ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORT FOR THE REGIONAL OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME OF THE COHESION REGION OF MORAVIA-SILESIA FOR 2010

Transcription

1 The Regional Council of the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region The Office of the Regional Council ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORT FOR THE REGIONAL OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME OF THE COHESION REGION OF MORAVIASILESIA FOR 2 as of 3 December 2

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 IDENTIFICATION OF THE OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME IDENTIFICATION OF THE OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME CHARACTERISTICS OF THE REGION DESCRIPTION AND BRIEF CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME LINK OF ROP MS TO STRATEGIC DOCUMENTS DESCRIPTION OF THE ECONOMIC SITUATION AND IMPACT OF OP ON CR S (REGION S) ECONOMY OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT... 9 OVERVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME PROGRESS ACHIEVED AND ITS ANALYSIS Evaluation of the Material Progress of the Operational Programme Overview of Announced and Ongoing Calls Information on ROP MS Financial Data Information on the Breakdown of Fund Utilisation Information on ROP MoraviaSilesia Aid by Target Groups Repaid or Repeatedly Used Aid Qualitative Analysis INFORMATION ON COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY LEGISLATION MAJOR PROBLEMS OCCURRED AND CORRECTIVE MEASURES ADOPTED Excluded Projects Identified Irregularities and Their Solution Problems Identified by the Auditing Authority according to the OP Audit Strategy Physical Checks according to Article 3 of Commission Regulation (EC) No. 828/ Staffing Monitoring System Absorption Capacity Problems with Project Implementation POTENTIAL CHANGES RELATED TO THE OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION External Changes with Impact on the OP Implementation Changes in the OP Implementation POTENTIAL SUBSTANTIAL MODIFICATION COMPLEMENTARITY WITH OTHER INSTRUMENTS Use of EU Financial Engineering Instruments Integrated Urban Development Plans MONITORING MEASURES AND CONTINUOUS EVALUATIONS Description of the Monitoring System Measures Ensuring Quality and Efficiency of the Monitoring System Monitoring Committee Evaluations POTENTIAL NATIONAL EFFICIENCY RESERVE

3 3 IMPLEMENTATION BY PRIORITY AXES PRIORITY AXIS REGIONAL ACCESSIBILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE Progress Achieved and Its Analysis PRIORITY AXIS 2 SUPPORT FOR THE PROSPERITY OF THE REGION Progress Achieved and Its Analysis PRIORITY AXIS 3 URBAN DEVELOPMENT Progress Achieved and Its Analysis PRIORITY AXIS 4 RURAL DEVELOPMENT Progress Achieved and Its Analysis PRIORITY AXIS 5 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE... 8 Progress Achieved and Its Analysis ESF PROGRAMMES COHESION AND ORIENTATIONS MAJOR PROJECTS TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE DEFINITION OF THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE UTILISATION OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IN Situation in the Utilisation of the Technical Assistance Reinforcement of Absorption Capacity Operating Activities of the Regional Council Financed by Technical Assistance Publicrelated Activities Expert Studies, Analyses, Programme Assessment Provision of Administrative Capacity of the Managing Authority for ROP MoraviaSilesia... 9 COMMUNICATION AND PUBLICITY MEDIA COMMUNICATION ONLINE COMMUNICATION DIRECT COMMUNICATION PUBLISHING ACTIVITIES SPECIFIC INFORMATION TOOLS EVALUATION OF COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES PUBLICITY COSTS... 8 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS... 9 ANNEXES... 3 LIST OF TABLES... 6 LIST OF PICTURES

4 Identification of the Operational Programme. Identification of the Operational Programme Table Identification of the Operational Programme REGIONAL OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME OF THE MORAVIASILESIA COHESION REGION ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORT Respective Objective: Respective Qualified Region: Programming Period: Programme Number (CCI): Convergence CZ CZ6PO Programme Name: Regional Operational Programme of the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region Year for which the Report is submitted: Date of authorisation of the Annual Report by the Monitoring Committee 2 7th June, 2.2 Characteristics of the Region From the regional aspect, the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region is identical with the territory of the MoravianSilesian Region (MRS). The MoravianSilesian Region was established under Constitutional Act No. 347/997 Coll., in the territory of Northern Moravia and Silesia as of January 2. Under Resolution of the Government of the Czech Republic No. 77/998, it represents the statistical unit NUTS III and simultaneously the statistical unit NUTS II the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region. The statutory city of Ostrava is the regional city. The MoravianSilesian Region is defined by the following districts Bruntál, FrýdekMístek, Karviná, Nový Jičín, Opava and OstravaCity, and divided into 22 administrative districts of municipalities with extended competences (socalled municipalities of the third degree). The area of 5,427 km2 of MSR takes up 6.9% of the Czech Republic s territory and it is the sixth largest region in the Czech Republic. In 2, the trend in population decrease was confirmed (4,53 inhabitants, in 29 it was 2,882 inhabitants). In spite of that, MSR still holds the third place among the regions (,243,22 inhabitants) after Prague and the Central Bohemian Region. The unfavourable trend in population decrease is given by decrease in inhabitants due to migration (3,959 inhabitants; 7 in 28) and due to stagnation in natural increase (94 inhabitants; +428 in 28). The most substantial decrease due to migration was registered in the districts of Karviná (2,5) and Ostrava (,755); there was a decrease by 2 inhabitants due to migration in the districts of Nový Jičín and Bruntál, while FrýdekMístek and Opava registered an increase due to migration (52 and 237, respectively). The region is characterised by a dense population (23 inhabitants per km², the highest value among the regions, except for Prague), a small number of municipalities (299) and high urbanisation ratio two thirds of the region s inhabitants (65.8%, the highest number besides Prague) live in cities with a population above, inhabitants and three quarters of inhabitants (74.6%, the highest number besides Prague) live in towns with a population above 5, inhabitants. Under CSO s methodology, approximately 8% of inhabitants live in rural areas. In comparison with other regions, the MoravianSilesian Region takes the first place in the number of the unemployed (63. thousand, i.e. 6.3% within the Czech Republic) and in the number of the longterm unemployed (25.4 thousand. i.e. 23.4% within the Czech Republic). The unemployment rate in 29 following two years of economic growth and a decrease in unemployment (with a registered 4

5 unemployment rate of 9.62% in 27 and 8.49% in 28) almost reached the level of 26 by hitting 2.4% (second place after the Ústí nad Labem Region). The Bruntál District (5.4%, 4th place among the Czech districts) had the highest unemployment rate and the FrýdekMístek District had the lowest unemployment rate (9.8%, 4th place among the Czech districts). Table 2 Basic Information on the Region (29) MoraviaSilesia CR / proportion in CR Area (km2) 5, % Population,243,22.8% % 372,458.% Number of municipalities GDP (mil. CZK) General unemployment rate Proportion in CR 6.3%. 2.4% Average in CR 9.24% Source: CSO 27 Population in MSR Total population in CR Total proportion of MSR inhabitants / CR,249,897 28,25,255 29,247,373 2,243,22,38,3,467,542,56,83,532,77 2.4%.94%.87%.8% Picture Administrative Division of the MoravianSilesian Region Source: CSO 5

6 Some of the region s strengths are the following: The region s industrial tradition The region s favourable location at an international transport intersection (airport and highway) A developed network of public and private schools, including four universities, and dynamic growth in the number of university students in recent years The region s significant tourism and natural potential Successfully developing sectors of the automotive industry and information technology with a high potential in research, development and innovation The region s weakness are the following: A gap in economic performance in comparison with the CR s average Low entrepreneurship activity the lowest in CR A weak, underfunded innovation system A strong industrial specialisation in traditional sectors Incomplete transport infrastructure A high unemployment rate (including longterm unemployment) A high migration rate of workingage and education population outside the region Excessive pressure on the environment, in particular exceeding the limits for air quality.3 Description and Brief Characteristics of the Operational Programme The Regional Operational Programme for the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region (ROP MS) has been established for the period 2723, in which this region belongs to the Convergence Objective. It was processed in accordance with the General Strategic Principles of the Community and National Strategic Reference Framework (hereinafter NSRF). The final version of ROP MS was approved by the European Commission on 3 December 27. The global objective of the ROP for the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region is to accelerate the region s development and increase its competitiveness, using its potential efficiently. The objective shall be attained by increasing the quality of living and the region s attractiveness for investors and visitors, and improving conditions for work and leisure. The region s competitiveness shall be strengthened by creating optimal conditions for entrepreneurship and marketing the MSR in an active way. The strategy of ROP MS is implemented through five priority axes divided into 3 areas of intervention. ROP MS is entirely funded from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the overall allocation of ERDF s resources for ROP MS for the entire programme period is EUR 76,93,27. On 24 February 2, the Regional Council sent a request for ROP MS revision to the European Commission. The revision included changes in ROP MS approved during the 7th to 9th meeting of the ROP MS Monitoring Committee that took place in the period from June 28 to December 29. On 6 December 2, the European Commission issued a resolution by which the proposed change in ROP MS was approved. The change includes transfers of resources within Priority Axis and 2 and adjustment of indicators and indicative allocations for priority topics. Neither the ROP MS objectives, nor the strategy were changed by the publication of ROP MS Version 2. 6

7 Priority Axis Regional Infrastructure and Accessibility The Priority Axis is divided into 4 areas of intervention. The objective is to improve the quality of transport infrastructure, crisis management infrastructure and transport services in the region while respecting the environment. Priority Axis 2 Support for the Prosperity of the Region The Priority Axis is divided into 4 areas of intervention and it focuses on increase the prosperity of the economy and quality of living in the region and decrease the unemployment rate. Priority Axis 3 Urban Development The Priority Axis is divided into 2 areas of intervention. Its objective is to improve the environment in cities and the civic infrastructure in accordance with the need for a sustainable development. Priority Axis 4 Rural Development Priority Axis 4 includes area of intervention and its objective is to support a complex rural development. Priority Axis 5 Technical Assistance The Priority Axis is divided into 2 areas of intervention and its objective is to arrange institutional, technical and administrative conditions for the implementation of ROP MS and the region s absorption capacity. Table 3 Proportion of Priority Axes in the Total ROP MS Allocation in the Period of Priority Axis Community Contribution in EUR %. Regional Infrastructure and Accessibility 289,3, Advancement of Regional Prosperity 82,245, Urban Development 7,72, Rural Development 5,26, Technical Assistance 24,347, ,93,27 Total ROP MS allocation Source: Regional Operational Programme of the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region for Link of ROP MS to Strategic Documents ROP MS promotes the Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Employment objectives of increasing attractiveness of the MoravianSilesian Region for entrepreneurship by improving the regional transport infrastructure, accessibility to individual parts of the region and the urban environment and furthermore by improving the quality of conditions for education and health and social care. ROP MS is linked up with the CR s National Reform Programme, which implements the Lisbon Strategy. ROP MS contributes to fulfilling reforms in the area of modernisation and development of transport networks in Priority Axis, reflects interventions in the area of education by establishing the education infrastructure in Priority Axis 2 and Priority Axes 3 and 4 focus on the promotion of equal opportunities, elimination of unemployment among the youth and participation of senior citizens in the labour market with the assistance of infrastructural projects in the area of education, social and health care. 7

8 Out of the four Strategic Objectives of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSFR), ROP MS has the strongest link to the Strategic Objective IV. Balanced Regional Development in all its priority axes: Priority Axis by developing and upgrading the regional and local transport infrastructure, improving transport services, Priority Axis 2 by promoting tourism, Priority Axis 3 by supporting the development of large cities and urban groups and by a complex approach to regeneration of selected districts and by supporting regeneration in smaller towns, Priority Axis 4 by supporting the complex development of rural municipalities, including regeneration of the region, infrastructure for health and social services, leisure, cultural and sports activities. ROP MS also reflects the Strategic Objective II of NSRF An Open, Flexible and Cohesive Society in the area of education and social cohesion by establishing an infrastructure for the regional educational system and health and social services in Priority Axes 2, 3 and 4. ROP MS also has an indirect link to the Strategic Objective II of NSFR An Attractive Environment in the field of brownfields removal and preferences of projects taking power efficiency and renewable resources in the field of public infrastructure and tourism into consideration. The towns, which create poles in the regional development, are provided with aid through the Integrated Urban Development Plans (IUDP). The objective of IUDP is to coordinate activities and concentrate resources on solving the most difficult problems identified and to utilise the economic and further development potential of cities. IUDPs include activities cofinanced by ROP MS within Area of Intervention 3. Poles in Regional Development and it also supports activities contained in Priority Axes and 2. There are also other interconnected activities supported by other operational programmes that may also be a part of IUDPs. These activities receive beneficial scores for the fact that they fit in the Strategy of the given IUDP. It results in a required synergic effect of the SF interventions. Interventions within IUDP respect the legislations of CR and the European Community. The Managing Authority of ROP MS monitors the projects included in IUDPs in the same way as other projects supported within ROP MS. ROP MS also follows other strategic documents that include: Strategy for Sustainable Development of the Czech Republic, Regional Development Policy of the Czech Republic, Strategy for Economic Growth, Strategy for Regional Development of the Czech Republic and Development Programme for the MoravianSilesian Region. Particularly in connection with awarding public contracts, rules for public aid, economic competition etc. and they are implemented in a way ensuring the effective utilisation of the EU structural funds, protecting public interest and preventing indirect profits. 8

9 .5 Description of the Economic Situation and Impact of OP on CR s (Region s) Economy General Economic Situation The economic growth of the MoravianSilesian Region has accelerated since 23 when the annual growth rates reached up to %. In 28 the economic depression slowed down the annual growth of GDP to less than 6%. The crisis extended in 29 and it reflected in a decline of GDP. Compared to 28, there was a decline about 7,8% (mostly within the regions NUTS II CR) the oneside focus of the region s economy on sectors with high cyclical fluctuations and export orientation of the region s economy were revealed (the value of export in 29 fell down annually by almost 3% at the level of 26). Economic activity decline was accompanied by a rise in unemployment which increased from 8,5% at the end of 28 up to 2,4% or to 2,36% at the end of 29 and 2. In 2 there was an increase in registered unemployment rate in districts of Bruntál and Ostrava, in other districts there was a decrease of that rate (including Karviná district). The highest rate of unemployment was noted in Bruntál district (7,85% the second highest rate in CR), the lowest rate in FrýdekMístek district (9,5%, about 6% lower that the average of CR). However, the level of unemployment is still lower than 26 and by 2% lower than within years of The GDP development data in 2 are not available but a significant sales growth in industry shows (26,% compared to 29) that in the industrial production, which had a key share of GDP decline in 29, there was a recovery in 2. On the other hand, it is obvious that companies have continued their efforts to increase a productivity because this economic recovery has not reflected in the labor market by the end of 2. The effect of ROP MS on public budgets The investments of ROP MS are mostly focused on regional beneficiaries from public sector (consisting of municipalities and region and its established or founded organizations. The share of these regional public recipients on approved grants is 87%. In 29 the capital expenditures of the region, municipalities and its established or founded organizations made, bn. CZK. The payments by ROP MS executed to these public subjects for financing of investments in 29 made,8 bn. CZK, in 2,78 bn. CZK. Subsidies paid out by ROP MS in 29 participated by,6% in financing the capital expenditures (investment) of the region and municipalities of the MoraviaSilesia Region. In 2 this share was higher about halve (est.)..6 Operational Programme Management The comprehensive responsibility for the implementation and management of the Regional Operational Programme NUTS II MoraviaSilesia is borne in accordance with Article 59 of the General Regulation and in accordance with Section 6, Article 3 of the Act on the Support of Regional Development by the Managing Authority of the Regional Operational Programme NUTS II MoraviaSilesia, which is the Regional Council of the Cohesion Region MoraviaSilesia. The Regional Council of the Cohesion Region MoraviaSilesia is a legal entity, established with effect from July 26 in the regional district of the Statistical Unit NUTS II MoraviaSilesia, by the Amendment to the Act on the Support of Regional Development. In the implementation structure, the Managing Authority for ROP MS has no mediating subject. 9

10 2 Overview of the Implementation of the Operational Programme 2. Progress Achieved and Its Analysis 2.. Evaluation of the Material Progress of the Operational Programme Table 4 Programme Indicators NCI Code EU Code/ Lisbon Indicator Title Indicator Type Population net migration value Unit of Measure Source Value 27 CSO Attained Baseline Planned,7 Attained ,5 Baseline Planned 9 Attained Baseline Planned 6 Intraregional differentiation of the unemployment rate (coefficient of variation of unemployment rates in municipalities with extended competences) % Employment rate in the tertiary sector % CSO CSO Target 25 Total The values of indicators for the years in the table above were updated on the basis of documents provided by the National Authority for Coordination (i.e. on the basis of the National Codebook of Indicators fulfilled by CSO, version valid as of 3/3/2, The data for 29 and 2 were not available as of that date from the sources of the National Codebook of Indicators fulfilled by CSO and therefore the ROP MS MA supplemented them from other sources. The planned value of indicators is set as a target for 25. The baseline value of indicators describes the state in 25. Since 25, there has been an annual decline in the level of negative net migration almost to zero in 27 and 28. The situation in 29, certainly affected by the economic crisis reaching its peak, characterised by quite a significant decline in the number of immigrants and at the same time an increase in the number of emigrants, resulted in an unprecedented negative net migration (2,875 inhabitants, i.e. 2.3 ). This trend became even more obvious in 2 when the negative net migration increased to 3,959 inhabitants, i.e Moreover, the natural population growth decreased into negative values after three years. Thus the region, within one year, lost the inhabitants of one mediumsized municipality. The net migration data for 2 were not available as of the date of the preparation of the annual report.

