EN Official Journal of the European Union L 38/1

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/207

of 20 January 2015

laying down detailed rules implementing Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the models for the progress report, submission of the information on a major project, the joint action plan, the implementation reports for the Investment for growth and jobs goal, the management declaration, the audit strategy, the audit opinion and the annual control report and the methodology for carrying out the cost-benefit analysis and pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1299/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the model for the implementation reports for the European territorial cooperation goal

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of 17 December 2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (1), and in particular Article 52(4), the second and the fifth paragraphs of Article 101, the second paragraph of Article 106, and Articles 111(5), 125(10) and 127(6), thereof,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1299/2013 of 17 December 2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on specific provisions for the support from the European Regional Development Fund to the European territorial cooperation goal (2), and in particular Article 14(5) thereof,

After consulting the Coordination Committee for the European Structural and Investment Funds,

Whereas:

(1) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 288/2014 (3) lays down provisions necessary for the preparation of programmes. In order to ensure implementation of the programmes financed by the European Structural and Investment Funds (the ‘ESI Funds’), it is necessary to lay down further provisions for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. To facilitate a comprehensive view and the access to those provisions, those provisions should be set out in one implementing act.

(2) The model for the progress report on implementation of the Partnership Agreement should set out uniform conditions for presenting information required in each part of the progress report in order to ensure that the information provided in the progress report is consistent and comparable and can, where necessary, be aggregated. To this end and taking into account that all information exchanges between Member States and the Commission should take place electronically through a system established for that purpose, the model should also define the technical characteristics of each field, including the format of the data, the input method and the character limits. The character limits proposed for the text fields are based on the needs of the most comprehensive reports.

(3) To comply with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, the model for the progress report is divided into five parts. Part I sets out the information and assessment required for all the European Structural and Investment Funds. Part II sets out information and assessment required in the progress report on the Youth Employment Initiative. The information set out in Parts III, IV and V of the model for the progress report should be provided for the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Cohesion Fund where, in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 111(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, Member States with no more than one operational programme per Fund have opted to include the information required by Article 50(5) of the same Regulation and the information referred to in points (a), (b), (c) and (h) of the second subparagraph of Article 111(4) of that Regulation in the progress report on implementation of the Partnership Agreement instead of in the annual implementation reports submitted in 2017 and 2019 and in the final implementation report. Where such information has already been provided in Part I or II of the progress report, it should not be repeated in Part III, IV or V, as all information should be submitted once only.

(4) Major projects represent a substantial proportion of EU spending and are of strategic importance for achieving the EU strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. To ensure uniform application it is necessary to provide a standard format for submitting the information requested for the approval of major projects. The information specified within this model should provide sufficient assurance that the financial contribution from the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund will not result in a substantial loss of jobs in existing locations within the Union.

(5) A cost-benefit analysis, including an economic analysis, a financial analysis and a risk assessment is a prerequisite for the approval of a major project. A methodology for carrying out the cost-benefit analysis should be developed based on recognised best practices and with a view to ensuring consistency, quality and rigour, both in carrying out the analysis and in its assessment by the Commission or independent experts. The cost-benefit analysis of major projects should show that the project is desirable from an economic point of view and that the contribution from the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund is needed for the project to be financially viable.

(6) To ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of Article 106 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 it is necessary to set out a format of the model for the joint action plan. Taking into account that all information exchanges between Member States and the Commission should take place electronically through a system established for that purpose, the model should also define the technical characteristics of each field, including the format of the data, the input method and the character limits.

(7) As the reporting requirements for the Investment for growth and jobs goal and for the European territorial cooperation goal are not identical, it is necessary to set out two models for the implementation reports, one for operational programmes under the Investment for growth and jobs goal and one for cooperation programmes under the European territorial cooperation goal. Nevertheless it should be ensured that where reporting requirements are the same or similar for the two goals, the content of the models is harmonised to the extent possible.

(8) A model for the annual and final implementation reports should set out uniform conditions for presenting the information required in each part of the reports. This will ensure that the information provided is consistent and comparable, and can, where necessary, be aggregated. To this end and taking into account that all information exchanges between Member States and the Commission should take place electronically through a system established for that purpose, the model should also define the technical characteristics of each field, including the format of the data, the input method and the character limits. The character limits proposed for the text fields are based on the needs of the most comprehensive reports.

