2.4. Indicators for monitoring individual TEI results
#borderbox { border: solid 1px #1196b4; padding: 2% }
The Methodological Note on TEI Design foresees that a few well-selected indicators, focusing on higher level results, will be agreed in the Joint Intervention Logic. Possible indicator sources are listed in Table 9. These indicators could be used in the intervention/component logframes that each TEI member is responsible for. Indicators in the Joint Intervention Logic may from the onset be drawn from existing intervention logframes and (joint) programming documents.
Indicators will be:
- Relevant, closely linked to the objectives;
- Accepted by the partners;
- Credible for non-experts, unambiguous;
- Easy to monitor;
- Robust against manipulation.
Table 9: Possible indicator sources for the Joint Intervention Logic.
The Joint Intervention Logic can include indicators from the following sources, among others:
1. SDG indicators, https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/dataportal
2. Indicators from national development strategies in partner countries
3. Indicators from the Global Europe Results Framework (Annex 2 of the Staff Working Document available at /resources/results-indicators/eu-rfi)
4. IPA Performance Framework indicators155
5. EU Gender Action Plan (GAP III) indicators
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52020SC0284&from=EN
6. Results Measurement Framework of the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD+)
7. Joint Programming Joint Results Framework
8. Guidance on Results and Indicators for Development
https://europa.eu/capacity4dev/results-and-indicators
9. Other indicators from individual interventions that are part of TEI.
The majority of indicators in the Joint Intervention Logic do not focus on results attributable to TEI but rather to outcomes and impact that the TEI aims to contribute to, together with other actors working in the same field.
| Tasks | Responsibilities |
|---|---|
| Collecting data on relevance, effectiveness and efficiency, as well as on the TEI value added | Each TEI will have regular coordination meetings and will conduct joint monitoring activities for periodically assessing the relevance, effectiveness and efficiency of the TEI implementation, as well as the TEI value added and the adequacy of its Joint Intervention Logic. This will include consultations with national partners, TE actors and implementing partners. TEI coordination meetings will be organised and supported by TEI support role156. |
| Collecting data on results |
The Methodological note on TEI design (p. 14) outlines two options:
TEI members will decide on the selection of an option and on the responsibilities for the compilation of results (in case of option 2). TEI members will use the results, objectives and indicators defined in the Joint Intervention Logic in a participatory process to guide the monitoring activities during implementation. As shown in Figure 1 below, managers of interventions that are part of a TEI will provide data on progress in the realisation of its planned results, through the regular reporting to their commissioning development partner(s). This information will be shared to the extent possible in coordination meetings with TEI members and discussed to ensure coherence with the TEI. The TEI support role will share the minutes with the Heads of MS missions/Heads of Delegation and Counsellors/Heads of Cooperation. TEI objectives, results and indicators - from the agreed Joint Intervention Logic - will be encoded in OPSYS by TEI members or by the Commission to facilitate progress reporting and results data recording. If TEI members would like to use OPSYS for additional reporting it is expected that OPSYS will offer more functionality in the future157. |
| Data quality control (QC) |
For indicators used for monitoring the individual TEI (as agreed in the Joint Intervention Logic), TEI members will be responsible for data quality control. This can be done, inter alia, by selecting a specific and reliable source of data for every indicator, regularly updating the progress data, as agreed by TEI members. If the TEI Joint Intervention Logic includes indicators focusing on monitoring direct beneficiaries/results and if several members will report against the same indicator – attention should be paid to avoid double counting. |
| Data analysis & publication | Every time data is collected and checked by the TEI members, it will be analysed in order to observe and discuss progress, as well as to draw any lessons learned. It can also be made available to the public, as deemed appropriate by TEI members. |
| Dissemination in partner countries | TEI members will disseminate information on results to national partners as deemed appropriate, including its presentation to the government, target communities, civil society and private sector entities, as well as discussion of lessons learned. |
155 A Commission Staff Working Document which will provide a results framework for the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA III RF) will be issued at the beginning of 2023. It will incorporate the key performance indicators of the IPA III Regulation (annex IV), indicators per each thematic window of the IPA III Programming Framework and IPA Performance Framework. Furthermore, corporate sources (such as Global Europe Results Framework, EFSD+) and statistical or third-party sources (such as the World Bank Governance Indicators and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) indicators) will be used.
156 Definition used for TEI coordinator from the agreed wording across the different TEI documents.
157 More specific information on the TEI results data flow and aggregation in OPSYS will be developed on the basis on lessons learned on EU funds results reporting in OPSYS for the first time carried out in 2023 by the Commission.