11 As for the coefficient of variation of unemployment rates, there was a decrease to 9 % in 29 with regard to the fact that the unemployment rate in the region lined up towards higher values due to the increase in the unemployment rate. At the end of 2, the unemployment rate differentiation in municipalities with extended competences increased which resulted in the increase in the coefficient of variation to 25.5% (value provided by the statistics of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs). After the drop in the employment rate in the tertiary sector in 28, this indicator reports an increase by about 3% in 29 due to the decrease in employment in the manufacturing industry caused by the economic crisis. The employment rate in the tertiary sector for 2 was not available as of the date of the preparation of the annual report. Context Indicators The context indicators were established in addition to programme indicators. Their purpose is to provide information on the development of values of key indicators that characterise the environment in which ROP activities are carried out but that will only be affected by the implementation of the programme directly. Table 5 Context Indicators Unit of Measure Source Value 25 Value 26 Value 27 Value 28 Value 29 Value Regional GDP per capita in PPS (CR) CR = CSO Not available 5523 Regional GDP per capita in PPS (EU 27) EU 27 = CSO Not available 5522 Regional GDP per capita in PPS (EU 25) EU 25 = CSO Not available 34 Registered unemployment rate % CSO , Unemployment rate 5 64 % Eurostat Not available 5255 Rate of economic activity 5+ % CSO Not available 533 Percentage of urban population % CSO Not available 533 Percentage of people with higher education 5+ % CSO Not available Tonnes per year per 2 km CHMI Not available Not available Not available Not available Indicator Specific emissions from stationary sources a) solid particles b) SO2 c) NOx d) CO Specific emissions from mobile sources a) solid particles b) SO2 c) NOx Tonnes per year per km2 CHMI

12 Indicator d) CO Unit of Measure Source Value 25 Value 26 Value 27 Value Value 29 Value 2 2 Emission balance CR 25 ( and own calculation Emission balance CR 26 ( and own calculation Emission balance CR 27 (version c, 2/7/29, and own calculation 5 CSO Statistical Bulletin MoravianSilesian Region in 29, (w8329) 6 Emission balance CR 28 (version 2b, 6/9/2, The values of indicators for the years in the table above were updated on the basis of documents provided by the National Coordination Authority (i.e. on the basis of the National Codebook of Indicators fulfilled by CSO, version valid as of 3// 2, The data for 29 and 2 were not available as of that date from the sources of the National Codebook of Indicators fulfilled by CSO and therefore the ROP MS MA supplemented them from other sources. 3 For most context indicators available as of the date of the preparation of the report no significant fluctuations occurred between 27 and 28. The labour market indicators in particular showed a positive development (decrease in the registered unemployment rate, increase in the employment rate in the group of 5 64 as well as the rate of economic activity of people over 5 years of age). The development recorded until 27 for the indicators of specific emissions was not very positive (especially in the case of nitrogen oxides and particles produced by stationary sources, which rose by 24% and 9% between 26 and 27, respectively); there was a slight improvement in these indicators in 28. In 29 (mainly due to the crisis), the previously positive trend in the unemployment and employment rates was reversed (unemployment rose to 2%, i.e. almost to the level before 27). Also, the growing trend of the GDP per capita indicator stopped at both the national and European level. In 29, the trend characterised by the decrease in the proportion of urban population in the region continued, while the rate of economic activity and the growth in the share of people with university education above 5 years of age increased. Indicators of Priority Axes A description of the development of indicators at the level of individual priority axes is given in Chapter 3, in the relevant subchapters related to the individual priority axes. They are fulfilled both from statistical sources and directly from the project level. 2

13 2..2 Overview of Announced and Ongoing Calls Table 6 Overview of Calls Announced/Completed in 2 Submission of project applications Call opening date Submission of project applications Call closing date Type of call 46 8//29 5//2 round ,942, ,26, ,22, //29 5//2 round ,96, ,32, ,78, //29 5// ,847, ,736, ,3. 5 8/2/29 2/2/2 round.2.4,55,546.75,62, /2/29 22/2/2 round ,923, ,475, /2/29 2/2/2 round...2 4,754, ,937, /2/29 22/2/2 round.2..3,98, ,, ,, /29 22/2/2 round.2..3,98, ,95, //2 8/4/ ,48, ,54, //2 5/3/ ,942, ,287, //2 5/3/2... 2,678, ,222, //2 24/3/2 round , , , /3/2 9/8/2 cont , , , /4/2 25/5/2 round ,5, ,9, /4/2 25/5/2 round.2..2,584, ,228, /4/2 25/5/2 round ,942, ,353, /5/2 3/2/2 cont , , /5/2 3/2/ ,62,28.7 2,62,28.7 2,83, /8/2 8//2.4. 5,942, ,33, /8/2 25// ,865, ,7, /2 3// ,847, ,45, /9/2 25//2 round..3. 7,29, ,7, //2 9//2 round.5. 3,58, ,83, ,83, //2 23//2 round...2 4,358, ,223, //2 6/2/2 round.2.4,8,589.54,283, Call No. round round round round cont. round cont. round Priority axis / area of intervention/ subarea Allocation to the call in EUR Submitted applications for subsidy Qty in EUR Projects with issued decision / signed contract Qty in EUR 3

14 74 8//2 25//2 76 5//2 3/2/2 78 8//2 22/2/2 Tota l round ,74, ,62,44.37 cont ,393.3 round.2..2,9, , ,679, ,269, ,98, Source: IS MSC 27, report 246 Note: The calls were announced for summary public funds. The table was compiled using the exchange rate CZK/EUR. Table No. 6 shows an overview of all calls that were announced in 29 and completed in 2. It also shows calls announced and completed in 2 as well as calls announced in 2 with a completion date in 2. A total of 28 calls the same amount as in 29 with allocation of EUR mil. by a third lower than in 29 were announced. During 2, 337 project applications in the volume of EUR mil. were submitted (the highest annual volume of requirements as against 27 2). Most projects were submitted in the following areas of intervention: project applications in the volume of EUR 77.9 mil. and applications with the volume of EUR 39.3 mil. As of 3 December 2, the volume of calls announced in 2 was EUR 33.2 mil. EUR 2. million from the ROP MoraviaSilesia were transferred to the JESSICA Holding Fund within Area of Intervention 2.3 Support for the Use of Brownfields. ROP MS announced a longterm continuous call, No. 3. 4, which focuses on the submission of projects within the integrated urban development plans (IUDP) with a completion date on 3 December 2 and total allocation of EUR mil. (CZK.5 milliard). The call evaluation is described in detail in the comments to the individual priority axes Information on ROP MS Financial Data Table 7 ROP MS Financial Data for the Period of 27 2 (in EUR) Priority Axis Priority Axis Priority Axis 2 Priority Axis 3 Priority Axis 4 Priority Axis 5 Grand total Total financial resources from the operational programme (Union and domestic) Basis for the calculation of the Union s contribution (from public resources or total) Total certified eligible expenditure paid by beneficiaries Applicable contribution from public sources Share of certified eligible expenditure in the total programme financing in % 34,354,896. Public 53,84, ,84, ,46,733. Public 4,557, ,533, ,84,87. Public 25,86,53. 25,535, ,972,383. Public 2,824, ,798, ,643,728. Public 6,628, ,628, ,462,6. Public 48,658,5.3 44,338,

15 ESFtype expenditure in 2 grand total, if the 75,82, Public 6,64.69 programme is cofinanced by ERDF ERDFtype expenditure in grand total, if the programme is cofinanced by ESF Source: IS MSC 27, as of 3/2/2 The table contains cumulative data from the beginning of the programming period 6, Table 8 ROP MS Financial Plan for the Whole Programming Period of Priority Axis/Area of Intervention Fond.. Development of Regional Road Transport ERDF Infrastructure..2 Ostrava Airport Development and ERDF Accessibility..3 Service Transport Development ERDF..4 Infrastructure of the Integrated Rescue ERDF System and Crisis Management. Regional Infrastructure and Accessibility ERDF.2. Infrastructure of Public Services ERDF.2.2 Tourism Development ERDF.2.3 Support of the Use of Brownfields ERDF.2.4 Region Marketing ERDF.2 Advancement of Regional Prosperity ERDF.3. Development Poles of the Region ERDF.3.2 Subregional Centres ERDF.3 Urban Development ERDF.4. Rural Development ERDF.4 Rural Development ERDF.5. Implementation of the Operational ERDF Programme.5.2 Support for Absorption Capacity ERDF.5 Technical Assistance ERDF Total Source: IS MSC27 + ROP MS Programming Document The table includes cumulative data. Share of total OP allocation in % EU contribution Total public funds in EUR in EUR 28,2,775 5,79, ,22,457 75,32, ,639,828 87,8, ,536,6 26,53, ,3,66 86,439,46 6,76,724 28,284,537 6,76,37 82,245,724 7,45,448 62,926,69 7,72,39 5,26,525 5,26,525 34,354,896,693,3 7,483,24 33,275,925 7,954,49 24,46,733 26,53,468 74,3,43 2,84,87 58,972,383 58,972, ,29,8 27,2, ,27,358 24,347,69 76,93,27,432,85 28,643, ,462, Expenditures under the area of ESF intervention could be cofinanced in additional way to the amount of 9% of absolute amount for each priority axis of the operational programmes. 5

16 Picture 2 Share of Priority Axes in ROP MS Financing Pursuant to the Financial Plan Source: IS MSC27 + ROP MS Programming Document The amount of EUR 76,93,27 (Community Contribution) was allocated to ROP MoraviaSilesia for the whole programming period of The greatest share of the total allocation 4.4% belongs to Priority Axis, within which Area of Intervention. takes up the greatest part of the allocation to Priority Axis % of resources are determined for Priority Axis 2 and 23.75% for Priority Axis 3. 7% is determined for Priority Axis 4 and 3.4% for Priority Axis 5 of the total amount allocated to the whole operational programme. List of Advance and Intermediate payments Received for the Programme from EC Table 9 List of Advance Payments for Individual Years (in EUR) Status as of Amount of advance payment 27 4,32, ,482, ,643, Total 64,448, Source: IS VIOLA, report PP84 6

17 Table Observing the N+3/N+2 Rule Financial plan year Total allocation of EU funds annual N+3/N+2 limits cumulative Advances from EC annual Claims for regular / final payments submitted to EC annual Advances from EC + payment claims from CR annual Advances EK + payment claims cumulative Differences between limits and payments cumulative A B C D = B+C E F = EA 27 88,847,947 4,32, ,32, ,32, ,32, ,28,257 2,482, ,482, ,84, ,84, ,67,672 28,643, ,943, ,587, ,392, ,392, ,22,34 95,743, ,743, ,35, ,35, ,799,4 8,26,248 79,9, ,379,6 22,44,9 33,36, ,38, ,59,338 27,923, ,246,49 398,, ,93,27 528,957,342.5 Total 76,93,27 76,93,27 64,448, ,687, ,35, Source: IS MSC report as of 5//2, (exchange rate = CZK/EUR) As of the end of 2, the N+3 limit for 2 was fulfilled by intermediate payment claims sent to the European Commission. In 2, we expect that the volume of payment claims sent to the European Commission will be EUR million. This will almost fulfil the N+3 rule for 22. However, to meet the concurrence of N+3 and N+2 rules in 23, subsidies in the volume of EUR 245 million (excluding advance payments) will have to be paid to beneficiaries during 22 and by September 23, out of which almost 2/3 of payments (EUR 5 million) must be paid to projects that will be approved for implementation in 2 and 22. Out of which, about EUR million will be used for payments to projects that will be submitted for evaluation in 2 and 22. They mainly include projects of the MoravianSilesian Region (class 2 and 3 roads, healthcare, Leoš Janáček Airport), the city of Ostrava, the city of Karviná in a smaller extent (IUDP) and tourism projects in areas covered by IDPAs. 7

18 Cross Financing ROP MoraviaSilesia allows funding activities that otherwise fall within the European Social Fund (crossfinancing) under Article 34 of Regulation No. 83/26, laying down general provisions on SF, and under the Instructions for Cross Financing for the Programming Period of 2723 issued by the Ministry of Finance, up to 2% of the total eligible project expenses, in relation to projects submitted under the subareas of intervention: 2.. Development of Infrastructure for Education and 2..2 Development of Social Services Infrastructure, and furthermore within the areas of intervention: 2.4 Region Marketing, 3. Development Poles of the Region, 3.2 Subregional Centres and 4. Rural Development, provided these projects do not fall into the Regional Investment Aid Scheme. Cross financing may be applied for the following activities: Training of personnel association with changing the nature of services provided or with introducing new services Creation of educational programmes in connection with the infrastructure for education; Operating costs at the start of operation of social services, up to one year; Education of providers, users and other actors in the field of social inclusion; Support for social services and other tools benefiting the social inclusion of target groups; Integration of socially excluded groups in the labour market. As for 3 December 2, cross financing was used in 2 projects. All these projects belong to Area of Intervention 2. Infrastructure of Public Services. out of the total number of the projects focus on the development of infrastructure for education and 2 projects focus on the development of infrastructure of social services. The overall financial volume of the aid for cross financing of these 2 projects is CZK 3,35, The number of projects with cross financing as against the status at the end of 29 increased by 4 projects and by the amount of CZK 2,99,34.7. As of the end of 2, 2 projects that will use cross financing had the status recommended for financing. project was within Area of Intervention 2.2 Development of Tourism and project was within Area of Intervention 3.2 Subregional Centres. There has not been any project using cross financing in the areas of intervention 2.4 Region Marketing and 4. Rural Development Information on the Breakdown of Fund Utilisation Cumulative distribution of allocations from the Community contributions according to the categories of the Annual Performance Report EC reference number: 27CZ6PO OP name: ROP NUTS II MoraviaSilesia Date of final decision by the Commission concerning OP: 6/2/2. Assistance financed from the funds focuses on the priorities of the European Union which are defined in Regulation No. 828/26 and Member States are obliged to fulfil the mentioned priorities in accordance with this regulation. Within ROP MS, an indicative breakdown of the Community contribution according to the categorisation of assistance was set out. Table provides information on the cumulative allocation of these funds from the beginning of ROP MS for projects from the state Decision to Grant a Subsidy and above. Details are given for combinations of categories for the period from January 27 to 3 December 2. The following table lists the individual themes with the respective allocations in EUR. 8

19 Table Combination of Codes for Themes 5 Code Code Code Code Code Priority Theme Form of Financing Type of Territory Economic Activity Location Allocation to Theme according to OP Used 6 Railways Nonrepayable aid Not applicable Not applicable CZ8 28,774,694 8 Mobile Rail Assets Nonrepayable aid Not applicable Not applicable CZ8 26,36,6 23 Regional / Local Roads Nonrepayable aid Not applicable Not applicable CZ8 52,8, ,663,385 4 Other forms of financing 5 Rural areas 24 Cycling Paths Nonrepayable aid Not applicable Not applicable CZ8 3,682, ,58,84 25 Urban Transport Nonrepayable aid Not applicable Not applicable CZ8 2,76, ,379, Intelligent Transport Systems Nonrepayable aid Not applicable Not applicable CZ8 7,, 29 Airports Nonrepayable aid Not applicable Not applicable CZ8 5,93, ,247,763 5 Rehabilitation of Industrial Sites and Contaminated Land Nonrepayable aid Urban Not applicable CZ8 2,35, ,, 2 Aid 5 Rural areas 52 Promotion of Clean Urban Transport Nonrepayable aid Not applicable Not applicable CZ8 9,542, ,899,4 53 Risk Prevention (including the drafting and implementation of plans and measures to prevent and manage natural and technological risks) Nonrepayable aid Not applicable Not applicable CZ8 23,24, ,536,6 56 Protection and Development of Natural Heritage Nonrepayable aid Not applicable Not applicable CZ8 3,, 57 Other Assistance to Improve Tourist Services Nonrepayable aid Not applicable Not applicable CZ8 23,344, ,882,775 Urban 4 Hotels and restaurants CZ72 5 Rural areas 7 Public administration 9 Activities concerning 3 Amount in EUR Added to the table on 6/4/2 due to an administrative error in the MONIT7+ monitoring system. 9

20 Code Code Code Code Code Priority Theme Form of Financing Type of Territory Economic Activity Location Amount in EUR Allocation to Theme according to OP Used human health 22 Other unspecified services 58 Protection and Preservation of Cultural Heritage Nonrepayable aid Urban Not applicable CZ8 8,522, ,639,266 5 Rural areas 4 Hotels and restaurants 59 Development of Cultural Infrastructure Nonrepayable aid Urban Not applicable CZ8 9,654, ,, 2 Aid 5 Rural areas 22 Other unspecified services 6 Integrated Projects for Urban and Rural Regeneration Nonrepayable aid Urban Not applicable CZ8 28,78, ,45, Measures to Improve Access to Employment and Increase Sustainable Participation and Progress of Women Nonrepayable aid Urban Not applicable CZ8 2,97.8 3,, 7 Pathways to Integration and Reentry into Employment for Disadvantaged People... Nonrepayable aid Urban Not applicable CZ8,, 72 Design, Introduction and Implementation of Reforms in Education and Training Systems... Nonrepayable aid Urban Not applicable CZ8 22,94.75,, 73 Measures to Increase Lifelong Participation in Education and Training Nonrepayable aid Urban Not applicable CZ8 869,47.99,, 75 Educational Infrastructure Nonrepayable aid Urban Not applicable CZ8 33,86, ,767,97 5 Rural areas 2 Construction 8 Education 7 Public administration 8 Education 2

21 Code Code Code Code Code Priority Theme Form of Financing Type of Territory Economic Activity Location 76 Healthcare Infrastructure Nonrepayable aid,urban Amount in EUR Used Allocation to Theme according to OP,Not,applicable CZ8 2,69, ,74,863,Urban,Not,applicable CZ8 4,73,42. 8,, 5,Rural,areas 8,Education,Urban,Not,applicable CZ8 2,78, ,26,525 5,Rural,areas 7,Public,administration 5,Rural,areas 77 Childcare Infrastructure 79 Other Social Infrastructure Nonrepayable aid Nonrepayable aid 2 Aid 2,Social,work,,community,,s ocial,and,personal,services, 22,Other,unspecified,servi ces, 8 Mechanisms for Improving Good Policy and Programme Design, Monitoring and Evaluation 4 Other forms of financing,not,applicable,not,applicable CZ8 2,26.2 3,, 85 Preparation, Implementation, Monitoring and Inspection Nonrepayable aid,not,applicable,,not,applicable CZ8 3,992, ,347,69 86 Evaluation and Studies; Information and Communication Nonrepayable aid,not,applicable,not,applicable CZ8 5, ,, ,384 76,93,27 TOTAL Source: IS MSC27 valid as of 5//2 Exchange rate: CZK/EUR 4 The total value also includes the information for Priority Theme 52 Promotion of Clean Urban Transport (see previous footnote). 2

22 As of 3 December 2, 39.4% of the ROP MS funds were contracted. The largest allocations within the given priority themes went to the following priority themes: 85 Preparation, Implementation, Monitoring and Inspection (EUR 3.99 million 97.53% of the allocation to this priority theme), 73 Measures to Increase Lifelong Participation in Education and Training... (EUR.87 million 86.95% of the allocation to this priority theme) and 59 Development of Cultural Infrastructure (EUR 9.65 million i.e. 8.46% of the allocation to this priority theme). The reason for this fact was the great interest in the subsidy for this priority theme in Area of Intervention 3.2 Subregional Centres (municipalities with 5, to 5, inhabitants) and also 4. Rural Development (municipalities with 5 to 5, inhabitants). The priority themes 25 Urban Transport and 53 Risk Prevention have already been fulfilled. Priority themes which are not fully committed or where the commitment is below average: 6 Railways and 8 Mobile Rail Assets The allocation in Priority Theme 6 Railways is to be used for funding the railway connection to the airport. The submission of this project is delayed by about a year and it is expected at the end of 2. The projects for the acquisition of regional rail vehicles (Priority Theme 8 Mobile Rail Assets) were submitted in 2 and their implementation will be completed in 23. As of 3 December 2, 2 projects fulfilling 57% of the allocation were registered. It is assumed that the allocation to this priority theme will be utilised in about two thirds; the Czech Railways, as the only possible beneficiary of this subsidy, propose to use the remaining part of the allocation to the reconstruction of transfer terminals connecting to the railway transport. 28 Intelligent Transport Systems The call was announced in 2; the implementation of projects will start in Promotion of Clean Urban Transport two contracts covering 3% of the allocation have been concluded, other 9 contracts on projects with 37% of the allocation to this priority theme are in progress, the rest will be used for different activities within the urban and rural development. 56 Protection and Development of Natural Heritage ROP has no specific activities focused on this theme; nature conservation projects were expected within the promotion of tourism, however, no projects focusing on this theme were submitted. 7 Pathways to Integration and Reentry into Employment for Disadvantaged People; Combating Discrimination in Accessing and Progressing in the Labour Market and Promoting Acceptance of Diversity at the Workplace One project fulfilling about a half of the allocation to this priority theme is registered. It is almost completed. 76 Healthcare Infrastructure 4 projects were recommended for funding and 2 projects were under implementation at the end of 2. A continuous fulfilment of this priority theme is anticipated in 2 and

23 2..5 Information on ROP MoraviaSilesia Aid by Target Groups Target Groups and Beneficiaries From the general point of view, the target group of beneficiaries for ROP MoraviaSilesia includes all the inhabitants of the MoravianSilesian Region, companies, domestic and foreign tourists and indirectly also all the inhabitants of the Czech Republic and the European Union. Specific target groups vary depending on the nature of projects in each priority axis. In Priority Axis, target groups are users of class 2 and 3 roads, cyclists from/outside the region, users of the airport both from the civil and business communities, users of public transport; all inhabitants, visitors and businesses in the MoravianSilesian Region in the case of the integrated rescue system. In Priority Axis 2, target group includes the inhabitants of the MoravianSilesian Region users of public services, public developers, domestic and foreign tourists. In Priority Axes 3 and 4, target groups include residents of municipalities and towns in the MoravianSilesian Region and, indirectly, businesses. Disadvantaged Target Groups The principle of nondiscrimination and equal opportunities was one of the principles applied in the development of ROP MS. This principle is fulfilled by giving preferences for disadvantaged target groups. These groups are: Persons with reduced mobility and orientation; Parents with children; Youth. Support for these target groups is included in the following areas of intervention: Tourism development for the target group of parents with children (e.g. extra points for projects aimed at this target group); Accessibility of public transport (transfer terminals, lowfloor vehicles) in Area of Intervention.3 Service Transport Development for the following target groups: people with reduced mobility and orientation and parents with children (e.g. extra points for projects aimed at this target group); Accessibility of buildings of civic infrastructure in Area of Intervention 2. Infrastructure of Public Services and in Priority Axes 3 and 4 focused on the target groups of people with reduced mobility and orientation and parents with children. The following target groups are defined in the area of Development of Social Services Infrastructure (Area of Intervention 2. Infrastructure of Public Services and Priority Axes 3 and 4): Children, youth and young adults; Ethnic minorities and people from different sociocultural environments; Immigrants and refugees; Homeless people; People leaving the facility for institutional or protective care, people leaving prison or people performing the sentence of community service or another alternative sentence; Victims of crime, domestic violence, victims of trafficking, commercially exploited people; People from socially excluded localities; 23