(9) In order to comply with the requirements of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 for the annual implementation report under the Investment in growth and jobs goal, whereby different types of information are to be reported depending on the year in question, the model is divided into three parts in order to set out clearly the information required for each year's report. Part A sets out the information required every year starting from 2016, Part B sets out additional information to be provided in the reports submitted in 2017 and 2019 and in the final reports and Part C sets out information to be provided in the report submitted in 2019 and in the final report, in addition to the information set out in Parts A and B. In accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 111(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, Member States with no more than one operational programme per Fund may include certain information in the progress report instead of the annual implementation reports submitted in 2017 and 2019 and the final implementation report. It is necessary to identify this information in the model to ensure uniform application of those provisions.

(10) Pursuant to Article 50(9) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, a citizen's summary of the content of the annual and final implementation reports should be made available to the public. It should be uploaded as a separate file in the form of an annex to the annual and final implementation reports. No specific model is envisaged for the citizen's summary, thus allowing Member States to use the structure and formatting they consider most appropriate.

(11) To harmonise standards for the preparation and presentation of the management declaration for which a managing authority is responsible pursuant to point (e) of the first subparagraph of Article 125(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, it is necessary to set out uniform conditions for its content in the form of a standard model.

(12) To harmonise standards for the preparation and presentation of the audit strategy, the audit opinion and the annual control report for which an audit authority is responsible pursuant to Article 127(4) and the first subparagraph of Article 127(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, a model should be provided setting out uniform conditions for the structure, and specifying the nature and the quality of the information to be used in their preparation.

(13) In order to allow for the prompt application of the measures provided for in this Regulation, this Regulation should enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Model for the progress report

The progress report on implementation of the Partnership Agreement referred to in Article 52(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 shall be drawn up in accordance with the model set out in Annex I to this Regulation.

Article 2

Format for submission of the information on a major project

The information required for the approval of a major project, as referred to in points (a) to (i) of the first paragraph of Article 101 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 shall be submitted in accordance with the format set out in Annex II to this Regulation.

Article 3

Methodology for carrying out the cost-benefit analysis

The cost-benefit analysis referred to in point (e) of the first paragraph of Article 101 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 shall be carried out in accordance with the methodology set out in Annex III to this Regulation.

Article 4

Format of the model for the joint action plan

The content of the joint action plan referred to in the first paragraph of Article 106 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 shall be determined in accordance with the model set out in Annex IV to this Regulation.

Article 5

Model for the implementation reports for the Investment for growth and jobs goal

The annual and final implementation reports for the Investment for growth and jobs goal, as referred to in Article 111 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 shall be drawn up in accordance with the model set out in Annex V to this Regulation.

Article 6

Model for the management declaration

The management declaration referred to in point (e) of the first subparagraph of Article 125(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 shall be submitted for each operational programme in accordance with the model set out in Annex VI to this Regulation.

Article 7

Models for the audit strategy, the audit opinion and the annual control report

1. The audit strategy referred to in Article 127(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 shall be established in accordance with the model set out in in Annex VII to this Regulation.

2. The audit opinion referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph of Article 127(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 shall be drawn up in accordance with the model set out in Annex VIII to this Regulation.

3. The annual control report referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph of Article 127(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 shall be drawn up in accordance with the model set out in Annex IX to this Regulation.

Article 8

Model for the implementation reports for the European territorial cooperation goal

The annual and final implementation reports for the European territorial cooperation goal, as referred to in Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1299/2013 shall be drawn up in accordance with the model set out in Annex X to this Regulation.

Article 9

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 20 January 2015. For the Commission The President Jean-Claude JUNCKER

(1) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320.

(2) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 259.

(3) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 288/2014 of 25 February 2014 laying down rules pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund with regard to the model for operational programmes under the Investment for growth and jobs goal and pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1299/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on specific provisions for the support from the European Regional Development Fund to the European territorial cooperation goal with regard to the model for cooperation programmes under the European territorial cooperation goal (OJ L 87, 22.3.2014, p. 1).

