operationswhich have not yet been fully implemented. This additional information would offer assurance as tothe existence of a project pipeline to deliver targets set for outputs by the end of the accession.24 eg. SMART (PCM Manual, pp. 80-82)25 for further guidance, see: Guidance Fiche Performance Framework Review and Reserve in 2014-2020. Final Version –14 May 2014.http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/pdf/guidance_performance_framework.pdf
III.3 OTHER REFERENCE DOCUMENTSIII.3.1 Order of the Prime Minister on IIWGsIII.3.2 Sample Task Plan (Chapter 1)Note: Chapter Task Plan 1’s structure slightly differs from the one presented in the VadeMecum (based on additional experience). However, it represents well the approach, andgives a sample of a “first edition” Task Plan.III.3.3 Stakeholders’ Map – Chapter 1
III.3.4 SMEI II – EU Officials’ HandbookIII.3.5 SMEI III Guidelines for Law ApproximationIII.3.6 NPEI 2018 methodology[to be annexed when approved] 74
Deutsche Gesellschaft fürInternationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbHHarmonisation of Albanian economic and tradelegislation with the EU acquisRruga Ismail Qemali, No. 3, 3rd floor.Tirana - AlbaniaT +355 (0) 42273424 / +355 (0) 42234365E [email protected] www.giz.de/albania
Search