24 People with health disabilities and mental illnesses; People in crisis; People with addiction to addictive substances and drug abusers; People caring for their relatives. The list of eligible beneficiaries in ROP MoraviaSilesia is included in the Regional Operational Programme MoraviaSilesia. Priority Axis the following are eligible beneficiaries: MoravianSilesian Region, organizations instituted and established by MSR, municipalities, voluntary associations of municipalities, organizations instituted and established by municipalities and voluntary associations of municipalities, NGOs, Railway Transport Administration, carriers providing public transport on the basis of a public service commitment, owners of public transport stops and the Fire Brigade of the MoravianSilesian Region. Priority Axis 2 the following are eligible beneficiaries: MoravianSilesian Region, organizations instituted and established by MSR, municipalities, voluntary associations of municipalities, organizations instituted and established by municipalities and voluntary associations of municipalities, state enterprises, NGOs, educational and consulting institutions, schools and school facilities pursuant to Act No. 56/24 Coll., universities, providers of social services registered pursuant to Act No. 8/26 Coll., professional, departmental and other associations, enterprises, medical facilities, organizational government units, state organizations, interest groups for legal entities established only to provide services in the field of regional development and business firms providing services within a public service commitment. Priority Axis 3 the following are eligible beneficiaries: municipalities, organizations instituted and established by municipalities, MoravianSilesian Region and organizations instituted and established by MSR, universities and nongovernmental nonprofit organizations. Priority Axis 4 the following are eligible beneficiaries: municipalities, voluntary associations of municipalities and organizations instituted and established by municipalities and voluntary associations of municipalities, NGOs and interest groups for legal entities. Priority Axis 5 the following are eligible beneficiaries: Regional Council of NUTS II MoraviaSilesia, MoravianSilesian Region, organizations instituted and established by MSR, municipalities and voluntary associations of municipalities. The ROP MS Managing Authority publishes a list of beneficiaries names with the project name, year of allocation (i.e. the year of the conclusion of the contract on the provision of subsidy), allocated amount, and for completed projects also the year of the final payment and the overall amount paid by the completion of the project. The list is available at The list is regularly updated (every three months). Focus of Support by Target Groups according to the Principle of Equal Opportunities In relation to equal opportunities, all ROP MS areas of intervention provide equal terms and conditions to all potential applicants for subsidy in accordance with Art. 6 of the General Directive. All the priority axes of ROP MS include activities linked to equal opportunities. None of the project applications submitted to ROP MS may have a negative impact on the policy of equal opportunities. The project assessment includes the solution of the issue of horizontal themes. Projects which include specific activities to support this policy are given preference. The main objective is to encourage applicants to consider in addition to the main objective of the project extending the project activities by those that have a positive impact on this horizontal theme. 24

25 Focus on Support by Territory Regional development strategies for the period of in accordance with Government Resolution No. 4 of 22 February 2 define regions with concentrated state aid for the period of 223. Karviná, OstravaCity, FrýdekMístek and Nový Jičín belong among structurally affected regions (districts) in the MoravianSilesian Region. The group of economically weak regions (district) in the MoravianSilesian Region includes Bruntál and Opava. Regions with unemployment rates highly above the average include the territory of the district of OstravaCity and Vítkov, a municipality with extended competences. The calls announced in 2 did not focus on a specific territory; except for the integrated development plans of areas that focus on the territories of municipalities with a higher potential for the development of tourism in the area of Beskydy and Jeseníky Repaid or Repeatedly Used Aid In 2 the amount in the total volume of 7,97.95 EUR were refunded and deducted from statement of expenditure. All financial amounts have been sent to the account of Paying and Certification Authority (PCA). These amounts have not been used for the operation or operations in which the corrections have been executed and the conditions stipulated in Art.98 Regulation N 83/26 were kept Qualitative Analysis Actual Progress of the Operational Programme Table 2 Financial Progress as of 3/2/2 (EU and national sources) cumulative Allocation Priority Axes mil. EUR Funds covered by Decision/Contract (addendum) mil. EUR % Funds disbursed to beneficiaries mil. EUR % Certified funds submitted to EC mil. EUR % TOTAL All values in the table are cumulative, i.e. from the beginning of the programming period until 3/2/2. Source: IS MSC27, reports 2A, 252B valid as of 5//2. The data in the table are reported as a total for public funds. Columns a, b and c were calculated with the use of the EUR/CZK exchange rate in the amount of CZK/EUR. For status Certified funds submitted to EC has been used the exchange rate as of charging date into IS VIOLA. Status Certified funds submitted to EC includes the financial amounts without refunds.,44 project applications with the total volume of EUR,79.7 million were submitted from the beginning of the programming period until 3/2/ project applications were submitted within the ongoing and completed calls during 2. A total of 39 contracts with the total value of EUR million, i.e % of the allocation to the whole sevenyear programming period, were signed with beneficiaries, out of which 8 contracts in the volume of EUR were signed in 25

26 2. In comparison with the status in 29, the greatest increase in the volume of concluded contracts was in Priority Axis and 2 (by more than %). As of the end of 2, EUR million were paid to beneficiaries, as against 29 when EUR 65.3 million were sent to their accounts. Thus we can state that there was a significant increase in the rate of disbursing payment claims. The increase in disbursed claims was even in all priority axes. In 2 four certification procedures were executed. In total there was certified EUR million (total eligible expenditure), i.e. 7.3% of funds intended for ROP MoraviaSilesia. Compliance with Horizontal EU Themes Horizontal themes are incorporated into all programming documents related to ROP MS (the Regional Operational Programme, Guide for Applicants, Handbook for Beneficiaries, methodological guideline for applicants and beneficiaries entitled Guide to Horizontal Themes etc.). Using the evaluation criteria, horizontal themes of equal opportunities and sustainable development are also taken into account in the selection of projects and they are monitored during the project implementation. Applicants are required to ensure at least a neutral impact on equal opportunities and the environment when implementing their projects. Projects with a negative impact on some of the horizontal themes are not supported within ROP MS. A. Contribution to Equal Opportunities (Article 6 of Regulation No. 83/26) ROP MS does not by its character focus on promoting equal opportunities of men and women and thus it does not include the indicator for the horizontal theme Equal Opportunities. In the process of project selection, however, it uses the evaluation criteria to give preference to those projects that will contribute to improving the area of equal opportunities by committing to the implementation of the socalled criteria of equal opportunities. As of 3 March 2, 82 projects with a positive impact on equal opportunities were supported within ROP MS (these are projects with completed implementation). B. Contribution to the Partnership Principle (Article of Regulation No. 83/26) ROP MS contributes to the partnership principle in particular through integrated urban development plans (IUDP) where the creation of an effective partnership is one of the prerequisites for a successful preparation and implementation of IUDP. In accordance with the partnership principle, the city (i.e. the bearer of IUDP) plans, prepares and implements its IUDP. In the course of the IUDP implementation, partners are engaged e.g. by participating in the steering committee and working groups of IUDP, by engaging in the selection of subprojects, in public consultations of proposed changes, by commenting on the proposals for activities and proposals for individual IUDP projects. The partnership principle is also applied within ROP MoraviaSilesia through Integrated Development Plans of Areas (IDPA), on the basis of which support for the development of tourism is provided in three priority locations defined by the valid Marketing Tourism Development Strategy in the MoravianSilesian Region for IDPAs were prepared in cooperation with the actors of tourism active in the territory of the specified priority location (e.g. representatives of municipalities, entrepreneurs in tourism, interest groups, tourist areas or the Regional Office of MSR). There were meetings of the interested actors in the specified locations during the preparation as well as elaboration of the individual IDPAs. The partnership principle is also taken into account in the managing structure of the IDPAs, i.e. IDPA Monitoring Committees. 26

27 The management of ROP MS represents another area significantly reflecting the principle of partnership. The composition of the ROP MS Monitoring Committee is based on the principle of partnership. There were three meetings in total in 2 ( x mail meeting and 2 x regular meetings). Its regular members include the representatives of the Managing Authority, state administration, local government, economic and social partners, universities operating in the region, nongovernmental nonprofit organizations representing civil society, environmental organizations and agencies promoting equality of opportunities. Thus the Monitoring Committee engages umbrella organizations of groups of individual partner groups (municipalities, businesses, nonprofit sector), providing twoway transfer of information and ideas between the programme management and implementation and the public at the regional level. Membership of representatives of other MAs provides for application of the partnership principle even within the framework of synergies between ROP and other operational programmes (collaboration with other programmes is described in Chapter 2.6 Complementarity with Other Instruments). C. Contribution to the Principle of Sustainable Development (Article 7 of Regulation No. 83/26) Table 3 Fulfilment of Indicators for the Horizontal Theme Sustainable Development as of 3 March 2 Indicator title Unit of measure Information source Situation in 29 Increase in 2 Status as of 3/32 Will the project be implemented with the use of brownfields? ha Monitoring system Source: IS MSC27, report 23 as of 3/3/2 In accordance with the currently valid Methodological Instruction System for Monitoring the Environmental Impact of Structural Intervention during the Programming Period of 27 23, Version.3 of November 29, ROP MS MA chose to follow the socalled environmental indicator criterion no. 4: Will the project be implemented with the use of brownfields?, which is also a programme indicator in ROP MS. 439 applicants selected this indicator in their projects; the attained value of the indicator fulfilment is 5.9 ha. For the assessment of projects and monitoring of their positive impact on the environment, ROP MS utilises other environmental criteria as well. As of 3 March 2, a total of 24 projects with a positive impact on the environment were supported within ROP MS, i.e. projects that have chosen one or more environmental criteria and committed to their fulfilment (these are projects will completed implementation). Contribution of OP Interventions to the Lisbon Strategy Objectives The MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region is eligible for funding under the Convergence Objective. The obligation to regulate in compliance with Article 9 of the General Regulation i.e. to ensure that 6% of expenses for the Convergence Objective is earmarked to the priorities of the European Union to support competitiveness and job creation, including performance of the objectives of the Integrated Policy Guidelines for Growth and Jobs is not binding for the Czech Republic because it acceded to 27

28 the European Union only after May 24. However, the Czech Republic undertook to earmark via an official letter of 4 July 27. Table 4 Priority Themes within Earmarking Priority Theme 6 Railways Allocation in EUR Promotion of Clean Public Transport Used in 2 in % with regard to the allocation ,774,694. 7,, 35,247,763. 5,93, ,899, Intelligent Transport Systems 29 Airports Used in 2 in EUR with regard to the allocation 9,542, Measures to improve access to employment and to increase sustainable participation and progress of women in employment to reduce genderbased segregation in the labour market, and to reconcile work and private life, such as facilitating access to childcare and care for dependants. 3,, 2, Pathways to integration and reentry into employment for disadvantaged people; combating discrimination in accessing and progressing in the labour market and promoting acceptance of diversity at the workplace.,, 72 Design, introduction and implementation of reforms in education and training systems in order to develop employability, improving the labour market relevance of initial and vocational education and training, updating skills of training personnel with a view to innovation and knowledge based economy.,, 22, Measures to increase lifelong participation in education and training, including through action to achieve a reduction in early school leaving, genderbased segregation of subjects and increased access and quality of initial, vocational and tertiary education and training,, 869, ,92,857. 6,468, Total Source: IS MSC27 status as of 5//2 Exchange rate: CZK/EUR ROP MS identified interventions in the total amount of EUR 7,92,857 within earmarking, which represents 5.7 % of the total ERDF allocation to ROP in the amount of EUR 76,93,27. The ROP MS Managing Authority gives a higher preference to projects that belong to the aforementioned priority themes within the implementation of ROP MS MoraviaSilesia. Some of the reasons for the low share of earmarking interventions in ROP MoraviaSilesia (5.7%) within the total ERDF allocation to this Objective are as follows: interventions in the field of science and research are beyond the scope of regional operational programmes; business and innovation in regions are supported mainly from OP Enterprise and Innovation; information and communication technology in regions is cofinanced mainly from the Integrated Operational Programme; the TENT network is cofinanced from OP Transport. 5 Added to the table on 6/4/2 due to an administrative error in the MONIT7+ monitoring system. 28

29 The implementation of 2 projects that relate to the fulfilment of the earmarking priority themes were completed in 2: one project with Priority Theme 29 Airports (where 6.83 % of the priority theme allocation has been used) and one project with Priority Theme 73 Measures to Increase Lifelong Participation in Education and Training, Including through Action to Achieve a Reduction in Early School Leaving, Genderbased Segregation of Subjects and Increased Access and Quality of Initial, Vocational and Tertiary Education and Training, within which % of the total allocation has been used. The allocation in Priority Theme 6 Railways is to be used for a project of railway connection to the airport, whose implementation should start at the end of 2. An increase in the used allocation to Priority Theme 29 Airports by other 4 percentage points is expected in 2. In 2, 2 projects focused on fulfilling Priority Theme 52 Promotion of Clean Public Transport were being implemented, fulfilling about 3% of the allocation to this priority theme. 9 other projects with 37% of the allocation are in the phase prior to the conclusion of the contract and their implementation is expected in 2. In 2, a call for submitting projects related to intelligent transport systems in public transport was announced, so we can expect implementation of projects in 2 and thus fulfilment of Priority Theme 28 Intelligent Transport Systems. Within the monitoring of the overall fulfilment of the selected priority themes, EUR 6.47 million, i.e. 5.26% of the total earmarking theme allocation, was used. 2.2 Information on Compliance with Community Legislation In 2, no cases of noncompliance with the European Community legislation were detected during the implementation of OP on the part of the Managing Authority or the beneficiaries obtaining aid from the operational programme. The Managing Authority issues a system of controlled documents including the whole system of the ROP implementation, which is in compliance with both the Czech and European legislation. The controlled document system, with regard to both its contents and form, places emphasis on the compliance with the rules of: Economic competition, Public procurement; Environmental protection; Support of equal opportunities. Rules of Economic Competition The funds for the implementation of OP are considered to be public funds, to the provisions of which relevant EU rules related to public support and national legislation apply. The basic rules defining public support are Articles 87 to 89 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with these Articles, a support provided in any form by the state or from the state funds, which violates or may violate economic competition by giving preference to certain businesses or certain manufacturing sectors, is incompatible with the common market if it affects trade among the Member States. Exceptions to this basic rule are further specified in the Treaty on European Union. The protection of economic competition in the Czech Republic is provided under Act No. 43/2 Coll., On the Protection of Economic Competition and on Amendments of Other Acts, as amended. 29

30 The Office for the Protection of Competition is the central state administration body ensuring supervision over the compliance with the rules of economic competition pursuant to Act No. 272/996 Coll. Due compliance with the rules of economic competition is incorporated in the individual operational programmes. The principle of a project review from the point of view of the correct application of public support rules is taken into account within the process of assessment of applications for subsidy. Public Procurement In the case of public procurement, the OP Programming Documentation stipulates for all beneficiaries the obligation to proceed in accordance with Act No. 37/26 Coll., On Public Procurement, as amended, which reflects European Directive 24/7/ES and 24/8/ES and at the same time in accordance with the additional rules of OP. The public procurement is subject to review by the Managing Authority. On the basis of executed audits and experience from the period of 24 26, the Ministry for Regional Development (NCA) in cooperation with the Ministry of Finance (PCA) acceded to establishing a basic minimum in the area of awarding contracts that are not regulated by law. The objective of the document Binding Rules for Awarding Contracts Cofinanced from EU Sources Not Regulated by the Provisions of Act No. 37/26 Coll., On Public Procurement, in the Programming Period of is therefore to determine a unified procedure in the area of awarding contracts not regulated by the law for all entities involved in the process of the implementation of the Cohesion Policy. This document was approved by Czech Government Resolution No. 48 of 2 January 29. Transparent public procurement is one of the main principles of the implementation of operational programmes cofinanced from the EU budget, which must be strictly complied with, reviewed and adequately sanctioned in case of its breach in the form of repayment of the corresponding part of funds provided in the form of a subsidy in accordance with the EC legislation. Therefore it was necessary to unify the matter in question and to approach public procurement and sanctions in case of nonobservance of the stipulated principles in a unified and transparent manner regardless of whether or not contracts are subject to statutory regulations. Environmental Protection Directive 42/2 of the European Parliament and the Council of 27 June 2 on the assessment of the effects of some plans and programmes on the environment is projected in the legal order of the Czech Republic by Act No. /2 Coll., On the Assessment of Effects on the Environment and on Changes of Some Related Acts (the Act on the Assessment of Effects on the Environment), as amended. Promotion of Equal Opportunities The principle of promotion of equal opportunities is applied in compliance with Council Regulation (EC) No. 83/26, Article 6 Equality of Women and Men and Ban on Discrimination. This chapter of the Annual Report informs about the conformity of the Czech legislation with the EU legislation. The incorporation of these key areas into the setting of OP is described in the quantitative analysis of the Annual Report, i.e. in Chapter

31 2.3 Major Problems Occurred and Corrective Measures Adopted 2.3. Excluded Projects Table 5 Statistics of Excluded Projects for ROP MoraviaSilesia as of 3/2/2 Number of projects Projects registered in completed calls in 2 Financial volume in mil. CZK,44 27, , Project returned to be completed (N) Failure to meet formal requisites (N2) Failure to meet the acceptability criterion (N) , Project failed to meet the terms for the conclusion of the contract (N4) Project withdrawn by the applicant (N5),46. Project suspended (N6) Incomplete/withdrawn project (N7) Contract terminated by MA (N8) Out of which excluded projects in total Excluded due to material assessment (N3) Project not recommended/approved (N2) Source: MSC29 as of 5//2 Exchange rate: CZK/EUR Out of,44 projects received for assessment as of 3/2/2, 482 projects (42.3%) with the total public funds in the amount of CZK 8,728 million (32%) were excluded; out of which 39 projects were excluded in Priority Axis 2 and 4, where the proportion of excluded projects due to quantity or financial volume is slightly more than 5% of projects submitted for these priority axes, while the proportion of excluded projects in Priority Axis and 3 is less than ¼, both with respect to quantity and financial volume. Most projects (8%) were excluded due to low scoring. The high number of projects withdrawn by applicants after their approval was caused by the withdrawal of the largescale project of the MoravianSilesian Scientific Library, for which CZK,57 million was allocated from the total public funds. The rest of the projects withdrawn by applicants include projects withdrawn by entrepreneurs in the field of tourism due to the economic crisis and 3 projects of nonprofit organizations that were withdrawn this year due to the failure to arrange cofinancing. 3

32 Table 6 Statistics of Excluded Projects according to Priority Axes for 2 Priority Axis Qty Financial volume in mil. CZK Projects registered in completed calls in ,58.86 Out of which excluded projects in total 4 Project returned to be completed (N) Failure to meet formal requisites (N2) Failure to meet the acceptability criterion (N) Excluded due to material assessment(n3) Project not recommended/approved (N2) Project failed to meet the terms for the conclusion of the contract (N4) Project withdrawn by the applicant (N5) Project suspended (N6) Priority Axis 2 Priority Axis 4 Financial volume in mil. CZK Qty Financial volume in mil. CZK Qty Financial volume in mil. CZK 9 2, , Incomplete/withdrawn project (N7) Contract terminated by MA (N8) Source: IS Monit 7+ status as of 5//2 Exchange rate: CZK/EUR Qty Priority Axis 3 The table above shows the status of projects submitted in the calls completed in 2 as of 3/2/2. Only 4 projects with a minimum volume of funds were excluded in Priority Axis. 43 projects submitted in 2 for Priority Axis 2 were excluded, i.e. less than a half (47.25% ), out of which most of them (74%) were excluded due to the failure to meet the minimum scoring in material assessment in two calls: 2.4 Infrastructure of Residential Services (6 out of 2 submitted projects) and 2.26 Support of Accommodation Services in Tourism, where only a third of projects out of 36 submitted ones passed the scoring; the economic assessment was mostly low. 33 projects, i.e. 25.2% of submitted projects, were excluded in one completed call in Priority Axis 3 for the educational infrastructure for towns with 5 to 5 thousand inhabitants; 4% of the projects were excluded due to the failure to meet the minimum scoring in material assessment. Only one call in Priority Axis 4 was terminated in October 2 as it had not been assessed by 3/2/2. The statistics of the excluded projects shows that only 3 projects were excluded due to the failure to meet formal criteria Identified Irregularities and Their Solution The Managing Authority of ROP MoraviaSilesia registered a total of 69 cases suspected of irregularities as of 3/2/2, out of which 58 cases were discussed and closed by the Irregularities Work Group. In 2, 42 cases were reported and 32 cases were discussed and closed. The reported 32