ANNEX I MODEL FOR THE PROGRESS REPORT PART I Information and assessment required for all the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) 1. Changes in the development needs in the Member State since the adoption of the Partnership Agreement (Article 52(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) ) (a) General description and assessment of the changes in the development needs, including a description of changes in the development needs identified by new relevant country-specific recommendations adopted in accordance with Articles 121(2) and 148(4) of the Treaty. (b) Other elements, where relevant. <type='S' maxlength=24500 input='M'> ( 2 ) 2. Progress towards achievement of the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, as well as of the Fund-specific missions through the contribution of the ESI Funds to the thematic objectives selected, and in particular in respect to the milestones set out in the performance framework for each programme, and to the support used for climate change objectives (Article 52(2)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) (a) A description and assessment of the progress made in achieving the national Europe 2020 targets (3) and of the contribution of the ESI Funds to that end, with reference to the milestones set out in the performance framework, and to the support used for climate change objectives, where appropriate. (b) A description and assessment, with reference to the milestones set out in the performance framework, and to the support used for climate change objectives, where appropriate, of how the ESI Funds have contributed to delivering on the thematic objectives and of the progress made in achieving the expected main results for each of the thematic objectives as set out in the Partnership Agreement, including where appropriate, a description of the contribution of the ESI Funds in achieving economic, social and territorial cohesion, with reference to the milestones set out in the performance framework for each programme. (c) Where applicable, a description of the contribution of the ESI Funds to new relevant country-specific recommendations. (d) Where applicable, a description of how changes in the development needs have been addressed by the ESI Funds. (e) For the 2019 report only: a summary analysis of the data in Table 2 including an assessment of the reasons for the failure to achieve the milestones and of the measures that will be taken to address them. (f) Other elements, where relevant. <type='S' maxlength=52500 input='M'> Table 1 Support used for climate change objectives Fund A. Support used for climate change objectives in the Partnership Agreement B. Support used for climate change objectives (4) Percentage of support used compared to the Partnership Agreement (% B/A) ERDF <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> Cohesion Fund <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> ESF (5) <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> EAFRD <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> EMFF <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> TOTAL <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'>

Table 2 For 2019 report only — Achievement of milestones based on the assessment of the Member State Programme Priority Fund (6) Category (7) of region Thematic (7) objective Achievement of milestones (yes/no) Union support <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='C' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> 3. For 2017 report only — Actions taken to fulfil the ex ante conditionalities set out in the Partnership Agreement (Article 52(2)(c) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) Where appropriate, general information and assessment whether the actions taken to fulfil the applicable ex ante conditionalities set out in the Partnership Agreement not fulfilled at the date of adoption of the Partnership Agreement have been implemented in accordance with the timetable established. <type='S' maxlength=10500 input='M'> Applicable general ex ante conditionalities which were completely unfulfilled or partially fulfilled Criteria not fulfilled Action taken Deadline (date) Bodies responsible for fulfilment Action completed by the deadline (Y/N) Criteria fulfilled (Y/N) Expected date for full implementation of remaining actions, if applicable Commentary (for each action) <type='S' maxlength=500 input='G'> <type='S' maxlength=500 input='G'> <type='S' maxlength=1000 input='G'> <type='D' input='G'> <type='S' maxlength=500 input='G'> <type='C' input='M'> <type='C' input='M'> <type='C' input='M'> <type='S' maxlength=2000 input='M'> Action 1 Action 2

