Participants | 2014 Support Materials MS

No. It is not necessary to keep the previously recorded result data for participants that re-join the same operation. Only data associated with the initial entry and final exit date are required. Note however, that the system should ensure that any reported indicators including data for a first result are updated accordingly and that the revised results are transmitted to the Commission through the SFC. 

Indicators marked with two asterisks in Annex I of the ESF regulation are those for which information to be collected is considered as sensitive, according to Art. 8 of the 95/46/EC directive.These are the following common output indicators:

• "migrants, participants with a foreign background, minorities (including marginalised communities such as the Roma);
• “participants with disabilities”;
• “other disadvantaged”.

As well as the immediate and longer-term result indicators:

• “disadvantaged participants engaged in job searching, education/training, gaining a qualification, in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving”; and
• “disadvantaged participants in employment, including self-employment, six months after leaving”.

Both the immediate and longer-term result indicators on disadvantaged (“disadvantaged participants engaged in job searching, education/training, gaining a qualification, in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving”, and “disadvantaged participants in employment, including self-employment, six months after leaving”) should only include participants who have been recorded in at least one of the following common output indicators (note that people may cumulate several disadvantages:

• participants who live in jobless households;
• participants who live in a single adult household with dependent children;
• migrants, people with a foreign background, minorities (including marginalised communities such as the Roma);
• participants with disabilities; or
• other disadvantaged.

For participants that at the start date (when joining an ESF operation) are neither unemployed nor inactive (i.e. they are in employment) the immediate result indicators “participants in education and training” and “participants gaining a qualification” can apply. Any person counted in one or both of these indicators and who was also disadvantaged (living in a jobless household, single parent, migrant/minority, disabled or other disadvantaged) would also be counted under the immediate result indicator “disadvantaged participants engaged in job searching, education/training, gaining a qualification, in employment, including self-employment”.

For the purpose of reporting common output indicators it is enough to record the educational level of participants as falling in one of the three categories required for indicators (ISCED 1-2, ISCED 3-4 and ISCED 5-8). However, it may be useful to maintain in the monitoring system information on the specific ISCED level of the participant, for example, to support the use of programme-specific indicators based on particular education levels or for evaluation purposes (see section 5.5.1 of the Annex D of the EC guidance for further details).

The common output indicator “above 54 years” does not cover participants aged 54, it only includes persons who are 55 or older when joining the operation. Please note that it is recommended that the full date of birth (day/ month/year) is recorded in order to calculate the age of the participants. Moreover, in order to check the completeness of the data it may be useful to have participants recorded in one of the three age categories (below 25 years old; 25-54 years old; above 54 years old).

Participants living in a rural area should be counted as “other disadvantaged” only when the area in which they reside is recognised nationally as disadvantaged. This means that in 2017 a person may be reported as homeless or from a rural area (or even both) and as other disadvantaged at the same time. Note that it should be ensured that the same criteria and definitions are applied across all ESF programmes in the country. Thus, a clear definition and appropriate guidance should be provided to all organisations in charge of data collection (e.g. project promoters or beneficiaries) in order to ensure consistency of data (see section 4.3 section of Annex D of the EC guidance on monitoring and evaluation).

The common output indicator on participants living in rural areas refers to the situation of participants at the date they start the operation. The fact that a participant relocates to another area (rural or not) during an operation is not relevant to this indicator and does not have to be recorded for monitoring purposes (see page 61 of Annex D of the Practical guidance, which has a specific note on this).

The common output indicator “employed, including self-employed” and the result indicators relating to “participants in employment” do not include any requirement in terms of the minimum number of hours. The definition of employment used for the common indicators is taken from the EU Labour Force Survey which refers to “any work for pay or profit during the reference week, even for as little as one hour”. As a consequence, all jobs which are in line with the definition provided in the EC guidance document on monitoring and evaluation (Annex C1) should be recorded.

The groups to be covered under the indicator “Other disadvantaged” are established by a combination of common and national definitions.

Two groups should be considered:

• Persons with an education level of ISCED level 0 (i.e. persons who have not completed ISCED level 1 and who are beyond the customary exit age of ISCED level 1) should always be counted under “other disadvantaged”;
• It is recommended that persons who are homeless or affected by housing exclusion are counted under “other disadvantaged” (provided the data are collected for the full population of participants and for all years).

Any other groups to be counted as “other disadvantaged” should be established according to national definitions and might include groups such as ex-offenders or drug addicts. Persons living in rural areas may be included as a category of “other disadvantaged” but only when the area in which they reside is recognised nationally as disadvantaged (and if the data are collected for all participants and all years). For this purpose, the national definition of disadvantaged rural areas might use units which are different from those in the DEGURBA classification required for the common indicator on that topic.