33 cases suspected of irregularities, except for those that were rejected due to insufficient justification, were registered in MSC27. Table 7 Number of Reported Irregularity Cases by Individual Conditions (as of 3/2/2) Number of discrepancies reported at an internal level (MSC27) Resolving justification Unfounded discrepancy Legitimate discrepancy Unconfirmed discrepancy Confirmed discrepancy Total number of cases The total amount affected by the confirmed irregularities (42 cases) was CZK 4.97 million, while the amount affected by the confirmed irregularities is the amount of expenses related to the irregularities. The financial volume of the given corrections from this amount is CZK 2.74 million. The correction amount is significantly lower as it includes illegitimately disbursed funds that the beneficiaries had to return and proportional financial corrections that are applied in case of detecting deficiencies in the implementation of public contracts. Historically, the total amount affected by irregularities also includes cases from the beginning of the programming period that are not considered to be irregularities according to present rules (about CZK 28.4 million), i.e. they did not have any financial impact. Most cases were reported due to the payment of an ineligible or illegitimate expense (a total of 24 cases, out of which 23 in 2) and cases suspected of a breach of Act No. 37/26 Coll., On Public Procurement, as amended, or a breach of the Methodological Guideline for Public Procurement (29 reported cases, out of which 5 cases in 2; 7 irregularities of this type have been confirmed so far, out of which 4 in 2 ). RCO MS provides consulting services to beneficiaries in order to prevent the occurrence of irregularities and offers seminars concerning public procurement and financial issues. The documentation to public procurement is inspected prior to the conclusion of the contract on the provision of subsidy (if the order was implemented prior to the conclusion of the contract) and the inspection of supplements to contracts of beneficiaries with suppliers has been intensified. Furthermore, RCO MS informs of the issue of irregularities in a printed newsletter distributed to beneficiaries and on the RCO s website Problems Identified by the Auditing Authority according to the OP Audit Strategy In 2, the auditing body, or the authorised auditing subject (AAS), executed 2 system audits (audited entity: the Regional Council of the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region) and 9 audits of a sample of operations in accordance with the audit strategy. In operation audits, AAS reviewed that operations met the terms of selection for the operational programme, that they were executed in accordance with the Contract on the Provision of Subsidy, that the reported expenses agreed with the ledgers and the documents managed by the beneficiary, that they were in compliance with the Community directives and Czech regulations and that the beneficiary obtained the public contribution in full amount, without fees and delays. Three discrepancies were found in the operation audits, out of which one was in the area of public procurement and two concerned the compliance of the documentation with the actual status of the project (unimplemented individual construction parts CZK.259 million of the subsidy were ordered to be returned to the national budget). 33

34 In 2, AAS executed to system audits focusing on the verification of the reliability of the managing and controlling system of MA in the area of public support and ROP implementation. The following deficiencies were identified in the area of public support that have a slight impact on the functions of the managing and controlling system: Failure to specify competences for the area of the public support paperwork administration Failure to arrange an audit trail on the verification of statutory declarations of the eligibility of companies in the category of microenterprise, small or medium enterprise Failure to ensure conformity of the Operational Manual with procedures executed in IS Monit 7+ A total of 7 findings with a low level of significance were determined in the audited area. These include operating issues that do not have a direct impact on the functions of the internal managing and controlling system. AAS identified 6 findings with a high level of significance, findings with a medium level of significance, 6 findings with a low significance and 3 minor errors in the audit of the ROP implementation focusing on the verification of the reliability of the managing and controlling system. In particular: Call No..2 and 4. : the currently valid evaluation charts were not published on the MA s website; The revised MI criteria were valid at the time of project assessment in the continuous call. Approved criteria were used for assessment, but revised criteria should have been used at the time of assessment; Unconformity of requirements for acceptability assessment and scoring procedures stipulated by the Operational Manual; Methodological Note No. 23 adjusted the approved call in the following sections: the latest possible date of project completion and determination of the minimum or maximum level of total eligible expenses/subsidy without the approval of the RC manager and chairman; MA did not determine actual criteria of economy, suitability and efficiency of additional expenses; AAS found out from the sample of 35 projects based on the IS Monit 7+ data that the deadlines for the disbursement of payment claims were significantly exceeded as against the requirements of the methodology of financial flows and control (MFFC); The analysis of risks for the selection of projects for the exante checks had not been recorded for more than one year; The Operational Manual (OM) did not include a mechanism for determining expost audit deadlines on the spot; The period from the project selection for financing to the conclusion of the Contract on the Provision of Subsidy is about 37 calendar days according to the sum of the periods determined by OM (63+6+4), which is contradictory to MFFC that determines 3 months (i.e. no more than 92 calendar days); AAS checked the deadlines for the conclusion of the contracts for the provision of subsidy for 6 projects according to IS Monit 7+. The deadline for the conclusion of the contract in conformity with MFFC was observed only in one case; Deficiencies in methodological note documentation management; MA did not determine a procedure for handling AAS audit report conclusions and their distribution to audited divisions; 34

35 The status recorded in IS Monit 7+ did not correspond with the current project status; terms for entering information into IS Monit 7+ were not observed; The procedure for reviewing the Report on the Provision of Project Sustainability described in OM was not prepared; Incompatibility between the published methodological instructions for projects generating incomes. AAS verified that the risks related to the audited key requirements were sufficiently managed; handling the risks of fraud was reviewed. AAS found out that the level of the risk of failure to detect risks and factual problems in project sustainability had been increasing with regard to the ROP implementation procedure. Furthermore, AAS found out that the analysis of risks for project selection for exante checks on the spot was not reviewed which represents an increase in the risk of failure to detect risks and factual problems in prior to the conclusion of contracts with beneficiaries. In comparison with Audit No. 3/29/P, AAS identified a permanent trend in the risk of violation of the prescribed methodology for ROP implementation in relation to the failure to meet the deadlines determined by MFFC and in the risk of complexity and lack of coherence in all processes defined by the Operational Manual in the field of methodological note documentation management. During the audit, the impact of the risk of political influences that could lead to changes in the EU and CR legislation was registered due to the decision of the Czech government to cofinance ROP, but MA managed and minimized the impact. On the other hand, the risk of inappropriate monitoring system decreased as against Audit No. 3/29/P. However, the problems with entering the current project status in IS Monit 7+ continue. The risk of unethical conduct was decreased by the acceptance of the Strategy against Fraudulent and Corrupt Conduct and by updating the Code of Ethics and the prevention from potential corruption or fraud was increased Physical Checks according to Article 3 of Commission Regulation (EC) No. 828/26 In 2, the Committee of the Regional Council approved the total of 249 projects for financing. A total of 45 exante checks were performed in 2. With regard to the number of approved projects, the sample size represented 8. %. Conducting onsite physical checks at the beneficiary s premises fulfils its objective, which is the verification of the factual accuracy of the information contained in the project application as well as the verification of the actual project status. In addition to the monitoring function, these checks fulfil another objective as well, which lies in the field of consultation. Immediately upon the approval of the subsidy, beneficiaries and project guarantors from the Managing Authority have the opportunity to ask questions about issues that are not clear in the administration of the project or that are considered as problematic. Thus the consulting function of these checks has a preventive effect on the following phases of the project implementation. The size of samples for interim onsite physical checks amounted to 44.3% in 2 (with regard to 23 completed administrative interim checks). Although the sample size is practically uncontrollable during the year (it depends on the number of payment claims submitted during the respective year and the proportion of intermediate and final payment claims), the average sample size reached the upper limit of the estimated range (2535%). In this sense, the reached sample percentage of 44.3% 35

36 can be considered as confirming the correct operation of the control system configuration, presenting also a warning about the risk in the area of ensuring capacity in the event of further temporary or longterm growth. Interim onsite physical checks were completed in 39 payment claims. The eligible expenses checked within the interim physical checks amounted to CZK,947,25,272.46, out of which ineligible expenses discovered by the checks were CZK 32,29,5.95. With regard to the paid financial volume, the error rate of the beneficiaries reached.66% of the total volume stated above (for more information see the annexe) with the following conclusions: 47 checks without any deficiencies found; 9 checks with different violations of the binding terms and conditions of the contract on the provision of subsidy (exceeded budget, undocumented or unexecuted construction works and supplies, failure to observe the environmental criteria in one case, minor errors in the area of wages etc.), with a consequent reduction in the final payment claims without imposing corrective measures; Corrective measures were imposed and executed by the beneficiary by the deadline in the case of 2 checks. The measures included repayments of financial funds for unexecuted but paid expenses. The aforementioned results show that the control system configuration is able to identify the number of both minor and major errors made by beneficiaries. The most common errors include the inclusion of ineligible expenses among eligible, failure to observe binding procedures or contractual terms and conditions (most often in the area of changes in projects and public procurement), inconclusiveness of submitted documents, incorporation of an undelivered product or service in the payment claim (inconsistent checks of supplier invoices by beneficiaries) and overdrawing the approved budget items. We believe that the operability of the MA s control system provides a strong degree of confidence that expenses declared by beneficiaries and approved by the Managing Authority for disbursement are real, that products or services were provided in accordance with the approving decision, that payment claims by beneficiaries are correct and that operations and expenses are in conformity with the Czech legislation and the Community rules Staffing There were no significant issues in the field of human resources in 2. In 2, the number of employees at the Department of Internal Affairs, Department of Payments, Department of Programming and Methodology increased by 8 job positions in total. 3 employees were hired, 5 employees went on a maternity leave, 2 employees came back from a maternity leave. 5 employees terminated the employment and employee was on leave pursuant to Section 99, Article 3 of Act No. 262/26 Coll., the Labour Code, as amended. The number of employees of the Regional Council of the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region was 3 at the end of 2 (after the conversion to fulltime jobs, the number of employees is.88; out of which of employees are paid from MA TA). The fluctuation was 4.8% and the sickness rate was.6% in 2. More information is available in Chapter Provision of Administrative Capacity of the ROP MoraviaSilesia Managing Authority. 36

37 2.3.6 Monitoring System There were no serious issues in the area of the monitoring system. Comments on the modifications of the Benefit 7+, Monit 7+ and MSC27 systems are usually discussed at the meetings of the relevant working groups (Monitoring WG, Unified Monitoring System WG) Absorption Capacity In 2, there were no significant issues related to the ability of the MoravianSilesian Region to absorb the ROP MS funds. The excess of applicants in calls for tenders in the following areas of intervention:.3 Public Transport Vehicles and Terminals, 2. Social Services, 2.2 Tourism, 3.2 Small Towns, ranged from.5 to 3 multiple of the offered allocation and sextuple in the last call for rural development. The allocation was not used up in calls for the support of the reconstruction of class 2 and 3 roads and for the acquisition of rail vehicles due to a sixmonth delay in the preparation of projects parts; as for rail vehicles, also due to the decision of the Czech Railways not to use the entire allocation to rail vehicles, but to use a part of the funds to make railway transport more attractive by reconstructing public transport passenger terminals connected to the railway. The insufficient progress in the use of ROP MS funds in the area such as the support of the development of the Ostrava Airport, support of healthcare or IUDP of the city of Ostrava is not caused by a lack of suitable projects, but by delays in their preparation Problems with Project Implementation The Managing Authority of ROP MoraviaSilesia does not register any serious problems with project implementation. However, there were some minor or medium problems in the field of implementation in 2 to which the Managing Authority was forced to respond. Common Implementation Problems The decision of the Czech Government to suspend the provision of the contribution from the national budget to cofinance projects implemented from ROP MS by 2, which was approved by Government Decision No. 563 of /8/2, brought uncertainty to the subsidy beneficiaries. The Regional Council did not suspend the programme implementation and it reserved the right to decrease the subsidy in relation to the availability of cofinancing from the national budget in the contracts with beneficiaries. However, this slowed down the rate of newly signed contracts in the last quarter of 2 and also caused delays in the commencement of physical project implementations. With regard to the uncertainty in financing ROP MS projects, there was also a delay in the deadline for submitting annexes to the contracts on the provision of subsidy, which had an effect on projects approved in the 3rd round of the call in Area of Intervention 3.2 Subregional Centres. The situation was clarified after the correction of Government Decision No. 675 of 22/9/2 and the rate of conclusion of contracts and project implementation gradually increased. Delays in the implementation of the integrated development plans for the statutory city of Ostrava increased the ROP MS Managing Authority increased the attention in the field of fulfilling the implementation plans of two approved IUDPs for the statutory city of Ostrava and a web application for entering current information on the status of implemented or prepared projects within the individual IUDPs by the statutory cities was launched in October 2. In relation to the data provided and updated schedule, the ROP MS Managing Authority assesses the fulfilment of the N+ rule in financial schedules. Any potential identified problems with use are solved at the level of the RCO management and management of individual cities. 37

38 Shifts in the implementation deadlines of some projects by the MoravianSilesian Region the deadlines for the submission of projects prepared by the MoravianSilesian Region are shifted in individual cases (class 2 and 3 roads, railway connection to the airport) as against the information used as the basis for the preparation of the plan of calls. Due to the fact that the approval of ROP MS Version 2 was extended until December 2, no cofinancing of projects financed from the transfers or allocation in ROP MS Version 2 has been provided by the current budget and the budget outlook of the MoravianSilesian Region. Increasing number of applying more/less tasks in the construction parts of the projects in relation to the eligibility of expenses and in accordance with the Act on Public Procurement a working group was established in order to assess individual cases and to provide a uniform standard procedure for solving individual changes. The experience with assessing more/less tasks will be later used for adjustments of the relevant methodology solving this issue. Delayed submission of monitoring reports with payment claims and reports on the progress of the beneficiary compared to the planned schedule. Partial Implementation Problems Delays in the audits of documentation to public procurement assigned to the subsidy beneficiary this problem was caused due to the departure of two workers specialized in the public procurement process audits in the summer of 2 and also due to the significant increase in the payment claims from beneficiaries. In autumn, new employees were hired for this position and the capacity of external consulting companies that executed the public procurement documentation audits was also used. On the basis of the findings, it was decided to outsource a part of the public procurement audits from 2 in order to be able to respond to the increased requirements of the subsidy beneficiaries put on public procurement audits. Innovation in Programme Implementation Introduction of a New Payment Claim Submission System The experience gained during the change to modified payments positively confirmed their usefulness and efficiency. The change was gradual and it increased in the last quarter of modified payment claims were submitted for the entire year of 2 (in reality approximately for the last 5 months), out of which 37 were disbursed in the total amount of CZK 22,57,55. The average amount of the subsidy per individual payment claim was CZK 5,95,22 and the average administration time was 3.3 days. On the other hand, the reduction of periods and simplification of the process is obtained in this scheme partially by excluding some budget items more demanding for audits and thus by partially shifting some of the audit activities to final payments. On the basis of the good experience with electronic submission of the modified payment claims at the end of 2, the ROP MS Managing Authority launched the preparation of the obligatory electronic submission of standard expost payment claims. The new payment claim submission system was put into operation in February 2 through the application of Overview of Accounting Documents (OAD) at the website of the MoravianSilesian Regional Council. This application is used with modified payments. The subsidy beneficiaries had the opportunity to get detailed information on the changes in the system of payment claim submissions at training sessions and seminars organized by the Office of the Regional Council. 38

39 Positive effects of electronic payment claims: Simplification of the submission of payment claims, elimination of the error rate Facilitation of communication between the subsidy beneficiaries and the Office of the MoravianSilesian Regional Council Provision of overview of the current status of the submitted payment claim for beneficiaries 2.4 Potential Changes Related to the Operational Programme Implementation 2.4. External Changes with Impact on the OP Implementation The most significant external factor that had an effect on the course of the ROP MS implementation was Government Decision No. 563 of /8/2, by which the contribution of the national budget to cofinancing projects implemented from ROP MS was to be cancelled with effect from 2. In relation to the Government Decision, the Regional Council Committee approved by Resolution No. 42/426 of 8/9/2 a decrease in the maximum level of the Regional Council s subsidy to projects not constituting public support, submitted in calls announced in the second half of 2, with effect for all projects submitted in continuous calls after August 2, to 85%, i.e. to the share provided by subsidies from EU funds. At the same time, all contracts on the provision of subsidy that were concluded after /8/2 were supplemented with a provision in which the Regional Council reserves the right to decrease the level of subsidy from 92.5% to 85% in relation to the availability of cofinancing from the national budget. The negotiations of the Association of Regions and the Union of Cities and Municipalities with the Czech Government led to a change in the opinion of the Government and as a result, the Government passed Decision No. 675 and subsequently Decision No. 64 on 9 January 2 with the provision that cofinancing from the national budget will not be provided to projects approved after 22 September 2 with effect from January 2. The Regional Council Committee decided by Decision No. 44/458 of 3 November 2 on the basis of the calculation of the estimated volume of national public funds generated from public subject projects that projects submitted in calls announced before August 2, regardless of the date of their approval, will receive a subsidy in the maximum amount according to the call (with the exception of continuous calls). This procedure that allows maintaining the level of subsidy for approved projects and calls announced by mid2 is based on a flexible financing model within which it is possible to increase the level of subsidies from EU funds thanks to the excess of public funds for projects submitted before August 2. Moreover, the ROP implementation is influenced by the strengthening exchange rate of the Czech crown to euro, which was CZK/EUR in December 2 as against 29. CZK/EUR from the beginning of the programming period. The average exchange rate for payments in 2 was CZK/EUR Changes in the OP Implementation An official request for a change in ROP MS was sent to the European Commission on 24 February 2 after prior unofficial consultations. The request included changes in ROP MS approved at the 7th to 9th meeting of the Monitoring Committee that took place from June to December 29. The European Commission passed Decision No. K(2) 868 of 6 December 2 approving ROP MS Version 2 after three rounds of comments. 39

40 The Decision approved the transfer of funds from the cancelled project of the MoravianSilesian Scientific Library to the support of infrastructure of education, healthcare and social services. Moreover, the funds for healthcare were increased at the expense of the regeneration of brownfields and the funds for the reconstruction of class 2 and 3 roads were increased at the expense of the support of the development of the Ostrava Airport. Furthermore, terms and conditions for projects for regeneration of brownfields financed through the refundable JESSICA instrument were modified in addition to other minor changes. 2.5 Potential Substantial Modification There were no operations to substantial changes according to Article 57 of the General Regulation in Complementarity with Other Instruments The basic framework for the interface and coordination among programmes financed by ERDF, ESF and EAFRD was set by NSRF, and by the individual programmes in more detail. Within the agreed framework, the National Coordination Authority (NCA) plays the most significant role that of an umbrella for coordinating all aspects of the NSRF implementation system followed by the Managing and Coordinating Committee (MCC) in the role of the NSRF Monitoring Committee. Because of similar or synergic targeting of a part of the interventions, a cooperation between ROP MS and some programmes takes place. The need for closer cooperation of ROP MS with the Integrated Operational Programme (IOP) or operational programmes financed by ESF (OP HRE and OP EC) is desirable to achieve a synergic effect of these programmes, particularly in the field of integrated urban development and/or educational and social services. The coordination of ROP MS with the Operational Programme Transport (OP T) and the Rural Development Programme (RDP) financed by EAFRD is desirable, especially to avoid overlaps between these programmes. To deepen the cooperation between ROP MS MA and IOP MA and OP T, agreements on mutual cooperation were signed to coordinate announcements of calls, cooperation in areas where coordinated action is desirable and to ensure mutual provision of information on preparation and implementation of individual activities. The cooperation of ROP MS MA with the managing authorities of OP T and IOP is carried out through the representation of both MAs in the ROP MS Monitoring Committee and through coordination meetings at the level of RCO and OP T MA directors. There was also intensive cooperation between MRD, IOP MA and all ROPs in the area of integrated urban development plans (IUDP), particularly in preparing the conditions for providing assistance to IUDPs on the basis of Working Group for Urban Policy Coordination (WG UPC). Namely cooperation and mutual improvement of projects included in IUDPs are addressed at the level of this working group. The coordination of ROP MS, IOP and RDP is provided at the level of the Regional Working Group for Coordination of Interventions by ROP MS and IOP with RDP, consisting of regional representatives of the MAs of these programmes. As the cooperation with IOP takes place at the aforementioned level of WG UPC, the emphasis at the level of this regional working group is mainly put on the cooperation of ROP MS with RDP, which took place in particular through a mutual exchange of experience and efforts to avoid overlaps between the two programmes. Under the agreements concluded and the outputs from the coordination meetings, ROP MS MA and MAs of IOP, RDP, OPE, OPEI and MAs of ESF programmes (OP HRE a OP EC) agreed on a mutual exchange of data on the projects selected for implementation (particularly, all MAs can obtain information on other Ops through MSC27). 4