Applicable thematic ex ante conditionalities which were completely unfulfilled or partially fulfilled Criteria not fulfilled Action taken Deadline (date) Bodies responsible for fulfilment Action completed by the deadline (Y/N) Criteria fulfilled (Y/N) Expected date for full implementation of remaining actions, if applicable Commentary (for each action) <type='S' maxlength=500 input='G'> <type='S' maxlength=500 input='G'> <type='S' maxlength=1000 input='G'> <type='D' input='G'> <type='S' maxlength=500 input='G'> <type='C' input='M'> <type='C' input='M'> <type='C' input='M'> <type='S' maxlength=2000 input='M'> Action 1 Action 2 4. Implementation of mechanisms to ensure coordination between the ESI Funds and other Union and national funding instruments and with the European Investment Bank (EIB) (Article 52(2)(d) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) <type='S' maxlength=14000 input='M'> (a) An assessment of the implementation of the coordination mechanisms laid down in the Partnership Agreement and, if applicable, of any problems encountered in their implementation. (b) Where applicable, a description of adjusted and new coordination mechanisms. (c) Other elements, where relevant. 5. Implementation of the integrated approach to territorial development, or a summary of the implementation of the integrated approaches that are based on the programmes, including progress towards achievement of priority areas established for cooperation (Article 52(2)(e) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) (a) General commentary and assessment. <type='S' maxlength=14000 input='M'> (b) In relation to Article 15(2)(a)(i) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 — Overview of implementation of Community-led local development. <type='S' maxlength=7000 input='M'> (c) In relation to Article 15(2)(a)(i) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 — Overview of implementation of integrated territorial investments, where appropriate. <type='S' maxlength=7000 input='M'> (d) In relation to Article 15(2)(a)(ii) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, where appropriate, overview of implementation of macro-regional strategies and sea basin strategies. <type='S' maxlength=7000 input='M'> (e) In relation to Article 15(2)(a)(iii) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, where appropriate, overview of the implementation of the integrated approach to address needs of geographical area most affected by poverty or of target groups at highest risk of discrimination or social exclusion. — A description of the actions taken to address the specific needs of geographical areas most affected by poverty or of target groups at highest risk of discrimination or social exclusion. — A description of the results achieved in addressing the needs of these geographical areas/target groups. <type='S' maxlength=7000 input='M'> (f) In relation to Article 15(2)(a)(iv) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, where appropriate, overview of implementation to address demographic challenges of areas which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps. <type='S' maxlength=7000 input='M'> 6. Where appropriate, actions taken to reinforce the capacity of the Member State authorities and beneficiaries to administer and use the ESI Funds (Article 52(2)(f) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) <type='S' maxlength=14000 input='M'> 7. Actions taken and progress achieved towards a reduction in the administrative burden for beneficiaries (Article 52(2)(g) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) <type='S' maxlength=14000 input='M'> 8. The role of the partners referred to in Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 in the implementation of the Partnership Agreement (Article 52(2)(h) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) (a) A description and assessment of the role of the selected partners in the preparation of the progress report, with reference to the Partnership Agreement. (b) A description and assessment of the involvement of the selected partners in the implementation of programmes, including participation in the monitoring committees of the programmes. (c) Other elements, where relevant. <type='S' maxlength=21000 input='M'> 9. A summary of the actions taken in relation to the application of horizontal principles and policy objectives for the implementation of the ESI Funds (Article 52(2)(i) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) (a) A summary of the actions taken in relation to the application of horizontal principles to ensure the promotion and monitoring of these principles in the different types of programme, with reference to the content of the Partnership Agreement: (1) gender equality, non-discrimination, accessibility for persons with disabilities; (2) sustainable development (environmental protection, resources efficiency, climate change mitigation and adaptation, biodiversity and risk prevention). (b) A summary of arrangements implemented to ensure mainstreaming of horizontal policy objectives, with reference to the content of the Partnership Agreement. (c) Other elements, where relevant. <type='S' maxlength=14000 input='M'> PART II Information and assessment on the Youth Employment Initiative (for the purposes