Mid-term evaluation of grant programmes always aim to assess the financial progress of the programme. Progress to date assessment is conducted via addressing three issues: by overviewing progress so far, by exploring the reasons behind the current level of progress, and by answering the specific evaluation questions formulated as a result of pr
...ogress overview. The Simple Progress Overview Tool is a method and a tool facilitating the overview of financial progress, supporting the exploration of reasons behind the current level of progress and enabling the identification of targeted further evaluation questions. The methodology applies the Du Pont approach of division to factors, in which the variable describing a phenomenon is divided into the multiplication of factors (milestone stages of the process) influencing the variable. Also, this division to factors facilitates the identification of reasons behind progress. The factors carry individually meaningful information to the evaluation of progress. This method was used by many EU member states including the Czech Republic, Romania, and Malta for the evaluation of progress in the course of the mid-term evaluation of their National Strategic Reference Frameworks.
The main purpose of the mid-term evaluation of grant programmes is to assess relevance, progress, effectiveness and efficiency. There are several methodologies, tools and techniques applied in various evaluations to assess these programme aspects. An important area of the evaluation of both the financial progress and the effectiveness of the pr
...ogramme is to evaluate the risk of absorption which is indicated by various factors, inter alia risk of supported project failure. If a project fails in any EU co-funded programme in the stage of preparation or implementation, then the fund already committed to that particular project (assumed to have already been absorbed or “spent”) is to be reused again or is to face decommitment (funds have to be paid back to the EU). There are strict EU regulations governing the time scale of this re-use (n+2, n+3 rules), therefore it is of major importance to assess the risk severity (measured as the resultant of the volume of grant at risk and the chance of project failure) and build up an early warning mechanism which indicates if the risk reaches a critical level that requires immediate intervention.