41 The links to project activities of other OPs are reflected by ROP MS also when assessing projects submitted to ROP MS through giving precedence to projects with such links (there are particular synergic links between ROP MS and OP EC and OP HRE in the area of education or social services). ROP MS MA informs applicants of the options and conditions for receiving this preference in the documentation for applicants and/or in the calls for grant applications. As of 3/2/2, bonus points were awarded to 9 projects for synergy with OP EC in the area of education (out of which projects in 2) and to 5 projects for synergy with OP HRE in the field of social services (all in 2). Table 8 Synergic Links Form Compiler: Managing Authority of ROP MoraviaSilesia MoraviaSilesia Regional Council Thematic Area*: Development of Tourism ROP MS Synergic areas of intervention OP/ROP* 2.2 Development of Tourism 2.4 Regional Marketing IOP Coherence to areas of intervention OP/ROP2* 4.a National Support of the Development of Tourism 5. National Support of the Use of the Cultural Heritage Potential Agreement on cooperation concluded YES between MA (PP) a MA (NP) Assessment of the operation of coordination mechanisms between MA (PP) and MA (NP) determined by agreements between MAs / in programme documentation / other coordination mechanisms, including the description of the form (e.g. sending the plan of calls, sending reports on implementation/annual reports, participation in MCC / thematic microteams** called under KV / monitoring committees / working groups / annual conferences, information about seminars for applicants / beneficiaries, information in PPZ/PPP, etc.): The area of the use of the cultural heritage potential (link between ROP MS 2.2 and IOP 5.) is solved by focusing ROP calls to IOP projects on the part of ROP by agreement with the IOP intermediating subject. All projects submitted within ROP would get the points for the synergic criterion, thus the bonus is not applied in this case. In 2, ROP MS announced a controlled call focused on Accompanying Activities following up the project of Dolní oblast Vítkovice implemented within IOP. As of 3/2/2, this call was not completed and no project was submitted. In the area of intervention concerning the development of tourism (link between ROP MS 2.4 and IOP 4.a), the bonus has not been applied by ROP MS yet. Overview of synergic projects meeting the specified link MSC22; if MA does not use the MSC27 system for monitoring all synergic links, it shall state its own records of synergic projects. ROP MS has no synergic projects in MSC22. Comments to the table and other information on synergic projects (total number of synergic projects, most frequent synergic area, number of unreported links in the system due to NP/PP passing over to the negative status, ): As of 3/2/2, no synergic project was registered in this thematic area. Problems and identified risks in providing the link by managing authorities, measures taken: none Topics for the meeting of the coordination committee / thematic microteam: None Other comments: none Created by: Ing. Lenka Bartošová 4

42 Form Compiler: Managing Authority of ROP MoraviaSilesia MoraviaSilesia Regional Council Thematic Area*: Social Integration ROP MS Synergic areas of intervention OP/ROP* 2..2 Development of Social Services Infrastructure 3. Development Poles of the Region 3.2 Subregional Centres 4. Rural Development Coherence to areas of intervention OP/ROP2* OP HRE 3. Support of Social Integration and Social Services 3.2 Support of Social Integration of Romany locations Thematic Area*: Education ROP MS Synergic areas of intervention OP/ROP* 2.. Development of Educational Infrastructure 3. Development Poles of the Region 3.2 Subregional Centres 4. Rural Development OP EC. Increasing the Quality of Education Coherence to areas of intervention OP/ROP2*.2 Equal Opportunities for Children and Pupils, including Children and Pupils with Special Educational Needs.3 Further Education of School and Educational Facility Workers 2. Higher Vocational Education 3. Facilitation of the Individual Access of Czech Inhabitants to Further Education and Increase in Their Motivation to Lifelong Learning Agreement on cooperation concluded YES between MA (PP) a MA (NP) Assessment of the operation of coordination mechanisms between MA (PP) and MA (NP) determined by agreements between MAs / in programme documentation / other coordination mechanisms, including the description of the form (e.g. sending the plan of calls, sending reports on implementation/annual reports, participation in MCC / thematic microteams** called under KV / monitoring committees / working groups / annual conferences, information about seminars for applicants / beneficiaries, information in PPZ/PPP, etc.): Individual/Area of Intervention 2.., 2..2, 3.2 and 4.: In the field of social integration (link between ROP MS and OP HRE) and in the field of education (link between ROP MS and OP EC), applicants submitting projects to ROP MS may receive a bonus for synergy with OP HRE, or OP EC. ROP MS MA informs applicants of the options and conditions for receiving this preference in the documentation for applicants and/or in the calls for grant applications. As of 3/2/2, bonus points were awarded to 9 projects for synergy with OP EC in the area of education (projects submitted within Area of Intervention ROP MS 2..) and to 5 projects for synergy with OP HRE in the field of social services (projects submitted within Area of Intervention ROP MS 2..2) ROP MS gives precedence for synergy with implemented or approved projects in OP HRE/OP EC. The condition for receiving bonus points is to prove a link between the project submitted to ROP MS and the project implemented or approved within OP EC/OP HRE. ROP MS MA agreed with the intermediating subjects for OP EC and OP HRE on confirming the synergic links between projects. ROP MS MA informs the intermediating subjects for OP EC and OP HRE of the planned ROP MS calls. Area of Intervention 3.: In Area of Intervention 3., ROP MS only accepts projects for Integrated Urban Development Plans (IUDPs) and individual projects through which the approved IUDPs are approved. IUDPs are a significant instrument providing synergy between operational programmes. The projects included in ROP MS s IUDP may receive a bonus of % when submitted within the thematic operational programmes, on the basis of Government Decision No. 883 of 3/8/27 on the main 42

43 principles for the preparation, approval and evaluation of IUDPs. Most frequent links of IUDPs submitted to ROP MS are links to OP Environment (contained by four of the approved IUDPs), OP Education for Competitiveness (contained by two of the approved IUDPs). ROP MS does not apply the point bonus for synergy for IUDPs (and thus in entire Area of Intervention 3.). The individual IUDP projects are assessed according to the level of conformity with the given ROP MS IUDP; the bonus points for synergy with other OPs are not relevant to ROP MS). Overview of synergic projects meeting the specified link MSC22; if MA does not use the MSC27 system for monitoring all synergic links, it shall state its own records of synergic projects. ROP MS has no synergic projects in MSC22. Comments to the table and other information on synergic projects (total number of synergic projects, most frequent synergic area, number of unreported links in the system due to NP/PP passing over to the negative status, ): As of 3/2/2, 9 synergic projects were registered in these thematic areas and other 5 synergic projects in the area of social services. Problems and identified risks in providing the link by managing authorities, measures taken: none Topics for the meeting of the coordination committee / thematic microteam: None Other comments: none Created by: Ing. Lenka Bartošová Note: *defined in the Methodological Recommendation to the Provision of Synergic Links between OPs (Annexe No. and 2) ** see Annexe to Decision No. 235/29 of the Minister for Regional Development 2.6. Use of EU Financial Engineering Instruments In the Regional Operational Programme of the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region approved by the European Commission on 3 December 27, the Regional Council as the Managing Authority of the programme declared the possibility of utilising the JESSICA Initiative through urban development funds that will mediate capital, credits or guarantees stating that the actual form of implementing the JESSIC Initiative will be subject to further negotiations of the ROP Managing Authority with the European Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB). On the basis of the feasibility study prepared in 29, the Regional Council Committee decided to conclude a contract on the implementation of the JESSICA financial engineering tool with the European Investment Bank in December 29 through placing an order to the European Investment Bank to establish the JESSICA Holding Fund. A part of the allocation to Area of Intervention 2.3 in the amount of CZK 56.2 million was released by a change in the operational programme. This area of intervention was selected for the low interest of applicants for the support of projects for regeneration of brownfields that may only be regenerated (due to restrictions given by the operational programme) if owned by public subjects and if they have a prevailing noncommercial future use. These restrictions were also removed by the change in the operational programme for financing regeneration of brownfields through the JESSICA financial engineering instrument. 43

44 Activities Related to the Implementation of JESSICA in 2: 8 February 2 conclusion of the contract on financing the JESSICA Holding Fund between the MoravianSilesian Regional Council and the European Investment Bank in Prague; EUR 2 million will be transferred to the holding fund from ROP MoraviaSilesia, 22 February 2 the MoravianSilesian Regional Council officially sent the changes in the operational programme to the European Commission; the changes also included the transfer of funds to the JESSICA Initiative, 5 April 2 there was a working seminar focusing on JESSICA in Ostrava; the participants were representatives of EIB, MSR municipalities, bank institutions, consulting companies and real estate owners. May 2 the call for submitting projects launched the administration of the transfer of EUR 2 million from ROP MS to the JESSICA Holding Fund established by the contract between the MS Regional Council and the European Investment Bank of 8 February 2, 2 May 2 the MoravianSilesian Regional Council Committee appointed the members of the Investment Council of the JESSICA Holding Fund after the prior nominations and consultations with EIB at the 37th meeting. The Council performs the supreme supervision over the fund operation, prepares investment strategies and approves the selection of Urban Development Funds, 6 June 2 the MoravianSilesian Council and EIB signed a contract on the release of a longterm expert from the Office of the MoravianSilesian Regional Council who will participate in the fund administration and thus build the knowledge and experience basis within the Regional Council. 25 June 2 first meeting of the Investment Council of the JESSICA Holding Fund at EIB seat in Luxembourg, 2 July 2 the Regional Council Committee approved a project for the transfer of EUR 2 million (CZK million) to the JESSICA Holding Fund (the Czech crown equivalent to EUR 2 million was determined according to the ECB exchange rate valid on the day of the approval of the transfer by the Regional Council Committee) 5 October 2 CZK million was paid to the JESSICA Holding Fund at the European Investment Bank account. The amount of CZK (the remaining part after the deduction of the advance payment for the fees for the establishment of the fund) was transferred to the deposit account with a Czech bank selected on the basis of demand proceedings. The funds for financing urban development projects according to the approved business plan will be subsequently provided from this account to the urban development funds. to 5 November 2 a written query of the Investment Council of the holding fund took place and approved the criteria for the selection of urban development funds. 6 December 2 the Monitoring Authority of ROP MS approved the exclusion, selection and evaluation criteria for the selection of urban development funds by the JESSICA Holding Fund at the 2th meeting and also acknowledged the information on the course of the implementation of the JESSICA instrument. 6 December 2 a second meeting of the Investment Council in Ostrava where the Council approved the text of the Call for Expressions of Interest and authorised EIB to take measures necessary for the announcement of the Call for EoI that EIB planned for January 2. 6 December 2 the European Commission passed Decision No. K(2) 868 by which it approved Version 2 of ROP MS, which allows for the regeneration of brownfields owned by private subjects and regeneration of brownfields for business purposes in case of financing regeneration of brownfields through the urban development fund within the JESSICA financial engineering instrument in addition to regeneration of brownfields owned by public subjects with a prevailing noncommercial future use. 44

45 2.6.2 Integrated Urban Development Plans IUDPs Implementation Status Table 9 Implementation Status of IUDPs within ROP MS Financial demands in applications Share in IUDP allocation in % Number of projects in progress Share in IUDP allocation in% Disbursed expenses mil. EUR IUDP Karviná IUDP Havířov IUDP Ostrava Development Pole IUDP allocation mil. EUR Number of submitted projects IUDP Opava IUDP Ostrava Magnet of the Region IUDP FrýdekMístek IUDP mil. EUR Projects in progress mil. EUR Share in IUDP allocation in % Source: IS Monit 7+, status as of 5//2 Exchange rate: CZK/EUR 9 projects requesting the allocation of CZK were submitted within Continuous Call No for the submission of projects within IUDPs, which ended on 3/2/29. All projects were approved and implemented. In December 29, Continuous Call No for the submission of projects within IUDPs was announced. It will end on 3/2/2. The total allocation to the entire call is CZK.5 milliard. 7 projects applications have been submitted within the call with the total subsidy of CZK 9.66 million, out of which 3 projects in the amount of CZK 36.7 million are under implementation and 8 projects have been recommended for financing. As of 3/2/2, the implementation of IUDPs of the statutory cities of Opava, FrýdekMístek and Havířov was under way as the cities submitted projects fulfilling the entire allocation approved as of that date. Also, the implementation of the projects of these cities is successful all the cities were paid more than a half of the total allocation; the city of Opava received %. The city of Karviná submitted projects covering half of the IUDP allocation. Other projects should be submitted by the end of 2, which represents about a oneyear delay as against the originally approved IUDP implementation plan. Another delay is imminent in the project of the city stadium due to the uncertainty concerning cofinancing. Both Ostrava IUDPs are struggling as they only submitted a fraction of projects and only 2 projects are being implemented. On 28/6/2, a new eligible applicant universities implementing projects within IUDPs as well as relevant indicators were added to Continuous Call No Modifications in the IUDP Financing Structure The contracts concluded between the Regional Council of the ROP MS Cohesion Region and individual statutory cities include the liability to allocate financial resources from the Regional Council s budget in favour of the individual cities for the purpose of implementing the integrated urban development plans and their individual projects. 45

46 The allocations to the individual cities include ERDF funds and funds from the national budget on the basis of Government Decision No. 56 of 23 May 27 on the rules of the provision of cofinancing European Union funds from national public funds. Government Decision No. 563 and 675 of 2 cancelled the contribution of the Czech national budget to financing projects from ROP MoraviaSilesia approved after 22 September 2. Thus the allocations to the individual IUDPs will be decreased by a corresponding amount of the national budget contribution. Setting Evaluation Criteria for the Selection of Projects Included in IUDPs The evaluation of the individual projects that are submitted under the continuous call for IUDPs is carried out in accordance with the standard procedures common for all priority axes of ROP MS. A submitted project application must meet formal requisites defined uniformly for all projects within ROP MS. The acceptance criteria for projects submitted within IUDPs are configured differently from other projects. When evaluating acceptability, the eligibility of the beneficiary for Area of Intervention 3., conformity of the project with the call and conformity with the objective and activities are assessed. The evaluation criteria for project scoring (scoreboards) in part. Project Quality and 3. Horizontal Criteria are identical with the criteria set for other ROP MS priority axes. There is a difference in part 2. Project Significance, which assesses the conformity with IUDPs (conformity of activities/objectives of the project with the measures/activities defined in IUDP, fulfilment of the indicators set by IUDPs, conformity of the project with the financial schedule of IUDP). For projects with total expenses below CZK million included, the contribution of the project is assessed, e.g. contributions from the CBA application may be used, and for projects with total expenses exceeding CZK million, the contribution is assessed on the basis of the resulting value of the ERR indicator (economic rate of return). IUDPs are also an important tool for the provision of synergy between operational programmes. Projects included in ROP MS IUDPs may gain bonus in the amount of % when submitted within the thematic operational programmes according to Government Decision No. 883 of 3 August 27 on the main principles for the preparation, approval and evaluation of IDUPs. IUDPs submitted to ROP MS were most often linked to OP Environment (4 out of 6 approved IUDPs) and OP Education for Competitiveness (contained in 2 approved IUDPs). ROP MS does not apply the bonus points for synergy in case of IUDPs (individual IUDP projects are assessed according to the level of conformity with the given ROP MS IUDP; the bonus points for synergy with other Ops is not relevant to ROP MS). 2.7 Monitoring Measures and Continuous Evaluations 2.7. Description of the Monitoring System The information system for monitoring programmes in the period of (hereinafter MS27) is used for management, monitoring and evaluation of programmes and projects financed from the Structural Funds in the programming period of at all levels of administration. The system is designed as a complex of mutually communicating information systems consisting of three layers: Central and controlling (MSC27) complex monitoring for all OPs in CR, used for management, coordination, programme monitoring, data transfers to other ISs (Commission and CR) for the bodies performing central monitoring 46

47 Executive (operational programme) (MONIT7+) monitoring of individual OPs, used for administration of projects of the respective OP managing authority Beneficiary/applicant for support (web application BENEFIT7) monitoring at the level of the beneficiary, used for mutual communication between the managing authority and the beneficiary, especially for transfer of information from the beneficiary (web application) Measures Ensuring Quality and Efficiency of the Monitoring System There were no serious issues in the field of the monitoring system. The comments to the modifications of the BENEFIT7+, MONIT7+ and MSC27 systems are usually discussed at the meetings of the relevant working groups (Monitoring WG, Unified Monitoring System WG). The development of the monitoring system focused on changes in the administration of subsidy disbursement that decreased its time intensity. In 2, the following areas of IS were developed: Introduction of modifications arising from the changes in the monitoring methodology, or a requirement for a change by MRD A new system of subsidy disbursement was introduced at the end of Q and beginning of Q2, a model of modified payment claims. Together with this model, electronic submission of payment claims was also introduced through a OAD electronic application (Overview of Accounting Documents). Analytical and programming tasks aimed at the extension of this electronic application also for the needs of standard payment claims were introduced in Q3 and Q4 (i.e. submission of all types of payment claims to ROP MS with the use of a digital signature). Testing was launched in midq4 2 The RIMS web portal was further expanded by new types of reports used both for the support of strategic management of the ROP MS programme and for the support of management of the individual divisions MSC27 Information System MRD is responsible for the development and modifications of this IS. MONIT7+ Information System This IS was developed and modified in the monitored period mainly in the field of modifications of the payment claims administration, environmental criteria/indicators and configuration of financial monitoring checks. New functions and checks for Indicators and Environmental Criteria/Indicators were incorporated. Output reports from M7+ were continuously defined and updated. BENEFIT7 Web Application In 2, there were no significant changes or modifications of the BENEFIT7 web application. All modifications only concerned the standard maintenance procedures Monitoring Committee In accordance with Articles 63 and 64 of the General Regulation, the Monitoring Committee is established by the Member State in consensus with the Managing Authority of the Operational Programme within 3 months since the decision approving the Operational Programme. 47

48 The status and role of the Monitoring Committee of the Regional Operational Programme of the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region are defined in its Statutes. The ROP MS Monitoring Committee is obliged to ensure supervision over the implementation of the programme. Together with the Managing Authority, it ensures the effectiveness and quality of programme implementation, monitors implementation, oversees the quality of implementation, uses public funds in an efficient and effective manner and regularly monitors progress in achieving the programme objectives. The main objective of the ROP MS Monitoring Committee is to ensure the effectiveness and quality of the provided assistance. ROP MS MC meets at least twice a year and its composition is based on the partnership principle. A representative of the European Commission may also attend the meetings of the Committee in an advisory capacity. The representatives of the following institutions are the members of ROP MS MC: Regional Council of the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region, Office of the Regional Council of the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region, Czech Ministry for Regional Development, Czech Ministry of Finance, Czech Ministry of Transport, CzechInvest Agency for the Promotion of Enterprise and Investment, Regional Authority for the MoravianSilesian Region, Municipal Council of Opava, Municipal Council of Nový Jičín, Agentura pro regionální rozvoj a.s. (Agency for Regional Development), Regional Economic Chamber of the MoravianSilesian Region, Association for the Development of the MoravianSilesian Region, Technical University of Ostrava, University of Ostrava, Business School Ostrava Plc, Silesian University of Opava, Ostrava and Opava Diocesan Charity, Silesian Diaconia and Institute for Community Development. In 2, there were 2 meetings of ROP MS MC and mail meeting. th ROP MS MC Mail Meeting (23/3/2 7/4/2) The following was approved under this procedure of written query: Review of the evaluation criteria for project selection Criterion 3 Significance of the Project for Area of Intervention 2..2 Development of the Social Services Infrastructure and Area of Intervention 3. Development Poles of the Region; Granting an exception from the scoring of projects for the reconstruction of local communications after floods in Area of Intervention. Development of Regional Road Infrastructure, individual Area of Intervention..2 Safety on Communications, Cyclists and Pedestrians, and granting an exception from the scoring of projects and determination of a specific acceptability criterion for the assessment of projects in Individual Area of Intervention Organization and Cooperation in Tourism, for projects in Call No focused on tourist areas of the Northern Moravia and Silesia tourist region; Granting an exception from the scoring and simplification of the criteria for formal requisites and acceptability for the call for transfer of ROP MS funds to the JESSICA Holding Fund in Area of Intervention 2.3. th ROP MS MC Meeting (8/6/2) ROP MS MC approved the following: The Annual Implementation Report for the Regional Operational Programme of the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region for 29; Review of the evaluation criteria for project selection Criterion Project Quality and Criterion 3 Horizontal Themes; 48