of Article 19(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (8) ) 10. Implementation of the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) (Article 19(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013) (a) A general description of the implementation of the YEI, including how the YEI has contributed to the implementation of the Youth Guarantee and also including concrete examples of interventions supported in the framework of YEI. (b) A description of any problems encountered in the implementation of the YEI and measures taken to overcome these problems. (c) An assessment of the implementation of the YEI with regard to the objectives and targets set and to the contribution to implement the Youth Guarantee. <type='S' maxlength=14000 input='M'> PART III Information and assessment to be provided for cohesion policy if use is made of the option provided by Article 111(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 to include certain elements of the annual implementation reports in the progress report — to be provided in 2017 and 2019 11. Additional information and assessment which may be added depending on the content and objectives of the operational programme (Article 111(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, included where necessary to complement the other sections of the progress report) 11.1 Progress in implementation of the integrated approach to territorial development, including development of regions facing demographic challenges and permanent or natural handicaps, sustainable urban development, and community led local development under the operational programme. <type='S' maxlength=3500 input='M'> 11.2 Progress in implementation of actions to reinforce the capacity of Member State authorities and beneficiaries to administer and use the Funds. <type='S' maxlength=3500 input='M'> 11.3 Progress in implementation of any interregional and transnational actions. <type='S' maxlength=3500 input='M'> 11.4 Progress in the implementation of measures to address the specific needs of geographical areas most affected by poverty or of target groups at highest risk of poverty discrimination or social exclusion, with special regard to marginalised communities and persons with disabilities, long term unemployment and young people not in employment including, where appropriate, the financial resources used. <type='S' maxlength=3500 input='M'> PART IV Information and assessment on the implementation of the YEI in case use is made of the option provided by Article 111(4) of Regulation (EU) of No 1303/2013 — to be provided in 2019 (9) 12. Implementation of the YEI (Article 19(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013) (a) A description of the main findings of the evaluation referred to in Article 19(6) of Regulation (EU) 1304/2013 assessing the effectiveness, efficiency and impact of the joint support from the ESF and the specific allocation to the YEI, including for implementing the Youth Guarantee. (b) A description and assessment of the quality of employment offers received by YEI participants, including the disadvantaged, those from marginalised communities and those leaving education without qualifications. (c) A description and assessment of progress of YEI participants in continuing education, finding sustainable and decent jobs or moving into apprenticeship or quality traineeship. <type='S' maxlength=14000 input='M'> PART V Information and assessment to be provided for cohesion policy if use is made of the option provided by Article 111(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 (included where necessary to complement the other sections of the progress report) — to be provided in 2019 13. Programme contribution to achieving the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (Article 50(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) Information on and assessment of the programme contribution to achieving the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. <type='S' maxlength=17500 input='M'> (1) Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320). (2) Legend for the characteristics of fields: type: N = Number, D = Date, S = String, C = Checkbox, P = Percentage input: M = Manual, S = Selection, G = Generated by system maxlength = Maximum number of characters including spaces (3) For EAFRD, the description and assessment shall be made towards the targets set by Union priority, as the contribution to Europe 2020 strategy is structured around the six Union priorities (4) Cumulative, in EUR, based on eligible expenditure declared to the Commission with the cut-off date of 31 December of the previous year. (5) This also includes the YEI resources (YEI specific allocation and matching ESF support). (6) For the purpose of this table, the YEI (specific allocation and matching ESF support) is considered as a fund. (7) Not applicable to EAFRD and EMFF. (8) Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European Social Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 470). This part is only to be filled out by Member States with YEI eligible regions in accordance with Article 16 of this Regulation. (9) This part is only to be filled out by Member States with YEI eligible regions in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013.