The categories of disadvantage adopted for the indicator should not overlap with categories of disadvantage covered by any of the common output indicators that are to be reported on an annual basis (i.e. all common output indicators except those dealing with “homeless or affected by housing exclusion” and “from rural areas” which are to be collected only once in 2017). Persons experiencing disadvantages relating to gender, employment status, age or educational achievement of at least ISCED level 1 should not, therefore, be counted as “other disadvantaged”.

It is strongly recommended to provide project promoters or bodies responsible for primary data collection with a list of the groups to be included in this category as…

Yes, a participant may be counted for more than one result indicator. In particular, one or both of the immediate result indicators related to “gaining a qualification on leaving” and “in education/training on leaving” may be combined with an immediate result indicator measuring a change in the labour market situation - either “inactive participants engaged in job searching upon leaving” or “participants in employment, including self-employment,  upon leaving”, but not both.

Indicators related to a change in labour market situation are mutually exclusive at each observation point (on leaving or six months later), but not between points, and cannot be combined. For example, the immediate result indicator “inactive, engaged in job searching upon leaving” is intended to measure the transition from inactivity to unemployment, with the definition of “engaged in job-searching” referring to the definition of “unemployed” used for output indicators, which qualifies that persons concerned should be out of work (on leaving). This indicator therefore cannot be combined with the indicator for “in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving”. If a participant who was inactive on joining subsequently takes up a part-time job and at the same time is seeking a full-time job they would be counted only as being in employment and not as newly engaged in job-searching (because they are not out of work).

For the longer-term results the indicator on “participants in employment, including self-employment, six months after leaving” cannot be combined with “participants with an improved labour market situation six months after leaving” because they cover different reference populations – respectively those who were unemployed or inactive on joining and those who were employed on joining (see Annex B in the EC guidance document).

Indicators…

Results for a participation record (i.e. a participant) should be reported after the person leaves an operation.  If the pathway is one single operation that consists of several projects (stages), then only one result can be reported, namely when the person leaves the operation at the end of the pathway. If a pathway is spread over several separate operations, then both outputs and results for each operation are to be reported separately.

In the case that a person leaves and re-enters the same operation more than once there should be only one participation record with the output indicators referring to the situation on first entry and the result indicators to the situation after the last exit and six months after that date.

For more guidance on this question, see the EC Guidance document on Monitoring and Evaluation (Section 3.1 under Reporting and Annex D section 4.1 "Participants and participation records: some basic rules).

No. Data on common indicators have to be collected and recorded for every participant - including the ones who leave the operation early.  Note that the leaving date (and therefore the point to which immediate and longer-term result indicators should apply) is always the date that the participant leaves the operation and not the planned exit date.

No. Apart from the breakdown by gender and category of region that is required for all common indicators no further breakdown is required. Only aggregate figures need to be transferred to the EC via the SFC2014.

No. Eligibility for support is not linked to monitoring and does not require a complete set of data for participants. If a person is not prepared to reveal a complete set of data he can still be supported. There are only two preconditions for someone to get supported:

• they fulfil the eligibility criteria; and
• the managing authority can document the fulfilment of the eligibility criteria of the respective operation/project (e.g. a certain employment status).

Hence, an incomplete set of data does not affect the participant’s eligibility to the support in general.

Individuals for which non-sensitive personal data (gender, employment status, age, educational attainment and household situation) are incomplete should be reported in the grand total of participants. The grand total number of supported participants (which is at least equal or higher than the total number of participants) should be reported in the framework of the AIRs (see section 3.1.1 of the EC Guidance document on Monitoring and Evaluation and section 4.7.1 in Annex D).

The obligation to collect and store data on individual participants in operations (micro-data) applies to all personal information required for the common indicators, including those dealing with special categories of personal data according to Article 8 of Directive 95/46/EC (i.e. sensitive data). There is no derogation in this sense in the CPR (Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013). It is recommended that managing authorities liaise and discuss with national data protection supervisors/authorities in order to set up the provisions and framework for successful and timely data collection of all required monitoring data.

In addition, a managing authority may decide to establish a system based on consent through which participants can refuse to provide personal information on variables dealing with special categories of personal data (i.e. sensitive data) that are required for indicators marked with “**” in Annex I of the ESF Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013) (i.e. those related to migrants, participants with a foreign background, minorities, disability, and other disadvantaged). In these cases participation records may be left without personal sensitive information, but there should be documented evidence of the attempt of collection.

No. The obligation to collect and store data on individual participants in operations (micro-data) also covers sensitive personal data; there is no derogation in this sense foreseen in the regulations (Regulation (EU) No. 1303/2013 and Regulation (EU) No. 1304/2013). Estimates based on the opinion of project providers will not be accepted.