49 Review of the evaluation criteria for project selection Criterion 2 Significance of the Project for individual areas of intervention.3., 2.., 2.2., 2.2.2, and areas of intervention 3.2 and 4.; Evaluation criteria for project selection within individual Area of Intervention Call focused on tourist areas of the Northern Moravia and Silesia tourist region ROP MS MC acknowledged: The Annual Audit Report on ROP MS for the period from July 28 to 3 June 29 and the Annual Opinion of the Auditing Body according to Article 62 of the General Regulation; Report on ROP MS Implementation for the period from January to April 2; Proposal of solutions of measures arising from Government Decision No. 295 of 9 April 2 on the analysis of operational programmes including the proposal of potential reviews and evaluations of calls announced so far; Information on the Plan of ROP MS Calls for the second half of 2 and first half of 2; Information on the status of negotiating ROP MS changes with the European Commission; Information on the status of the implementation of JESSICA in the MoravianSilesian Region. 2th ROP MS MC Meeting (6/2/2) ROP MS MC approved: Review of the evaluation criteria for project selection Criterion 3 Horizontal Themes; Evaluation criteria for project selection Criterion 2 Significance of the Project for the selection of projects within individual Area of Intervention 2..3 for projects focused on the construction and reconstruction of medical facilities; Exclusion, selection and evaluation criteria for the selection of projects of urban development funds by the JESSICA Holding Fund ROP MS MC acknowledged: The amendment of the Annual Implementation Report for ROP MS for 29, namely in Section 2..2 Information on the Financial Data of ROP MS, Table 4 Financial Data of ROP MS for the period of 27 23; Report on the Implementation of ROP MS for the period of May September 2; Information on the status of negotiating ROP MS changes; Plan of ROP MS Calls for 2; Information on the course of the implementation of JESSICA; Annual Evaluation Plan for ROP MS for 2; Intermediate Evaluation Report of the Annual Communication Plan for ROP MS for the period of May September 2; Communication Plan for ROP MS for 2; Information on the Plan of Using Technical Assistance for ROP MS for 2. 49

50 2.7.4 Evaluations The annual Evaluation Plan for the Regional Operational Programme of the MoraviaSilesia Cohesion Region for 2 (hereinafter the Annual Evaluation Plan for ROP MS 2 ) was based on the general Evaluation Plan for ROP MS for the period of Its objective was to summarize the evaluation activities in 2 and to subsequently outline an overview of evaluation activities planned for 2. The document was prepared on 2 November 2 and it was submitted for the information to the ROP MS Monitoring Committee on 6 December 2. The evaluation office of ROP MoraviaSilesia is at the Department of Programming and Methodology. Some evaluation activities in the field of absorption activity are also executed by the Department of Marketing and Absorption Enhancement. Some activities that have the ad hoc evaluation character are executed by managing employees of the Office of the Regional Council. The evaluation activities were executed in compliance with the plan and on the basis of the need for strategic programme management.. Evaluation of the Scoring Criteria Configuration The final report summarizes the evaluation process of the configuration of scoring criteria that ran continually through 2. The evaluation focused on more specific definitions, new arrangement and weight of the individual criteria, or adding new criteria, with the aim to choose quality projects with a great significance for the development of the region with regard to the EU horizontal themes. Conclusions of the evaluation were projected into the proposals of evaluation criteria that were submitted and approved at the meetings of the Monitoring Committee of ROP MS in Territorial Distribution of ROP MS Subsidy The aim of the two internal evaluation studies was to map the territorial distribution of the subsidy required by beneficiaries and recommended for financing by the Regional Council Committee in the individual districts of the ROP MS Cohesion Region, to compare the success rate in the individual districts of the ROP MS Cohesion Region and to propose potential recommendations for further strategic programme management. 3. Integrated Development Plans of Areas The marketing strategy defined territories that tourism. The condition analysis, strategy and structures in that area. for the development of tourism in the MoravianSilesian Region until 25 could obtain funds from ROP MS for coordinated activities in the field of is to prepare an integrated development plan of an area (containing an proposal of activities) and to establish managing and implementation The Managing Authority assigned three evaluation studies in November 29 Integrated Development Plans of Areas (IDPA) for 3 priority localities defined by the Marketing Strategy for the Development of Tourism in the MoravianSilesian Region for for the territories of the following municipalities: Karlova Studánka and Malá Morávka (extended by the neighbouring municipality according to the Region s decision) Ostravice and Staré Hamry Jablunkov, Hrčava, Písečná, Bukovec, Písek, Dolní Lomná. IDPAs contain the analysis of the tourist potential of the specified territory, the strategy and objective of its development including the indicative list of projects and indicators of attained outputs. On the basis of IDPAs, projects fulfilling the objectives of the development of tourism in the 5

51 individual localities will be submitted to the Regional Council with the approval of the relevant managing authority. Main Outputs of the Evaluation Activity in 2: March June 2 3 managing structures in each territory defined by the Marketing Strategy for the Development of Tourism in the MoravianSilesian Region for were established and strategies (IDPAs) were created, including the analysis of the tourist potential of the particular territory, the strategy and objectives of its development and the indicative list of projects and indicators of attained outputs. May 2 presentation of the course of processing IDPA by its elaborator October 2 (or January 2) individual IDPAs approved by the Regional Council Committee 5 October 2 a continuous call for submission of projects within IDPAs announced CZK 38 million was allocated to each priority locality. 4. Evaluation of the Implementation of ROP MS Information and Communication Measures The main objective of this evaluation was to assess the usability and efficiency of the individual information and communication measures used in the context of longterm strategy of the programme and to assess the continuous fulfilment of the objectives of the Communication Plan and other planning instruments. The results of the evaluation (will be available in Q 2) are the groundwork for the decision on amending/not amending the existing Communication Plan. 5. External Evaluation Studies Czech Republic and the Future of the EU Cohesion Policy Author: Ing. Petr Zahradník, MSc. The study maps the economic situation in the European Union, key opinion streams of the future EU cohesion policy and the most substantial documents and positions of regions in CR. Results of the study are used for the current programme management and preparation for the period after 23. Development Priorities of the Regions in the Czech Republic and Analysis of Their Absorption Capacity Potential within the EU Cohesion Policy after 23 Author: Ing. Petr Zahradník, MSc. The study identifies and evaluates material priorities of the regions in the Czech Republic, identifies the absorption capacity potential of the regions on the basis of the longterm prognosis of their economic development, interprets regional priorities from the point of view of 22 EU Strategies and their key indicators and interprets regional priorities of the convergence type. The results of the study can also be used for the current programme management and preparation for the period after 23. How Can the Fiscal Situation Affect the Future of the EU Cohesion Policy? (General Consideration and Prognosis) Author: Ing. Petr Zahradník, MSc. From the longterm aspect, the health of public funds is the condition for the implementation of all fundamental activities for the promotion of competitiveness; however, from the shortterm and mediumterm aspect, the efforts to obtain sound public funds through savings may limit and 5

52 undermine the ability to fully use the opportunities offered by the instruments of the EU Cohesion Policy. And finally, tightening the tax policy would not be a desirable factor of the promotion of competitiveness of the business sphere and its possibilities to participate in the process mentioned above. The study deals with the fiscal situation of the individual countries and with the question of how tense the financial situation of companies and corporations can get to jeopardize the opportunity to participate in the implementation of projects supported by EU funds and in different forms of partnerships of the private and public sector that is also assumed to be fulfilled in a substantially larger extent. Evaluation of the Impact of ROP MS Changes on the Environment and Public Health The ROP MS Monitoring Committee approved changes in the operational programme on 9 June 29 that were officially sent to the European Commission in February 2. At the end of the negotiations, EC requested an execution of the Evaluation of the Impact of ROP MS Changes on the Environment and Public Health. The study was made available to the public on the regional website related to EIA/SEA processes in compliance with Article 3, Section 7 of Directive No. 2/42/EC on the evaluation of the impact of some plans and programmes on the environment. The results of the study were used for the implementation of the change in ROP MS and its approval by the European Commission. 6. Evaluation of the Intervention in Reinforcing Absorption Capacity The aim of this evaluation activity was to determine the absorption capacity of the key beneficiaries of the programme for the period of 222 and to set its monitoring efficiently. The output of the activity included: a) Introduction of the Integrated Development Plan module (IDP) available at in the Instruments section the module is made for monitoring the use of the individual IUDPs accessible to the Managing Authority (or to the employees of RCO who were granted the access rights by the administrator) and to IUDP project managers; b) Creation of a planning model for the use of financial resources in relation to the N+3/2 rule and the supporting SW tool this model will be further developed; c) Agreement between the ROP MS Managing Authority and representatives of the Department of European Projects of the Office of the MoravianSilesian Region on regular and ad hoc distribution of the key beneficiary s (MoravianSilesian Region) project preparation and implementation schedule. 7. Good Practice in the Implementation of the Lisbon Strategy Priorities in ROP In relation to the gradual commencement of the preparation of the new programming period of 23+, discussions about the future direction of financial interventions after the end of the current programming period are starting in the region. The prepared analysis aimed at the actual thematic orientation of selected foreign operational programmes. The following are the common elements of the analysed regional operational programmes: Significant support of investment into innovations, namely in small and medium enterprises; into the development of competences and knowledge within the lifelong learning system; Emphasis on efficient disposal of funds; Great significance of urban policy; 52

53 Simplification of objectives and priorities into two or three; Coherence of strategies in the regional, national and European context. The orientation of operational programmes in advanced European countries could be an inspiration for the preparation of potential future operational programmes in CR for the period of 23+ as the areas of orientation are very close to the 22 EU Strategies and recommendations arising from the 5th Cohesion Report. 8. Evaluation of the Intervention in Reinforcing Absorption Capacity in the Backward Parts of the Region The aim of the evaluation was to determine if the used of innovative instrument for reinforcing absorption capacity (training and supporting labour costs of the project managers of peripheral microregions with high unemployment rate) obtained the set objectives, if it was sufficiently efficient and if it can be replicated in the future. The output of the intervention includes 5 trained project managers and preliminary feasibility studies for projects that the microregions will submit in one of the calls announced by ROP MS. The intervention in reinforcing absorption capacity contributed to a greater activation of the activity in majority of the microregions. The support of labour costs of the project managers provided the microregions with an administrative capacity for the coordination of their activities, for searching for subsidy titles to submit projects that are in conformity with the microregion s strategy, for assisting small municipalities in handing over information on subsidies and for preparing grant applications. The positive advantage for the microregions and for the increase of their absorption capacity is also their spontaneous cooperation with other, more experienced microregions or associations (local action groups etc.). 9. Selection of Projects for Physical Exante Check The evaluation study analysed the efficiency of sampling method of projects recommended for financing from the ROP MS budget for the physical exante check. The evaluation focused on the ability of the method to predict and detect problematic projects prior to the conclusion of a contract. Independently of this study, OIP executed the evaluation of the efficiency of the sampling method for the exante onsite check resulting in the proposal for reviewing the existing risk analysis criteria. The resulting proposal for reviewing the existing criteria includes both the OIP s proposal and the proposal based on the evaluation findings. 2.8 Potential National Efficiency Reserve This chapter is not relevant for ROP MS. 53

54 3 Implementation by Priority Axes 3. Priority Axis Regional Accessibility and Infrastructure 3.. Progress Achieved and Its Analysis Information on the Material and Financial Progress of Priority Axis Table 2 Information on the Financial Progress of Priority Axis as of 3/2/2 (in EUR) Priority Axis Total financial resources from the operational programme (Union and domestic) Basis for the calculation of the Union s contribution (from public resources or total) Total certified eligible expenditure paid by beneficiaries Applicable contribution from public sources Share of certified eligible expenditure in the total programme financing in % 34,354,896. Public 53,84, ,84, Priority Axis Source: IS MSC 27, as of 3/2/2 The table contains cumulative data from the beginning of the programming period. Table 2 Indicators of Priority Axis : Regional Infrastructure and Accessibility NCI Code EU Code / Lisbon Indicator title Unit of measure Source Value Core 3 Output Number of supported projects for transport development (accessibility) number Gestor OP 6 Core 4 Length of new class 2 and 3 roads km Gestor OP Output 62 Core 6 Output 6 Output 63 Output Length of reconstructed class 2 and 3 roads Length of new cycling paths Number of adapted regional airports km km Total 25 Indicator Type 5 Target value Gestor OP Gestor OP number Gestor OP Attained Baseline 5. Planned Attained Baseline Planned.5.5 Attained Baseline Planned Attained Baseline Planned Attained Baseline Planned 54

55 546 Core 3 Output 63 Result 624 Result 62 Result 625 Result 62 Result Number of supported projects for the protection against natural disasters Number of checkedin passengers at regional airports change in the number and time in % number Gestor OP Total increase in the number of people using public transport Increment in municipalities taking part in IDS Baseline Planned.. Attained ,259 Baseline % 26, Gestor OP Number of newly purchased number Gestor OP environmentally friendly vehicles in public transport Number of municipalities involved in IUDP Attained number Gestor OP Planned 2 2 Attained Baseline Planned ,3 86. Baseline Attained 28,78 24,284 93,3 Baseline 279,42 28,78 24,284 93,3 279,42 3, 3,,68,747 Planned Attained number Gestor OP Attained Planned thousands Gestor OP of people 6 Baseline Planned,37,59,38,95,7,44 2,68, ,46,37,59,38,95,7,44 75,46 875, ,538 Source: MSC 24B generated as of 3/3/2 (data fixed as of 28/2/2) Notes: The target is defined for the whole programming period 2 The baseline value according to the 24 statistics = % In 2, 2 projects were completed in Priority Axis (5 in 29), projects are under implementation and 24 projects are recommended for financing and contracts on the provision of subsidy from the Regional Council s budget are being prepared for them. The target value of the number of projects was determined with the projection of submitting smaller projects of construction and reconstruction of class 2 and 3 roads (according to the individual sections). Due to the submission of several transport sections within one project, it is likely that the target value will 6 Data as of /9/28, source: 7 Data as of 3/2/29, source: 8 Data as of 2/2/2, source: 9 In 29, preliminary data of Ministry of Transport as of 27/5/2 In 2, data were not available (estimated availability at the beginning of June 2) Number of municipalities as of /9/28, source: population as of 3/2/28, source: 2 Number of municipalities as of /9/29, source: population as of 3/2/28, source: 3 Number of municipalities as of /9/2, source: population as of 3/2/29, source: 55

56 not be fulfilled. 2 projects are under implementation in the field of protection from fires, floods and other risks so the target value is likely to be exceeded. The completed projects fulfilled the indicator by.3 km of reconstructed class 2 and 3 roads (increase by 7% as against 29). The indicator already fulfils more than a half of the target value for the entire programming period, but the financial share of completed projects is only 4% of the allocation to the priority axis it is a very satisfying continuous results of the material fulfilment. The indicator of new class 2 and 3 roads is fulfilled with.75km; there are other projects with the total planned value of 6km registered in the monitoring system, out of which projects with the indicator value of 5.47km are under implementation or recommended for financing. The material and financial fulfilment of the activities of construction and reconstruction of class 2 and 3 roads is coordinated in compliance with the only possible beneficiary the MoravianSilesian Region and thus the fulfilment of these indicators is ensured. In 2, 6.79km out of km of new cycling paths planned by the programme were fulfilled. However, there are projects under implementation that will provide 28.57km and there are 3 projects waiting for the conclusion of the contract with the target value of 6.3km of new cycling paths. It is difficult to realise longer cycling paths with regard to the complexity of the property preparation and the necessity of coordination of investments among a number of municipalities through which the path runs. 4 projects were implemented in Area of Intervention.2 for the support and increase of the attractiveness of the Leoš Janáček Airport in Ostrava. The number of checkedin passengers in 2 was % to the baseline value from 27. The number of checkedin passengers has been decreasing since 28. In 2, there were 9% less checkedin passengers than in 29. The decrease in the number of passengers in 2 was caused by the continuing decrease in charter flight passengers due to the economic crisis (households save money on holiday air travels), by the decrease in the number of flights between Ostrava and Prague and also by the restricted air transport in April 2 due to the activity of the volcano in Iceland. In 2, a project that resulted in the acquisition of 6 environmentally friendly public transport vehicles was completed. One project is under implementation (34 vehicles) and projects recommended for financing will provide 75 environmentally friendly public transport vehicles. Thus this indicator should be fulfilled. In 2, 5 municipalities were added to the regional integrated public transport system (from 25 to 22 municipalities). The number of inhabitants in the municipalities with the regional integrated system, however, slightly decreased due to the demographic development and the steppedout municipality with 5, inhabitants (the newly accessed municipalities did not cover this outflow of inhabitants). 73.5% of municipalities and 94% of the inhabitants of the region are now included in the regional public transport system 2 municipalities are missing in order to obtain the target value and the planned value of the number of inhabitants is fulfilled. The number of public transport passengers continues decreasing which may be related to the higher unemployment rate, higher motor transport, alternative methods of commuting or demographic changes in the region (the number of school children decreases). 56

57 Priority Axis Quantitative Analysis Table 22 Financial Progress of Priority Axis (EU and national sources) cumulative Area of Intervention Allocation mil. EUR Projects with issued Decision / signed Contract mil. EUR % Funds disbursed to beneficiaries mil. EUR % Certified funds submitted to EC mil. EUR % Total for Priority Axis All the values in the table are cumulative, i.e. from the beginning of the programming period until 3/2/2. Source: IS MSC27, reports 2A, 252B as of 5//2. The data in the table are reported as a total of public funds. Columns a, b and c were calculated with the use of the EUR/CZK exchange rate in the amount of CZK/EUR. For status Certified funds submitted to EC has been used the exchange rate as of charging date into IS VIOLA. Status Certified funds submitted to EC includes the financial amounts without refunds. The share of allocation of projects with a concluded contract on the provision of subsidy from the Regional Council s budget (approved for financing) in Priority Axis doubled in 2 as against 29 from 22% to 46%, out of which 2/3 are represented by the allocation to Area of Intervention.3 Development of Transport Services. The volume of resources for paid and certified funds also doubled in 2. A half of the contracted funds (i.e. 2.5% of allocation) had already been paid to the beneficiaries. 74% of disbursed funds (EUR 54 million, i.e. 6% of allocation) had already been certified by the European Commission. The largest share of disbursed funds is in Area of Intervention.4 Infrastructure of the Integrated Rescue System and Crisis Management, where 83% of the allocation was paid by the end of 2, which represents a half of the funds disbursed within Priority Axis. The largest volume of contracted (EUR 7 million, i.e. 46%) and disbursed (EUR 4 million, i.e. 56%) funds is in Area of Intervention. Development of Road Transport Infrastructure. The dynamics of approving and implementing projects has significantly slowed down as against 29. About % of the allocation is contracted in Area of Intervention.2 Development and Accessibility of the Ostrava Airport, 6% has been disbursed (i.e. triple of the value of 29) and about 4% of funds have been certified (the funds were first certified in 2). In Area of Intervention.3 Development of Transport Services, contracts amounting to 57% of the allocation in this area of intervention (EUR 5 million) were concluded in 2. This represents 2/3 of all funds contracted in 2 within Priority Axis. At the same time, funds were paid to beneficiaries and expenses were certified for the first time. Area of Intervention.4 Infrastructure of the Integrated Rescue System and Crisis Management has been fully committed. The volume of disbursed funds was doubled to 83% (this is a half of funds paid in 2 within Priority Axis ). At the same time, the first significant certification of funds was executed almost a half of the allocation to this area of intervention was allocated by the end of 2. 57

