Laura Polverari, Rona Michie

European Structural and Investment Funds Journal, Volume 5 (2017), Issue 4, Page 299 - 308

The 2014-20 European Structural and Investment Funds regulations include provisions which strengthen the legal framework for examining and handling complaints under the ESI Funds. For the first time, the regulations require EU Member States to provide effective arrangements for examining complaints under their ESI Fund programmes (in Article 74(3) of the Common Provisions Regulation). However, provisions on how such complaints should be dealt with remain vague. This article examines some of the elements such complaints handling systems should include, proposes an analytical framework to assess the effectiveness of such systems, and asks whether imposing more stringent requirements on Member State authorities in this area could further exacerbate the already contested administrative cost of implementing Cohesion policy.

Giorgio Centurelli

European Structural and Investment Funds Journal, Volume 5 (2017), Issue 4, Page 309 - 311

New innovative instruments intended to help address concerns about administrative capacity have been introduced in 2014-20 in the Italian public administrations involved in managing ESI Fund programmes. The Plans for Administrative Reinforcement (PRA) are operational strategies which set clear timelines for improvements in administrative processes, and are monitored closely and have been given high political priority. The strategies involve taking steps to improve the availability of human resources, training and introduce the simplification of procedures. After a successful evaluation of the first phase, the PRAs have now entered a second phase which is being widened to include administrative responsibilities outside ESI Funds. The success of the PRAs has also been highlighted by the European Commission as being important in the discussions about administrative capacity taking place in regard to the post-2020 period.