ANNEX III Methodology for carrying out the cost-benefit analysis 1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES 1.1. The objective of a cost benefit analysis (hereinafter referred to as ‘CBA’) in the context of Cohesion Policy is to support the major project assessment in order to: — assess whether the major project is worth co-financing (from an economic point of view); — assess whether the major project needs co-financing (from a financial point of view). 1.2. A CBA shall be: — carried out as soon as possible in the project preparation phase, usually at the end of the preliminary design stage of the project; — viewed as an element of a major project application to be taken into consideration in conjunction with other documents prepared for major projects including those containing other information referred to in Article 101 (1) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. 1.3. A CBA shall comply with the following principles: — CBA must be performed against predetermined policy objectives; — CBA requires to define the relevant social context and perspective (local, regional, national, transboundary, global); — CBA requires a common measurement unit (usually monetary); — CBA requires a comparison of a scenario of the new investment with a scenario without the new investment (incremental analysis (1)); — CBA requires to state a reference period relevant for the project; — CBA requires consideration of residual values of investment; — CBA requires a risk assessment to deal with uncertainty. 1.4. A CBA for a major project shall include the elements set out below: (1) Presentation of the context; (2) Definition of objectives; (3) Identification of the project; (4) Results of feasibility studies with demand and option analysis; (5) Financial analysis; (6) Economic analysis; (7) Risk assessment. 2. ELEMENTS OF THE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS 2.1. Presentation of the context and definition of objectives, identification of the project, feasibility of the project with demand and option analysis 2.1.1. Presentation of the context This assessment requires the definition of the social, economic, political and institutional context. The key features to be described relate to: (1) the socio-economic conditions of the country/region that are relevant for the project; (2) the policy and institutional aspects, including existing economic policies and development plans with their policy objectives; (3) the current infrastructure endowment and service provision; (4) the perception and expectations of the population with relation to the service to be provided. 2.1.2. Definition of project's objectives Clear objectives shall be defined for the project in order to verify that the investment responds to an existing need and to assess the results and the impact of the project. As far as possible the objectives should be quantified through indicators with baselines and target values. The definition of the objectives shall be used to identify, where possible and appropriate, the project benefits in order to assess contribution of the project to welfare and to achieving the specific objectives of the priority axes of the operational programme(s). 2.1.3. Identification of the project The identification of the major project shall take place taking into account the definition of a major project set out in Article 100 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 and as well as the following principles: (1) the project needs to be clearly identified as a self-sufficient unit of analysis, that is, technical lots, administrative or financial phases that cannot be regarded as being operational in themselves, shall be analysed within the CBA together with other phases comprising a major project. (2) the impact area, final beneficiaries (2) and relevant stakeholders whose welfare counts in the aggregation of net benefits shall be taken into account. (3) the body responsible for implementation is identified and its technical, financial and institutional capacities analysed. 2.1.4. Feasibility of the project with demand and option analysis Feasibility studies, which normally cover the following aspects: demand analysis; option analysis; available technology; the production plan (including the utilisation rate of the infrastructure); personnel requirements; the scale of the project, location, physical inputs, timing and implementation, phases of expansion and financial planning; environmental aspects, climate change mitigation aspects (GHG emissions), resource efficiency and resilience to climate change impacts and natural disasters, shall be considered in the cost benefit analysis (where applicable). It shall be taken into account that: (1) Feasibility analysis identifies the potential constraints and related solutions with respect to technical, economic, environmental and climate change mitigation and adaptation, regulatory and institutional aspects. A project is feasible when its design satisfies the technical, legal, financial and other constraints relevant to the nation, region or specific site. Several project options may be feasible. A summary of results of feasibility studies must be presented in the CBA. CBA must be consistent with the information presented in feasibility studies. (2) Demand analysis identifies and quantifies the social need for an investment and considers as a minimum: — the current demand, by the use of models and actual data; — the forecast demand, from macroeconomic and sector forecasts and elasticity estimates of demand to relevant prices, income, and other core determinants; — supply side aspects including the analysis of existing supply and expected (infrastructure) developments; — network effect (if any). (3) Option analysis is performed to assess and compare different alternative options which are found generally feasible to meet the existing and future demand for the project and to find the best solution. Options should be compared against different criteria, including for example technical, institutional, economic, environmental and climate change aspects. The option analysis should be carried out in two steps; the first step looks at basic strategic options (i.e. type of infrastructure and location for the project) and the second step at specific solutions at the technological level. If the project is implemented as a Public Private Partnership this second step of the analysis should focus on the range of output specifications that may or may not be included in the output specifications of the Public Private Partnership project. The first step is usually based on (mainly qualitative) multi-criteria analyses while the second step normally uses mainly quantitative methods. Key aspects of selecting the best