58 Calls in Priority Axis calls that ran through 2 were announced within Priority Axis ( call was announced in December 29 and ended in January 2, other calls were announced and ended in 2). In Area of Intervention. Development of Regional Road Transport Infrastructure, 5 calls with the total allocation of CZK,45 million was announced. 3 projects requesting subsidies in the amount of CZK,67.9 million were submitted. Most projects were registered in the calls focusing on the construction of new cycling paths; however, the overall interest in the allocation was not large enough to cover the announced allocation 7 projects requesting subsidies in the amount of CZK 68.6 million (6 projects with allocation of CZK 63.4 million are prepared to sign contracts) were registered in Call.9 with the allocation of CZK 2 million, 3 projects requesting subsidies in the amount of CZK 2 million were registered in Call.3 with the allocation of CZK million (they were in the process of assessment as of 3/2/2). 2 calls for the construction, modernization and reconstruction class 2 and 3 roads were announced (prepared for the conclusion of the contract). project requesting CZK million was registered in Call. with allocation of CZK 32 million. Other initially planned projects from a single beneficiary the MoravianSilesian Region were submitted in following Call.2 for the same activities, the allocation of which was increased from CZK 66 to 88 million. 3 projects were registered requesting subsidy of CZK 76 million (they were in the process of assessment as of 3/2/2). In Area of Intervention., Call. for submitting transport infrastructure projects (roads, bridges) in municipalities hit by the flood in the summer of 29 was announced. 6 projects requesting CZK 6.4 million used the offered allocation of CZK 2 million (out of which 2 projects are prepared to sign contracts). In Area of Intervention.2 Development and Accessibility of the Ostrava Airport, no calls were announced in 2. In Area of Intervention.3 Development of Transport Services, 5 calls were announced call focused on the modernization of transfer terminals and telematic transport systems, 4 calls supported the modernization of the public transport fleet. In January 2, Call.33 for the acquisition and renewal of rail vehicles with the allocation of CZK 66 million was announced. The submitted project with the allocation of CZK 328 million is prepared to sign the contract. Subsequently, Call.37 with the allocation of CZK 33 million was announced in October 2 one project requesting CZK 52 million was registered. As the only eligible beneficiary informed that they are not planning to submit other projects for the acquisition of rail vehicles, the Managing Authority is considering a transfer of the remaining allocation to the support of public transport terminals connected to railway transport. Together with the call for rail vehicles, Call.34 for the acquisition of environmentally friendly and lowrise buses for suburban transport with the allocation of CZK 5 million was announced in January 2. 4 were registered with requirements covering the announced allocation. In March 2, Call.35 for the acquisition of environmentally friendly and lowrise buses for city public transport with the allocation of CZK 3 million was announced. Five registered projects requested subsidies in the amount of CZK 53 million. The Managing Authority recommended the projects for financing and conclusion of contracts and increased the allocation to CZK 53 million. In September 2, Call.36 with the allocation of CZK 84 million for the modernization of transfer terminals and for the acquisition or modernization of telematic (i.e. intelligent ) transport systems in the area of public transport was announced. The demand of applicants for subsidy was more than double 4 projects requested subsidies in the amount of CZK 48 million. In Area of Intervention.4 Infrastructure of the Integrated Rescue System and Crisis Management, no calls were announced in 2 as all the funds for this area of intervention had been exhausted. 58

59 Priority Axis Implementation Analysis The number of projects in Priority Axis that are being assessed, that are prepared to sign contracts or that have already been contracted (i.e. have a positive status ) doubled from 34 projects in 29 to 67 projects in projects (4%) are being assessed, 2 projects are prepared to sign contracts (i.e. 3% as for quantity and 7% of allocation), projects are being implemented (about 27% of allocation), 4 projects have been completed, 4 projects have been financially completed (3% of allocation in total). About 2% of the allocation to Priority Axis is in the phase of project assessment. That means that almost 8% of the allocation to Priority Axis has been allocated in completed calls. 29 projects have been contracted in total, out of which 22 projects are in Area of Intervention. Development of Regional Transport Infrastructure. Out of 2 projects prepared to sign contracts, 2 projects are also from Area of Intervention.. The number of projects in Area of Intervention. is relatively high thanks to the activities concerning the construction of new cycling paths or projects from the flood call for modernization of local roads and bridges. Cross Financing There are no activities within Priority Axis that could be supported through cross financing. Contribution of Priority Axis to the Fulfilment of EU Horizontal Themes In Priority Axis of ROP MS, Regional Infrastructure and Accessibility, equal opportunities influence mainly the area of transport services (Area of Intervention.3 Development of Transport Services) or projects for transport infrastructure (Area of Intervention. Development of Road Transport Infrastructure). It includes the support of activities for the modernization of transfer terminals, acquisition of lowrise public transport vehicles (trains, buses for suburban and city transport) with the assignment (in conformity with the notification of public support of the acquisition of public transport vehicles) including the requirement for a large lowrise area of vehicles. The acquisition of vehicles also included the electronic visual and acoustic information system for passengers. The terms and conditions of the call for the acquisition of buses for suburban transport included the condition that at least 5% of the annual circulation of vehicles in transport that are included in the project Through the MoravianSilesian Region by Public Transport without Barriers identifying the preferences of the client the MoravianSilesian Region shall be lowrise. Priority Axis of ROP MS, Regional Infrastructure and Accessibility, takes into account the horizontal theme of the environment namely in activities focused on the support of attractiveness of the public transport through modernization of transport terminals and fleet with emphasis on the environmental aspect. Concurrently, activities aimed at the promotion of other environmentally friendly means of transport are implemented (such as cycling). Projects get bonus points for the contribution to equal opportunities and to the environment. A total of 3 completed projects with a positive effect on equal opportunities and 8 completed projects with a positive effect on the environment were supported in Priority Axis. 59

60 Example of a Successfully Implemented Project within Priority Axis Area of Intervention:.3 Development of Transport Services Individual Area:.3.2 Acquisition of Means of Public Transport Project Title: Modernization of the Trolleybus Fleet at MDPO, a.s. Project Number: CZ../.3./.429 Subsidy Beneficiary: Městský dopravní podnik Opava, a.s. Amount of the Contracted Subsidy: CZK 24 million Project Implementation Location: Opava Project Objectives and Description: The subject of the project was to purchase six railway vehicles trolleybuses, out of which 4 x standard lowrise trolleybus and 2 x lowrise trolleybus with an auxiliary diesel aggregate (duobus). At present, MDPO, a.s. has 35 trolleybuses. The average age of vehicles is 9.8 years; the oldest cars have been in operation for more than 2 years. The project namely increased the quality and accessibility of public transport in Opava. At present, the ratio of guaranteed lowrise connections on all trolleybus lines is only 32.2%, which is not sufficient for people with limited mobility and orientation. Many trolleybuses are at the border of their service life and thus the modernization of the fleet is a necessary prerequisite for its attractiveness for the citizens of Opava and its surroundings as well as for the visitors. Project Completion Date: June 2 Major Problems Occurred and Corrective Measures Adopted No serious problems with the implementation of Priority Axis were identified in 2 within the procedure stipulated by Article 62, Section, Letter d), Item i) of Directive (EC) No. 83/26. In Area of Intervention.2 Development and Accessibility of the Ostrava Airport, a call for the railway connection to the airport was supposed to be announced in 2. The implementation of this significant projects with regard to the subsidy volume (about CZK 8 million) will be delayed by year as informed by the beneficiary the MoravianSilesian Region. In Area of Intervention.3, two calls for the acquisition of rail vehicles were announced in 2 for the only eligible applicant Czech Railways was prepared to submit the individual projects. The 6

61 allocation to railway vehicles (trains, trolleybuses, trams) is bound by the Agreement on Cooperation between the Ministry of Transport (OP Transport) and ROP MoraviaSilesia and other ROPs. Concurrently, the Agreement includes a provision on the indicative assignment of 7% of the allocation to rail vehicles (trains). The only eligible beneficiary Czech Railways asked the Managing Authority to change the purpose of the remaining unused part of the allocation to rail vehicles to the support of modernization of transfer terminals owned by the Czech Railways. The Managing Authority will consult the change proposed by the Czech Railways with the Ministry of Transport in the context of the Agreement on Cooperation between the Ministry of Transport and ROPs. 6

62 3.2 Priority Axis 2 Support for the Prosperity of the Region 3.2. Progress Achieved and Its Analysis Information on the Material and Financial Progress of Priority Axis 2 Table 23 Information on the Financial Progress of Priority Axis 2 as of 3/2/2 (in EUR) Priority Axis Priority Axis 2 Total financial resources from the operational programme (Union and domestic) Basis for the calculation of the Union s contribution (from public resources or total) Total certified eligible expenditure paid by beneficiaries Applicable contribution from public sources Share of certified eligible expenditure in the total programme financing in % 24,46,733. Public 4,557, ,533, Source: IS MSC 27, as of 3/2/2. The table contains cumulative data from the beginning of the programming period. Table 24 Indicators of Priority Axis 2: Advancement of Regional Prosperity NCI Code EU Code / Lisbon Indicator title Indicator Type 55 Core 39 Output 555 Result 5545 Result 556 Result 52 Core 34 Output 65 Result Unit of Source measure Total number of supported projects focusing on sustainable development and increasing the attractiveness of towns and cities Gestor number OP Number of supported projects focusing on the support of education Gestor number OP Number of supported projects focusing on the support of social services Gestor number OP Number of supported projects focusing on the support of healthcare Gestor number OP Number of supported projects focusing on the development of tourism The total area of recovered and revitalized objects in cities number area in 2 m Gestor OP Gestor OP Target value Value Attained Baseline 4. Planned 9 9 Attained Baseline Planned Attained Baseline 4. Planned Attained Baseline Planned Attained Baseline 3. Planned Attained , ,57.89 Baseline ,2 74,2 Planned 25 Total 62

63 5222 Core 35 Result 6352 Result Number of newly created jobs within projects for the development of tourism Attained number Gestor of jobs OP number CSO 63 Result 652 Result The total number of newly Gestor built or reconstructed beds number OP The total area of revitalized unused or neglected areas (brownfields) area in ha Gestor OP ³ 2 52.³ Baseline Planned Visitors of the region number of overnight stays Attained 2,36.,928.,85.,745.5,745.5 Baseline 2,65. 2,36.,928.,85. 2,65. Planned 24 2,4 Attained Baseline Planned 3 3 Attained Baseline Planned Source: MSC 24 as of 5//2 Source: MSC 24B generated as of 3/3/2 (data fixed as of 28/2/2) Notes: The target is defined for the whole programming period 2 Out of which 3 jobs were for men and 6 for women 3 Out of which 23 jobs were for men and 29 for women In 2, there was a significant increase in the reached value of Indicator 5.5. Number of Projects in Cities to 58.9% thanks to the fact that 49 projects were completed in 2. The indicator is fulfilled by 96.67% with projects that are being implemented. Projects supporting education have the largest share in the indicator. The least fulfilled is Indicator (support of healthcare). The estimated fulfilment of this indicator is up to 5% with regard to the planned allocation and size of the prepared projects. The value area indicator of objects (65 ) is low due to the low number of completed projects. However, this indicator was fulfilled by about 7% with regard to the commitment of beneficiaries in projects approved as of 3/2/2. The indicator of the area of brownfields (65.2) is fulfilled by 6% (3.8ha; other 38ha represent the aliquot part of the value of the indicator to the part of the allocation transferred to the JESSICA Holding Fund) with regard to the commitment of beneficiaries in projects recommended for financing as of 3/2/2. As of 3/2/2, 4 projects in the field of tourism were completed, i.e. 6.47% of the target value of the Number of projects in tourism (Indicator 5.2.); the total number of projects is 42, including projects with concluded contract (i.e. almost 5% of the target value of Indicator 5.2.). The indicators of the number of new or reconstructed beds in accommodation facilities (63..) as well as the indicator of newly created jobs in tourism (52.2.2) reached the fulfilment of 54%, or 65% in completed projects, the indicator of the number of new or reconstructed beds will be fulfilled almost to a double with consideration to projects that are being implemented. The number of newly created jobs will also be fulfilled. However, the unfavourable development of the indicator monitoring the number of overnight stays of visitors in the region (63.5.2) continues; it is lower than the baseline value of 25 by 5.5%. The decrease in the number of overnight stays, however, is a general trend caused by the decline in tourism the value of this indicator dropped by almost 8.7% in CR between 25 and 2. The decrease as against 25 in other NUTS II (with the exception of NUTS II Northwest) was even greater than in the MoravianSilesian Region. 63

64 Priority Axis 2 Qualitative Analysis The following table, No. 2, provides an overview of funds tied to projects with signed contracts in relation to the allocation to the relevant area of intervention. Most funds EUR 36.2 million (over 5% of the allocation and increase by 29 percentage points as against 29) are tied to projects contracts in Area of Intervention 2.2 Development of Tourism. The greatest share of contracted funds for allocation is in Area of Intervention 2.3 Support of the Use of Brownfields, where EUR 23.7 million, i.e. almost 7% of the allocation to this area of intervention, has been contracted; however, EUR 2 million is intended for the transfer of funds to the JESSICA Holding Fund. In Area of Intervention 2. Infrastructure of Public Services, there was an increase in the volume of contracts by almost 3.5 percentage points as against 29. In 2, there was also a significant shift in the values of disbursed and certified funds in all areas of intervention of Priority Axis 2. In addition to the values stated in Table No. 9, other funds of Priority Axis 2 are also tied in open calls or projects in the phase of assessment and contract drafting. As of 3/2/2, about 57% of the allocation to Area of Intervention 2., or 3% in Area of Intervention 2.2, or 3 % in Area of Intervention 2.3, and about 35% of the allocation to Area of Intervention 2.4 is tied. Table 25 Financial Progress of Priority Axis 2 (EU and national sources) cumulative Area of Intervention Allocation mil. EUR Projects with issued Decision / signed Contract mil. EUR % Funds disbursed to beneficiaries mil. EUR % Certified funds submitted to EC mil. EUR % Total for Priority Axis 2 All the values in the table are cumulative, i.e. from the beginning of the programming period until 3/2/2. Source: IS MSC27, reports 2A, 252B as of 5//2. The data in the table are reported as a total of public funds. Columns a, b and c were calculated with the use of the EUR/CZK exchange rate in the amount of CZK/EUR. For status Certified funds submitted to EC has been used the exchange rate as of charging date into IS VIOLA. Status Certified funds submitted to EC includes the financial amounts without refunds. Calls in Priority Axis 2 In Area of Intervention 2. Infrastructure of Public Services, 3 calls with the total allocation of CZK 238 million were announced. 24 projects requesting CZK million were submitted. All 3 calls focused on the development of the infrastructure of social services. As of 3/2/2, a total of projects were approved for financing with a subsidy of CZK 2.9 million. Furthermore, 3 other calls announced at the end of 29 with focus on medical technology and acquisition of ambulances were completed in Area of Intervention 2. in 2 5 projects requesting the subsidy of CZK million were submitted and approved. In Area of Intervention 2.2 Development of Tourism, five calls in total were announced in 2. 7 projects requesting subsidies in the amount of CZK 27.9 million were submitted and approved in the 7th and 8th call focusing on the promotion of organization and cooperation at the level of the Northern Moravia and Silesia Tourist Region. No projects were submitted in the 9th call in this area of 64

65 intervention (focusing on the accommodation capacity for universities intended for congress tourism). Neither the th call (continuous controlled call focusing on accompanying activities related to the project of Dolní oblast Vítkovice implemented in IOP), nor the th call (continuous call focusing on the submission of projects on the basis of the approved integrated development plans of areas in priority localities defined by the Marketing Strategy of the Development of Tourism in the MoravianSilesian Region for 293) was completed as of 3/2/2 and no projects were submitted by the given date. Out of the first six calls in this area of intervention, 8 projects with the allocation of CZK 37.9 million were in the phase of contract drafting, 9 projects with the allocation of CZK million were being implemented and 4 projects with the allocation of CZK 5.76 million were completed as of 3/2/2. 3 cases when the beneficiary withdrew from the project implementation were registered 5 prior to the conclusion of the contract, 3 after the conclusion of the contract but prior to the project implementation and 5 projects were withdrawn by applicants prior to their approval. In Area of Intervention 2.3 Support of the Use of Brownfields, the 2nd call for the transfer of ROP MS funds to the JESSICA Holding Fund, administered by the European Investment Bank, was announced in 2. The only project submitted in this call was completed and certified as of 3/2/2. The administration and implementation of projects from the st call in this area of intervention announced in 28 continued. Out of projects that successfully passed the assessment as of 3/2/2, project with a subsidy of CZK.39 million was in the process of contract drafting, 3 projects with subsidies of CZK million were under implementation and 5 projects with subsidies of 27.5 were completed. The last project was withdrawn by the applicant. In Area of Intervention 2.4 Regional Marketing, the call announced in 29 with the allocation of CZK 38 million was completed in 2. project with a subsidy of CZK million was submitted and approved for financing in this call. Furthermore, another call with the allocation of CZK 3 million was announced in 2 and project requesting a subsidy of CZK million, which is now in the assessment phase, was submitted. Priority Axis 2 Implementation Analysis When compared with other priority axes, Priority Axis 2 has the most completed calls in 2 (as well as in 29) 4 in total, out of which calls were also announced in 2. A total of 32 projects were registered as of 3/2/2. The greatest interest was in the area of intervention in social services where the requirements of the registered projects exceeded the allocation to the calls announced in this area of intervention by 2 %. The calls were announced in conformity with the readiness of potential projects for the priority axis. The information on the readiness of projects was obtained on the basis of an analysis of the consulted project plans and also on the basis of the evaluation of the results of previous calls. In 2, there were calls announced in all areas of intervention of Priority Axis 2. Cross Financing Cross financing within Priority Axis 2 is possible, namely in Area of Intervention 2. Infrastructure of Public Services (in the field of education and social services) and in Area of Intervention 2.2 Development of Tourism (in the field of accommodation facilities, tourist information centres and organizations and cooperation in tourism). In addition, cross financing will be used for Area of Intervention 2.4 Regional Marketing. Cross financing is mainly used for the education of personnel related to the change in the character of the provided services or to the introduction of new services. As of 3/2/2, cross financing was used in 2 projects in total; all of these projects belong to Area 65

66 of Intervention 2. Infrastructure of Public Services, out of which projects focus on the development of educational infrastructure and 2 projects focus on the development of social services infrastructure. The overall financial volume of the subsidy intended for cross financing of these 2 projects is CZK 3,35, The number of projects with cross financing increased by 4 projects and CZK 2,99,34.7 as against the status of 3/2/29. Contribution of Priority Axis 2 to the Fulfilment of EU Horizontal Themes With regard to the evaluation of the contribution of Priority Axis 2 to the fulfilment of EU horizontal themes, we have to state that Priority Axis 2 does not have the character of an axis focusing on equal opportunities for men and women or on the improvement of the environment. However, some activities supported in this priority axis have an effect on equal opportunities namely in the area of infrastructure of public services that supports activities leading to the development of the infrastructure of social services, education and healthcare that will, among others, provide an equal access to these public services. In particular, these includes social services provided to people endangered with social exclusion (field services and services for families with children that allow parents to go back to work etc.) or improvement of the accessibility of public buildings for people with restricted mobility or orientation. The effect of the area of the environment can be mainly identified in activities concerning the regeneration of brownfields (also including less serious ecological burdens) or in activities for the development of environmentally friendly forms of tourism (cycling, hiking etc.). The projects get bonus points for the contribution to equal opportunities and the environment; in total, 36 projects with a positive effect on equal opportunities and 23 projects with a positive effect on the environment were supported within Priority Axis 2 (these are supported projects, i.e. with the status completed ). 66

67 Example of a Successfully Implemented Project within Priority Axis 2 Area of Intervention: 2. Infrastructure of Public Services Individual Area of Intervention: 2.. Development of Educational Infrastructure Project Title: Modernization of Education at SOŠ and SOU Jablunkov Project Number: CZ../2../6.373 Subsidy Beneficiary: Secondary Vocational School and Secondary Training Institution in Business and Services, Jablunkov, Školní 46, an allowance organization Amount of the Contracted Subsidy: CZK 4,73,846 Project Implementation Location: Secondary Vocational School and Secondary Training Institution in Business and Services, Jablunkov Project Objectives and Description: The aim of the project was to modernize the workstations of technical practice that correspond to the current trends in the development of the labour market with the use of modern teaching methods. The project focused on the support of better quality of practical training, on the elimination of technical and safety defects, on broadening the educational methods for teachers and on the improvement of the functionality of the workshops. The output of the project: a modern equipped object for practical training of students. Project Completion Date: 3 September 2 Major Problems Occurred and Corrective Measures Adopted No significant problems were identified in 2 within the procedure stipulated by Article 62, Section, Letter d), Item i) of Directive (EC) No. 83/26. The MoravianSilesian Regional Council accepted relevant measures (such as insistent reminders of most common mistakes at training sessions for applicants, seminars for beneficiaries on the ROP procedures and rules) in order to prevent or eliminate less serious problems arising from the implementation of Priority Axis 2 (i.e. failure to submit annexes, documenting ownership relations, specification of the budget prior to the conclusion of the contract). 67