A change from employed to self-employed does not necessarily imply an improvement in the labour market situation of the individual concerned according to the definition of the indicator. For each case, all criteria set out in the definition should be checked irrespective of whether the participant is employed or self-employed. 

No. The definition of improved situation on the labour market is limited to the following criteria (provided in Annex C1 of the EC Guidance document on Monitoring and Evaluation):

“Persons who are employed when entering ESF support and who, following the support, transited from precarious to stable employment, and/or from underemployment to full employment, and/or have moved to a job requiring higher competences/skills/ qualifications, entailing more responsibilities, and/or received a promotion 6 months after leaving the ESF operation”.

Thus, participants who better meet the requirements of the labour market or increase their salary, but have not experienced any change in position, hours worked or range of activity, are not to be counted as “participants with an improved labour market situation six months after leaving”. If you want to monitor the change in meeting the requirements of the labour market it is suggested to set up programme-specific indicators to do so.

If the Managing Authority allows for it, the organisation responsible for the qualification (e.g. the training provider) can certify the corresponding change in the competence of participants.

There are no specific requirements in relation to the “competent body”. The competent body could be the institution delivering the qualification or the national body entrusted with the formal examination. 

The indicator on “participants gaining a qualification on leaving” uses the EQF definition of a qualification which requires that training outcomes are formally assessed according to “given standards”. However, there is no specific requirement to link these standards to EQF levels. Standards should be defined in relation to specific training courses and may be applied on a national, Operational Programme and/or project level. Programme-specific indicators can be elaborated using EQF levels if required. 

According to the European Qualifications Framework definition, a qualification is “a formal outcome of an assessment and validation process which is obtained when a competent body determines that an individual has achieved learning outcomes to given standards”.  

The main criterion is that the participants in an ESF operation need to pass a formal examination which attests the knowledge, skills and competence acquired on completion of the learning process. Participants who are given simple attendance certificates at the end of a course should not be counted in the indicator “Participants gaining a qualification upon leaving”. It is recommended to define "qualification" in the national context on national, Operational Programme and/or project level. 

All common result indicators (immediate and longer-term) measure changes in the situation of participants compared to their situation before starting on an ESF operation. In the case that a participant continues in training after the end of a period of ESF supported training then whether or not they should be counted under the immediate result indicator "participants in education/training upon leaving" depends on whether they were in education or training before starting on the ESF supported part of their training. Only participants who were not in education or training before starting the ESF supported training should be counted. See definitions and further guidance Annex C1 and Annex D of the EC Guidance document on Monitoring and Evaluation.

Participants who have not successfully completed ISCED level 1 should be treated in different ways depending on their age in relation to the customary exit age for ISCED level 1 (nationally defined but typically 10-12 years old):

• Those who are below the customary exit age should be considered as if ISCED level 1, and therefore recorded under the indicator for ISCED levels 1 and 2.
• Those who are above the customary exit age should be considered as ISCED level 0 and be recorded as “Other disadvantaged” and not counted in any of the educational attainment indicators (see Annex C1 and section 5.6.4  of Annex D of the EC Guidance document on Monitoring and Evaluation).

No. Only the aggregate figures for the indicator (i.e. total broken down by gender and category of region) are required to be reported in the AIR. However, it is recommended to maintain information in the monitoring system that identifies the relevant category (or categories) of disadvantage that applies to each participant that is considered as “other disadvantaged”. This would in fact be imperative in the case that programme-specific indicators are established in respect of particular groups addressed by the programme.

In the case of multiple interventions that are considered to provide direct support it is necessary to ensure that participants are counted only once per operation. An individual benefiting from support provided by different interventions which are funded by the same operation should only be counted once (for each indicator). The start date (which is the reference for the common output indicators) is the date on which the person started the first intervention and the leaving date (which is the reference for the common result indicators) is the date on which the person left the last intervention. If the interventions are part of different operations, the same individual should be counted under each operation separately (see section 4.1.3 in Annex D of the EC Guidance document on Monitoring and Evaluation).

Output indicators should cover persons benefitting directly from the ESF support under the respective investment priority. Events that aim to contribute to programme functioning rather than to develop human capacity do not benefit individuals directly, but the programme as a whole. Also, the expenditure (cost of the meeting) is not earmarked to support individuals, but to support the programme. Hence the people attending the event should not be considered as participants.