option: — to properly justify the solution sought, evidence is provided that the selected option is the optimal one of the various options considered during the technical feasibility study; — if different alternatives have the same, unique objective and the same or very similar externalities, it is recommended that the selection should be based on the least cost solution per unit of output produced taking into account the long term operating and maintenance costs associated with the option; — if the output and externalities are different in different options (assuming all share the same objective), the Member State is encouraged to undertake a simplified CBA for all main options to select the best option by determining which option is more favourable from a socio-economic point of view and the selection should be based on economic parameters of a project, including its Economic Net Present Value (ENPV). The simplified CBA shall be carried out based on approximate estimates of key financial and economic data, including demand, investment cost and operating costs, revenues, direct benefits and externalities, where relevant. 2.2. Financial analysis As set out in Article 101(1)(e) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, a financial analysis must be included in the CBA. The financial analysis shall include: (a) assessment of the financial profitability of the investment and of national capital; (b) determining the appropriate (maximum) contribution from the Funds; (c) checking the financial viability (sustainability) of the project. Financial analysis should, where possible and appropriate, be carried out from the point of view of the project owner and/or operator allowing to verify cash flows and guarantee positive cash balance in order to verify the financial sustainability and to calculate the indices of financial return on the investment project and on capital based on the discounted cash flows. If the owner and the operator are not the same entity, a consolidated financial analysis, which excludes cash flows between the owner and the operator, should be undertaken. Where possible and appropriate, the financial analysis should be carried out in constant prices (prices fixed at a base-year), but expected changes in relative prices should be considered as part of the risk assessment. 2.2.1. Discounted cash flow methodology, incremental method and other principles of financial analysis The financial analysis of major projects shall be carried out taking into account the rules set out in section III (Method for calculating the discounted net revenue of operations generating net revenue) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 480/2014, including: method for calculating discounted net revenue (including the reference period and the incremental method) and discounting of cash flow (including the financial discount rate in real terms). The data required to perform a financial analysis are as follows: (1) investment costs, including fixed investments, non-fixed investments including start-up costs, and, where appropriate, changes in working capital; (2) replacement costs as defined in Article 17 (a) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 480/2014; (3) operating costs as defined in Article 17 (b) and (c) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 480/2014; (4) revenues as defined in Article 16 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 480/2014; (5) source of funding including equity capital of the investor (either public or private), capital from loans (in this case loan repayment and interests are a project outflow in sustainability analysis) and any additional financial resources such as grants. In sectors where this is relevant, including the environmental sector, tariffs shall be fixed in compliance with the polluter-pays principle taking into account affordability, as set out in Section III (Method for calculating the discounted net revenue of operations generating net revenue) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 480/2014, and the full-cost recovery (3). Compliance with the full-cost recovery principle includes that: (1) tariffs should aim as far as possible to recover the capital cost, the operating and maintenance cost, including environmental and resource costs; (2) the tariff structure maximises the project's revenues before public subsidies, while taking affordability into account. Limitations of the polluter-pays principle and full-cost recovery principle in user charges and fees should: (1) not jeopardize the financial sustainability of the project; (2) as a general rule, be seen as temporary restrictions and maintained only as long as the issue of affordability of users exists. 2.2.2. Results of the financial analysis (a) Evaluation of financial profitability of the investment and national capital Financial Net Present Value (FNPV) is the sum that results when the expected investment and operating and replacement costs of the project (discounted) are deducted from the discounted value of the expected revenues. Financial Rate of Return (FRR) is the discount rate that produces a zero FNPV. The financial profitability of an investment is assessed by estimating the financial net present value and the financial rate of return of the investment (FNPV(C) and FRR(C)). These indicators compare investment costs to net revenues and measure the extent to which the project's net revenues are able to repay the investment, regardless of the sources of financing. In some cases (in the context of State Aid and private operators) the calculation of FRR(Kp) is required. Interest payments shall not be included in the calculation FNPV(C). For a project to require the contribution of the Funds: FNPV(C) before the EU contribution should be negative and FRR(C) should be lower than the discount rate used for the analysis (except for some projects falling under State aid rules for which this may not be relevant). If a major project shows high financial profitability (i.e. FRR(C) is substantially higher than the financial discount rate) it will, as a general rule, be considered sufficient for an investor to implement the project without Union contribution. A Union contribution may be justified only if it is demonstrated that the investment is not bankable on its own considering that the risks for an investor to implement the project e.g. highly innovative project may be too high to carry out the investment without a public grant. The financial profitability of national capital is assessed by estimating the financial net present value and the financial rate of return on capital (FNPV(K) and FRR(K)). These indicators measure the extent to which the project's net revenues are able to repay the financial