provisions, targets and reliable added value criteria related to performance and the absorption capacity of partner countries, that should be duly reflected in the management of the different aid operations and delivery modes; 15. Acknowledges recurrent weaknesses of the Commission's ex ante checks system and recalls the Commission to implement measures to avoid the accounted failure of certain ex ante controls; notes that the Court underlined that in some error cases the Commission had sufficient information from its information systems to prevent, detect and correct before making the expenditure, and the estimated level of error would have been consequently 1,8 % lower; considers the new concept of expenditure verification in the new Terms of Reference adopted by the Commission as a useful way to remedy deficiencies in the implementation of the control system; 16. Notes the less prudent approach applied in 2017 by DG DEVCO in its sixth ‘Residual Error Rate’ analysis, notably for the calculation and extrapolation of errors due to the fact that a very limited number of on-the-spot checks and examination of procurement procedures were included in the 2017 annual review, leading as a result to the issuance of a reservation limited to the scope of grants in direct management (with EUR 82,96 million at risk); recognizes the steady efforts carried out so far to reduce the estimated level of error below the 2 % materiality threshold of errors; stresses, however, that achieving this objective should not lead to a blurred vision of the regularity and legality of operations, which would also prevent the comparability of results over several years; calls on all stakeholders to avoid competing methodologies of assessing estimated error levels, in order to present a reliable picture of the situation and to increase confidence and fairness both in the control work performed and in the general control systems;

#### Risk management

17. Recalls that the regular monitoring of high risk factors (external, financial and operational) and their adequate quantification, is a key-prerequisite for a good financial management and quality expenditure and for developing the credibility, sustainability and reputation of the Union interventions; encourages DG DEVCO to continue refining its processes according to risks and financial volumetry and, to adapt conditionalities according to different levels of development, countries risk profiles and governance frameworks; 18. Highlights the need to regularly make evolving the DG DEVCO’ s risk mapping or matrix to the emergence of new forms of assistance instruments and facilities within the EU tool kit, like the blended finance, dedicated trust funds and financial partnerships with other international institutions or multilateral development banks;

#### Evaluation and reporting component

19. Invites DG DEVCO to improve significantly its monitoring, evaluation and performance reporting arrangements to ensure that key indicators established in the different performance systems are systematically monitored and that reliable and comprehensive information is provided to policy makers on a timely basis; calls for a long term evaluation including data gathering, researches, analysis in order to improve the key indicators; believes that undermining performance monitoring and results evaluation is detrimental to public accountability;