Participants need to be defined on the basis of the objective of the operation and how it is targeted. Output indicators should cover persons benefitting directly from the ESF support under the respective investment priority. Therefore, depending on the objective of the operation students or teachers/counsellors might be counted as participants, but this can only be ascertained on a case by case basis:

• Case 1: Operation provides training to career guidance counsellors in order to improve, expand (or create) career guidance services in schools. The service is then open to all students on demand. This is capacity building, individual students are not targeted.
  • Counsellors should be counted, students should not.

• Case 2:Operation aims to improve school-to-work transition of students with a migrant background living in a deprived area. Counsellors are trained to deal with the specific barriers faced by this group and there is a target to provide assistance to a particular number or proportion of the affected students in the area and expenditure is allocated accordingly. Students are selected individually on the basis of their disadvantaged situation and expenditure is earmarked accordingly.
  • Students should be counted as participants, but not the counsellors as they are not the target group and no results at individual level are expected for them.

According to the EC Guidance document on Monitoring and Evaluation (section 3.1): “Only those persons who can be identified and asked for their personal data (i.e. gender, employment status, age, educational attainment, household situation) and for whom specific expenditure is earmarked shall be reported as one participant.”

The completeness requirement combined with the earmarked expenditure requirement means that persons participating in open-door events or benefitting from un-personalised e-services should not be counted as participants.  Therefore, data collection should be limited to targeted support that is designed to directly benefit selected identifiable individuals (i.e. offered to a defined target group, excluding interventions for the general public and “open door” events).

Outputs and results for operations mainly consisting of this type of activities could be measured through the use of programme-specific indicators such as: number of events, number of hits on web-pages, registered users, feedback questionnaires, etc.

Yes. Reporting on the full set of common indicators listed in Annex I of the ESF Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013) is required for all IPs supported by the ESF  (see also section 3.1 of the EC Guidance document on Monitoring and Evaluation). The only exception relates to Technical Assistance priority axes.

However, not all data have to be collected by asking participants. Where possible, the use of already available administrative data is recommended so as to minimise administrative burden. For operations targeting particular groups for which it is clear and certain that all participants have specific characteristics (e.g. employed), participation records in the monitoring database can be completed without asking the participant (e.g. auto-filled fields). Any such treatment should be documented and justified.

Fields recording irrelevant data should be completed with “0” (see definitions in Annex C and the “reference population” for each of the result indicators in Annex B of the EC Guidance document on Monitoring and Evaluation). For example, the immediate result indicator dealing with participants engaged in job-searching on leaving refers only to participants who were inactive on joining. Data for this indicator do not need to be collected directly from participants who were employed or unemployed on joining and the fields recording these results can be completed with 0.

Note that it is not possible to report values for indicators as “not applicable”. Each participant must count either 1 or 0 towards each of the non-sensitive indicators (although for indicators on personal sensitive data, “non-response” values can be recorded).

Finally, in addition to the obligatory common indicators, Member States may also elaborate programme-specific (output and result) indicators which can…

For output indicators, information about personal characteristics of participants (gender, age, level of education, household situation, and information about possible disadvantages such as disability) should be collected only once and should reflect the situation on the date that they enter an operation (i.e. on the first day that participants take part in ESF supported operation). At the same time, it is required to collect information about their current (i.e. when entering the operation) labour market status and, for those who are inactive, whether they are currently in education or training. This information may be collected at some point before the start date (e.g. on registration) but any variables which might change (e.g. employment situation, household situation) should be verified on the start date.  

Subsequently, only changes regarding the labour market and the educational situation of the participants should be monitored (e.g. whether they found a job or started seeking for one, whether they have gained any qualifications as a result of the operation, and whether or not they are in education or training). For YEI supported operations it is also required to record whether the participants completed the intervention (planned activities) or not and whether they received an offer. This information has to be collected for each participant when leaving an operation (i.e. on the exit date or within 4 weeks of that point).

The above represents two sets of information to be collected for every participant – one when entering the operation and one when leaving. The numbers of participants in each situation are aggregated on an annual basis at the level of investment priority to produce the indicator values that should be reported in each AIR.

Additionally, for representative samples of participants, a further set of observations describing their labour market and educational situation six months after leaving has to be…

For monitoring purposes there is no flexibility as regards the completeness requirement. In order for a participant to be counted, information should be complete for all non-sensitive personal variables: gender, employment status, age, level of education and household situation.

The only variables that can be incomplete are those dealing with special categories of personal data (i.e. sensitive data) that are required for indicators marked with “**” in Annex I of the ESF Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013) (i.e. those related to migrants, participants with a foreign background, minorities, participants with disabilities, and other disadvantaged). For these variables, if the participant refuses to provide the information then it can be left empty but the managing authority should maintain documentary evidence that they have attempted to collect the information (see section 5.6 in Annex D of the EC Guidance document).