68 3.3 Priority Axis 3 Urban Development 3.3. Progress Achieved and Its Analysis Information on the Material and Financial Progress of Priority Axis 3 Table 26 Information on the Financial Progress of Priority Axis 3 as of 3/2/2 (in EUR) Priority Axis Priority Axis 3 Total financial resources from the operational programme (Union and domestic) Basis for the calculation of the Union s contribution (from public resources or total) Total certified eligible expenditure paid by beneficiaries Applicable contribution from public sources Share of certified eligible expenditure in the total programme financing in % 2,84,87. Public 25,86,53. 25,535, Source: IS MSC 27, as of 3/2/2. The table contains cumulative data from the beginning of the programming period. Table 27 Indicators of Priority Axis 3: Urban Development NCI Code EU Code/Lisbon Indicator title Indicator Type 55 Core 39 Output 553 Output 554 Output 65 Core 29 Result 65 Result 65 Result Total number of supported projects focusing on sustainable development and increasing the attractiveness of towns and cities Number of supported development projects (increasing attractiveness) selected towns Number of supported projects for other towns Area of revered and revitalized territory in towns The total area of recovered and revitalized objects in towns Area of recovered and revitalized objects designed for the development of education (towns) Unit of measure Source Value Target value Total 25 Gestor OP number Gestor OP number Gestor OP number area in ha 2 area in m 2 area in m Gestor OP Gestor OP Gestor OP Attained Baseline 2. Planned Attained Baseline. Planned 5 5 Attained Baseline 2 Planned 5 5 Attained Baseline.2 Planned Attained 8, , ,48.89 Baseline 8, Planned Attained 7, , , Baseline 7,63.8 2, 2, Planned 5, 5, 68

69 653 Result 654 Result 652 Result Area of recovered and revitalized objects for social services and healthcare (towns) Area of recovered and revitalized objects for interest and leisure activities (towns) Area of revitalized unused or neglected areas (brownfields) in towns 2 area in m 2 area in m area in ha Gestor OP Gestor OP Gestor OP Attained Baseline 28.7 Planned 3, 3, Attained 2, ,249.4 Baseline Planned Attained Baseline Planned,, Source: MSC 24B generated as of 3/3/2 (data fixed as of 28/2/2) Notes: The target is defined for the whole programming period 2 According to the methodology of the National Coordination Authority, Indicator 65 is a superior indicator that includes the values of indicators 65, 653, 654 as well as 652 Area of recovered and revitalized objects for OVS services (towns and cities). The table above contains the fulfilment of indicators in projects that have been completed. With consideration to 3% of the share of the priority axis allocation tied by contracted projects it is possible to state that the indicators of the total number of projects (5.5., 48%), of the number of projects for other cities mediumsized cities (5.5.4, 82%), of the area of revitalized area (65.., 27%), of the area of recovered objects intended for education (65.., 7%) as well as of the area of revitalized brownfields (65.2., 7%) are being fulfilled. On the contrary, the indicator of the number of projects of selected cities IUDPs (5.5.3, 4%) and the indicator of the total area of recovered objects (65.., 9.65%) are lagging behind the contracted funds. Moreover, Indicator 65.. is fulfilled unevenly with prevalence of areas for the development of education. The fulfilment of the indicator of recovered objects in education is high thanks to the higher quality of projects focusing on the infrastructure for education, which is positive with regard to the fact that these projects contribute to a higher quality of education, even though mostly at elementary schools. So far, the indicators of Priority Axis 3 are being fulfilled mostly by projects in Area of Intervention 3.2 Subregional Centres for towns with up to 5, inhabitants, with regard to the fact that only 7 projects were completed in Area of Intervention 3.. Priority Axis 3 Qualitative Analysis Table 28 Financial Progress of Priority Axis 3 (EU and national sources) cumulative Area of Intervention Allocation mil. EUR Projects with issued Decision / signed Contract mil. EUR % Funds disbursed to beneficiaries mil. EUR % Certified funds submitted to EC mil. EUR % Total for Priority Axis 3 All the values in the table are cumulative, i.e. from the beginning of the programming period until 3/2/2. Source: IS MSC27, reports 2A, 252B as of 5//2. 69

70 The data in the table are reported as a total of public funds. Columns a, b and c were calculated with the use of the EUR/CZK exchange rate in the amount of CZK/EUR. For status Certified funds submitted to EC has been used the exchange rate as of charging date into IS VIOLA. Status Certified funds submitted to EC includes the financial amounts without refunds. Calls in Priority Axis 3 In Area of Intervention 3. Development Poles of the Region, a total of 9 projects requesting allocations of CZK million were submitted within continuous Call No for the submission of projects within IUDPs, which ended on 3/2/29. As of the end of 2, 3 projects amounting to CZK.72 million were certified, 3 projects were being implemented, project was completed and 2 projects completed financing. The allocation to the call was CZK milliard. In December 29, continuous Call No for the submission of projects within IUDPs was announced with a completion date on 3/2/2. The total allocation to the entire call is CZK.5 milliard. 7 projects amounting to CZK 9.66 million were submitted in this call in 2. The accepted projects are being assessed and submitted for approval to the Regional Council Committee. As of the end of 2, 3 projects in the amount of CZK 36.7 million were under implementation and 8 projects were recommended for financing and 6 projects were in the process of assessment. In Area of Intervention 3.2, which is intended for the support of development of smaller towns (towns with 5 to 5 thousand inhabitants), the 4th call in this area of intervention with the allocation of CZK 4 million was announced in 2. The call was open from August 2 to October 2 and a total of 49 projects requesting CZK 77.7 million were submitted. The assessment of projects in this call focusing on civic amenities and public spaces was not completed as of 3/2/2. The 3rd call focusing on education and leisure, which ended in January 2, had 82 applications requesting CZK 93.9 million submitted. 5 projects with subsidies of CZK million passed the assessment the conclusion of contracts for the projects in the call was delayed due to the municipal elections in October 2. As of 3/2/2, one of these projects for CZK 5.53 million was completed, the remaining 49 projects were in the process of contract drafting. Priority Axis 3 Implementation Analysis In Area of Intervention 3. Development Poles of the Region, statutory cities with more than 5 thousand inhabitants submitted projects in accordance with the approved integrated urban development plans, either oriented on zones or themes. The zoneoriented IUDPs of Ostrava focus on the development of transport, tourism and leisure in the zone surrounding the city centre and the themeoriented IUDPs focus on the priority of economic development, social integration, environment, accessibility and mobility as well as the comprehensive theme of an attractive city. The IUDP of the city of Karviná solves the marked zone with a wide range of activities. The cities of FrýdekMístek, Opava and Havířov selected IUDPs with the theme Attractive Cities that focus on the support of the development of public spaces, culture, sports and leisure (in addition to that, IUDP Opava includes the development of tourism and recovery of neglected localities). As of 3/2/2, the cities of Opava, FrýdekMístek, Havířov and Karviná had the major half of the total allocation in projects that were under implementation. The implementation of both IUDPs in Ostrava had been significantly delayed: one project had been completed and only 2 projects were under implementation. In Area of Intervention 3.2, the trend of the first two calls was confirmed in both completed calls in 2. The number of submitted applications for subsidy significantly exceeded the call allocation and the interest in investments into education and leisure supported by the 3rd call was greater, both 7

71 from the aspect of the number of applicants and the total requested subsidy as against projects of the 4th call for civic amenities and public spaces. Projects focusing on education and leisure were also more successful in assessments than projects for civic amenities and public spaces (about 62.2% from the aspect of the number of projects and 54.5% from the aspect of the requested subsidy, as compared to 55% or 26% in the 2nd call for civic amenities and public spaces). Cross Financing Cross financing may be mostly used in Priority Axis 3 to cover expenses related to investments in the infrastructure for educational and social activities and for the operating costs of facilities for social services for the period of year after their opening. Cross financing was not used in 2. Contribution of Priority Axis 3 to the Fulfilment of EU Horizontal Themes With regard to the evaluation of the contribution of Priority Axis 3 to the fulfilment of EU horizontal themes, we have to state that Priority Axis 3 does not have the character of an axis focusing on equal opportunities for men and women or on the improvement of the environment. However, some activities supported in this priority axis have an effect on equal opportunities (namely in the area of improving the movement of people with impaired mobility, improving the access of disadvantaged groups to education, in the field of services for families with children that allow parents to go back to work, or in increasing the prevention of sociopathological phenomena and recovery of deprived city quarters, including activities aimed at the elimination of the risk of social exclusion) as well as on the improvement of the environment (such as regeneration of brownfields and expansion of greenery). Projects get bonus points for the contribution to equal opportunities and the environment; in total, 9 projects with a positive effect on equal opportunities and 27 projects with a positive effect on the environment were supported within Priority Axis 3. Example of Successfully Implemented Projects within Priority Axis 3 Area of Intervention: 3. Development Poles of the Region Project Title: Reconstruction of the square of 8. pěšího pluku Project Number: CZ../3../2.5 Subsidy Beneficiary: Statutory city of FrýdekMístek Amount of the Contracted Subsidy: CZK,4, Project Implementation Location: FrýdekMístek Project Objectives and Description: The subject of the project was to modernize the public space situated in the centre of Místek and transform it into a city boulevard. An area of 23,5 m2 was revitalized thanks to the project implementation. The project included the modernization of the road, construction of 248 new parking spaces, creation of a central green lane furnished with city street furniture intended for shortterm rest and for pedestrians and the expansion of bus stops on both sides of the road from one to three bus islands. The aim of the project was to change the road to a boulevard street which would calm down the quarter, increase the safety of pedestrians, ensure barrierfree crossings for pedestrians and create separated elements. Also, the speed of transit traffic was partially decreased and restricted. The project increased the capacity of parking spaces and direct connection to pavements. 7

72 Project Completion Date: 3 November 2 Area of Intervention: 3.2 Subregional Centres Project Title: Sports Complex at Frýdecká Český Těšín Project Number: CZ../3.2./.8 Subsidy Beneficiary: the city of Český Těšín Amount of the Contracted Subsidy: CZK 66,327,6.48 Project Implementation Location: Český Těšín Project Objectives and Description: The subject of the project was to build a new multipurpose sports complex in place of the dilapidated and unused premises for sports activities. The new complex is intended for schools, nonprofit organizations and general public. The complex includes the following: a football pitch with benches, athletic oval with four lanes, a sprint stretch, a sector for shotputting, a sector for high jump, a sector for throwing the cricket ball, a landing area, two basketball courts, a volleyball court, an inline track, a climbing wall, two playgrounds with natural surface, a playground for children, a skate park, a track for BMX, a building with changing rooms and background including the basic equipment, a platform for spectators and a car park. Fire obstacles for the conditional training of voluntary firemen will be acquired. Project Completion Date: 3 July 2 72

73 Major Problems Occurred and Corrective Measures Adopted No significant problems were identified in 2 within the procedure stipulated by Article 62, Section, Letter d), Item i) of Directive (EC) No. 83/26. The integrated plans of statutory cities were under implementation to a large extent in 2 and some cities almost fulfilled the contracted allocation by the submitted projects (FrýdekMístek, Havířov, Opava). This was also caused by the pressure on the side of the Managing Authority on relevant cities that put off the fulfilment of their liabilities in the form of submitting the planned projects. This led to a large number of projects submitted in the second half of the year, which increased the demands on the staffing for the needs of assessment, namely in relation to the necessity to request additional information to the submitted projects. However, MA managed the assessment so that the course of the implementation of submitted projects was not disturbed. Nevertheless, the fulfilment of the schedule of the two integrated development plans of the statutory city of Ostrava, which tie a large amount of the allocation to Area of Intervention 3., remains problematic. The delay in the implementation of the integrated plans is almost.5 year as against the estimates from 29. The Managing Authority responded to this fact by increased supervision over the readiness of the individual projects. There were no serious problems in the implementation of projects in Area of Intervention 3.2. with regard to the high number of submitted projects, the process of the evaluation of the 3rd call was extended and the deadline for the submission of annexes to the contracts was postponed to 3 January 2 with regard to the autumn municipal elections. Majority of the recommended projects fully used this period. Subsequently, the implementation dates of majority of projects were postponed, which led to increased administrative demands on settling the related changes. 73

74 3.4 Priority Axis 4 Rural Development 3.4. Progress Achieved and Its Analysis Information on the Material and Financial Progress of Priority Axis 4 Table 29 Information on the Financial Progress of Priority Axis 4 as of 3/2/2 (in EUR) Priority Axis Total financial resources from the operational programme (Union and domestic) Basis for the calculation of the Union s contribution (from public resources or total) Total certified eligible expenditure paid by beneficiaries Applicable contribution from public sources Share of certified eligible expenditure in the total programme financing in % 58,972,383. Public 2,824, ,798, Priority Axis 4 Source: IS MSC27, as of 3/2/2 The table contains cumulative data from the beginning of the programming period. Table 3 Indicators of Priority Axis 4: Rural Development NCI Code EU Code / Lisbon Indicator title Unit of measure Source Attained Baseline 45. Planned Attained Baseline 5.63 Planned Attained 24, , ,78.23 Baseline. 24, , 5, Indicator Type 52 Output 6555 Result 655 Result Number of supported projects for rural development number Gestor OP Area of recovered and revitalized area in ha Gestor OP territory in rural districts The total area of recovered and 2 area in m Gestor OP revitalized objects in rural districts Target value Value Planned Total 25 Source: MSC 24B generated as of 3/3/2 (data fixed as of 28/2/2) Notes: The target is defined for the whole programming period The indicators of Priority Axis 4 stated in Table No. 3 are fulfilled by projects under implementation and by completed projects (Indicator and 65.5.), or by completed projects (Indicator 5.2.). With 86% of allocated funds (in projects with concluded contracts), the following was reached: o The value of 44,78.23m2 in the indicator of Area of Recovered and Revitalized Objects (65.5.), i.e. 88% of the planned value 74

75 o The number of 7 in the indicator of Number of Supported Projects for Rural Development (5.2.), i.e. 7% of the planned value o The value of.27ha in the indicator of Area of Recovered and Revitalized Territory (65.5.5), i.e. 87% of the planned value The fulfilment of the indicator of Area of Recovered and Revitalized Objects (65.5.) is related to the attained use of the allocation to approved projects; the planned values for the other two indicators (5.2., ) were exceeded. The attained values of all indicators will be further increased due to the progress of the implementation of projects with concluded contracts and projects in the 4th call that are being assessed. Priority Axis 4 Qualitative Analysis Table 3 Financial Progress of Priority Axis 4 (EU and national sources) cumulative Area of Intervention Allocation mil. EUR Projects with issued Decision / signed Contract mil. EUR % Funds disbursed to beneficiaries mil. EUR % Certified funds submitted to EC mil. EUR % Total for Priority Axis All the values in the table are cumulative, i.e. from the beginning of the programming period until 3/2/2. Source: IS MSC27, reports 2A, 252B as of 5//2. The data in the table are reported as a total of public funds. Columns a, b and c were calculated with the use of the EUR/CZK exchange rate in the amount of CZK/EUR. For status Certified funds submitted to EC has been used the exchange rate as of charging date into IS VIOLA. Status Certified funds submitted to EC includes the financial amounts without refunds. Table No. 3 shows an overview of funds tied to projects with concluded contracts, disbursed funds and certified funds in relation to the allocation to the priority axis. 86% of the allocation has been contracted, the share of disbursed funds is almost 5% and the share of certified funds reached the value of 37%. At the end of 2, 52 project applications with the total amount of the requested subsidy of CZK.247 milliard were approved out of the total number of 43 projects registered in Area of Intervention 4., requesting subsidies in the amount of CZK 4.8 milliard. The implementation of 88 projects with the total subsidy of CZK 68 million was completed. Out of which 77 projects with the total subsidy of CZK 635 million were approved in 2 (from Call 4.3) and the implementation of 43 projects with the total subsidy of CZK 378 million was completed. 7 projects from Call 4.4 requesting subsidies in the amount of about CZK 75 million are being assessed. We can state that the allocated funds in Priority Axis 4 are used without any troubles, which is the prerequisite for the fulfilment of all planned material and financial indicators. The great interest of rural municipalities in subsidies that cannot be fully satisfied within this programming period is and has been a positive aspect of Priority Axis 4. 75

76 Calls in Priority Axis 4 One call was announced in 2 Call No. 4.4 Rural Development for the distribution of the remaining part of the allocation in the amount of about CZK 5 million. It is a call for a limited group of beneficiaries and projects, in which projects that did not succeed in the previous calls for rural development (4.3) could be submitted as well as projects for which applicants for subsidy received subsidies from the programmes for the support of project documentation preparation announced in 28 and 29 by the MoravianSilesian Region. Call 4.4 was announced in August 2 and 74 projects requesting subsidies in the amount of CZK 84 million were registered. The assessment process was not completed by the end of 2. Priority Axis 4 Implementation Analysis Priority Axis 4 registered the largest number of projects 43 in total with regard to other priority axes. The total number of 95 applicants (some applicants submitted more than project) included 54 municipalities, 6 associations of municipalities, 6 organizations established by a municipality and 6 nongovernment nonprofit organizations. The average size of the projects with respect to the total expenses per project is about CZK 3 million; projects with the value of CZK 8 to 9 million represent the largest group (23 projects ranging from CZK 7 to million). The submitted projects were both small (3 projects requesting subsidies up to CZK 2 million) and largescale projects near the maximum potential subsidy amount of CZK 5 million (there were only projects with a subsidy above CZK 4 million). The total number of applicants in the calls in Area of Intervention 4. confirmed the great interest in the subsidy and high absorption capacity in this area of intervention, particularly of municipalities. Cross Financing Cross financing may be mostly used in Priority Axis 4 to cover expenses related to investments in the infrastructure for educational and social activities and for the operating costs of facilities for social services for the period of year after their opening. However, the applicants in Priority Axis 4 have not used the possibility of cross financing yet. Contribution of Priority Axis 4 to the Fulfilment of EU Horizontal Themes Priority Axis 4 does not have the character of an axis focusing on equal opportunities for men and women or on the improvement of the environment. However, some activities supported in this priority axis have an effect on equal opportunities (namely in the area of improving the movement of people with impaired mobility, improving the access of disadvantaged groups to education, in the field of services for families with children that allow parents to go back to work, or in increasing the prevention of sociopathological phenomena) as well as on the improvement of the environment (such as regeneration of brownfields and expansion of greenery). The projects get bonus points for the contribution to equal opportunities and to the environment; in total, 33 projects with a positive effect on equal opportunities and 65 projects with a positive effect on the environment were supported within Priority Axis 4. Priority Axis 4 Rural Development, similarly to Priority Axis 3 Urban Development, takes into consideration the NSRF Strategic Objective IV: Balanced Territorial Development. The axis supports a comprehensive development of rural municipalities complementarily to the Rural Development Programme (financed by EAFRD), including the recovery of land, infrastructure for healthcare and social services, leisure, cultural and sports activities with direct connection to NSRF Strategic Objective IV. 76

77 Example of Successfully Implemented Projects within Priority Axis 4 Area of Intervention: 4. Rural Development Project Title: Multipurpose miniplayground in the municipality of Rybí Project Number: CZ../4../3.65 Subsidy Beneficiary: municipality of Rybí Amount of the Contracted Subsidy: CZK 2.7 million Project Implementation Location: Rybí Project Objectives and Description: The subject of the project was to build a multipurpose miniplayground in the municipality of Rybí. The playground is used for ball sports and as an icerink in winter. At the same time, a peripheral pavement with locking tiles was built to be used as a bench. The implementation of the project contributes to the development of sports and social activities of the inhabitants of the municipality and its vicinity. Project Completion Date: September 2 77

78 Area of Intervention: 4. Rural Development Project Title: Reconstruction, Modernization and Adaptation of the Elementary School in Čeladná Phase IV Gymnasium Extension Project Number: CZ../4../.24 Subsidy Beneficiary: municipality of Čeladná Amount of the Contracted Subsidy: CZK 47 million Project Implementation Location: Čeladná Project Objectives and Description: The subject of the project was to build a modern object for the new gymnasium, including the technical, social and hygienic facilities. The object includes a playing area that fully meets the requirements of all hall sports. The construction also included an auditorium, announcer studio, facilities for trainers, social, hygienic and technical facilities, a clubroom and a fitness centre. In addition to the sports activities, the new gymnasium may be also used for various cultural events, balls, children s shows, carnivals, performances etc. The part of the project also includes the provision of a barrierfree access for physically disabled people. Project Completion Date: June 2 78