There is no specific definition for the type of action plan needed here. Overall, there should be a concrete plan for the reuse of the rehabilitated land (the reuse can be achieved beyond 12 months).
The indicator relates to the enterprises targeted (forecast) and benefiting from the non-financial support. Potentially benefiting enterprises should not be counted. Only actual beneficiaries should be reported.
In the case of job creation in the enterprises supported, this should be reported as a result indicator.
‘Source of data’ shall describe the organisation/institution that produced/aggregated the data for the given result indicator.
Explanations on the method of estimation of indicator data are among the elements that should be found in the methodological document prepared by the managing authority in accordance with the provisions of Article 13 (2) CPR.
From the DG REGIO perspective, it is imperative that programmes make an attempt to estimate the targets and the baselines for the actions expected under the relevant specific objectives in order to understand the context and the scale of the GHG reductions envisaged. A very significant financial effort will be made to support the Green Deal using EU budget funding, and reducing GHG emissions is of the highest policy priority. Not having baselines and targets in initial programmes will undermine the Commission’s presentation of the justification for the EU budget to the Council and the European Parliament in the early year of the 2021-2027 programme period. For that reason, we must ask that the best is made to estimate the baseline and targets for relevant specific objectives.
The basis for estimating the targets could be the experience with similar actions in 2014-2020, while taking into account any changes in actions planned for support or other contextual elements. Where you have information on unit costs, and these are relevant for the different actions you are planning to finance in future, then this would be a reasonable starting point.
We recall that the performance framework methodology provides the possibility to outline the data, evidence and assumptions used in selecting indicators and calculating baselines, milestones and targets as relevant. The uncertainty surrounding the lack of information on the projects to later be selected could be set out in the methodology.
Afin de remplacer l’indicateur RCO99, nous avons créé pour la période 2021-2027 un groupe d’indicateurs complémentaires (RCO26/RCO36/RCO37). Pour le type de sites que vous mentionnez, nous recommandons le recours à l’indicateur RCO36.
Nous souhaitons attirer votre attention sur les textes législatifs et réglementaires mentionnés dans les fiches indicateurs RCO107/RCR47/RCR103, en particulier les références à la Directive relative aux déchets (« Waste Framework Directive » ; 2008/98/EC) du 19 Novembre 2008.
Nous recommandons l’utilisation de l’indicateur RCO26 dans le cas que vous mentionnez.
Pour le FEDER et le Fonds de Cohésion, tous les programmes doivent être couverts.
Nous vous invitons à consulter les dispositions de l’Article 17(3)(d)(ii) du projet de RDPC.
In 2021-2027 the performance framework mechanism will function differently than in 2014-2020. All outputs shall have milestones and targets to track overall performance. There is no prima facie obligation for the financial coverage by output indicators. However, it is anticipated that the expanded list of common outputs and the use of programme common indicators will lead to very high coverage of investments by output indicators.
The regulation does not set a minimum requirement on the coverage of output indicators. There should be some flexibility to avoid that a common indicator might be needed to cover marginal or isolated actions (not covered by more widely relevant indicators). The PF methodology (Article 13) talks about the criteria applied in selecting indicators. The budget covered by the indicators proposed will be a relevant criteria. The scale of the investment effort by specific objective (SO), the homogeneity or diversity of actions and the relevance of common or result indicators will be others. In the case of a SO with a significant budget (absolute or relative) and homogeneous actions, it could be expected that close to 100% of the budget is covered by indicators. In the case of a SO with a small budget covering diverse actions, a lower coverage could be justified.
The 50%+ minimum percentage for PF indicator coverage in 2014-2020 is not a relevant comparator for the period 2021-2027. That provision was specifically linked to the sub-set of indicators used in the 2014-2020 PF to inform the performance review and performance reserve. Other indicators (common and specific) also existed with targets set outside the 2014-2020 PF.