resources provided by the national funds (both private and public sources). Calculation of FNPV(K) and FRR(K) requires that: — the financial resources — net of EU support — invested in the project are treated as outflows disregarding investment costs; — capital contributions are considered at the moment they are actually paid out for the project or reimbursed (in the case of loans); — interest payments are included in the table for the analysis of the return on capital (FNPV(K)); — operating subsidies are not included in the table for the analysis of the return on capital (FNPV(K)). For a project to require the contribution of the Funds: FNPV(K) with Union assistance should be negative or equal to zero, and FRR(K) should be lower or equal to the discount rate, otherwise appropriate justification has to be provided. When relevant, the return on the project promoter's capital (FRR(Kp)) should also be calculated. This compares the net revenues of the investment with the resources provided by the promoter: i.e. the investment cost minus the non-reimbursable grants received from the EU and/or the national/regional authorities. This exercise can be particularly useful in the context of State aid in order to verify that the intensity of the aid (EU and national assistance) provides the best value-for-money with the objective of limiting public financial support to what is necessary for the project to be economically or financially viable. If the project expects a substantial positive return (i.e. significantly above the national benchmarks on expected profitability in the given sector) it shows that the grant received would bring supra-normal profits to the beneficiary and therefore the Union contribution may not be justified. (b) Determination of the appropriate (maximum) contribution from the Funds Determination of the appropriate (maximum) contribution from the Funds for revenue generating projects shall be done in accordance with one of the methods for determining the potential net revenue in accordance with Article 61 (Operations generating net revenue after completion) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 and Annex V to Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 and Section III of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 480/2014 setting out rules for calculation of the discounted net revenue of operations generating net revenue. (c) Ensuring financial viability (sustainability) The financial sustainability analysis is based on undiscounted cash-flow projections. It is mainly used to show that the project will have year by year sufficient cash resources at its disposition enabling it to always cover expenditures for investment and operations throughout the entire reference period. Key aspects of financial sustainability analysis are as follows: (1) financial sustainability of the project is verified by checking that the cumulated (undiscounted) net cash flow is positive (or zero) on an annual basis and over the entire reference period considered; (2) the net cash flows to be considered for this purpose should: — take into account investment costs, all (national and EU) financial resources and cash revenues and operating and replacement costs at the moment they are paid, repayments of entity's financial obligations as well as capital contributions, interests and direct taxes; — exclude VAT unless VAT is not recoverable; — not take into account the residual value unless the asset is actually liquidated in the last year of analysis considered; (3) in the case of an operation not subject to the requirements set out in Article 61 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, or whenever negative cash-flows are projected in the future, it must be indicated how costs will be covered with a clear long-term commitment of the beneficiary/operator to provide adequate funding from other sources to ensure the sustainability of the project; (4) if projects fall within a pre-existing infrastructure, such as capacity extension projects, the overall financial sustainability of the system operator in the ‘with-project scenario’ (more than the capacity of the single extended segment) must be checked and a sustainability analysis at a system operator level must be performed and results must be taken into account in the risk assessment. 2.2.3. Financial analysis in Public Private Partnership (PPP) The following aspects shall be taken into consideration when the financial analysis is carried out for major projects implemented as PPPs: (1) The financial discount rate may be increased above the standard rate set out in Section III (Method for calculation of the discounted net revenue of operations generating net revenue after completion) of the Commission Delegated Regulation to reflect a higher opportunity cost of capital to the private investor. This higher opportunity cost should be justified by the beneficiary on a case-by-case basis, providing evidence, where possible, of the private partner's past returns on similar projects, or other relevant factual evidence. (2) In case of PPP schemes where the owner of the infrastructure is different from the operator a consolidated financial analysis, covering both the owner and operator, must be carried out. (3) Unless private partner is chosen in a fair, transparent and open competitive procedure assuring the best ‘value for money’ for public partner (4), in order to check the financial profitability of the private capital and avoid unduly high profit generated by EU support an indicator measuring the financial profitability of the invested capital to the private investor (FRR(Kp)) shall be calculated (5), comparing the net revenues accrued by the private partner with the resources provided during investment (either through equity or loans). The resulting FRR(Kp) shall be compared with national or international benchmarks on expected profitability in the given sector. 2.3. Economic analysis As provided for by Article 101(1)(e) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, an economic analysis must be included in the CBA. Economic analysis is an analysis that is undertaken using economic values, reflecting the social opportunity cost of goods and services. 2.3.1. Key steps of economic analysis The economic analysis should be carried out in constant accounting (shadow) prices and shall be undertaken taking the financial analysis cash flows as a starting point. Economic analysis includes the following steps: 1. Fiscal corrections to exclude indirect taxes (e.g. VAT, excise duties), subsidies and pure transfer payments granted by a public entity (e.g. payments from national healthcare systems) from the economic analysis. Where indirect taxes/subsidies are intended to correct for externalities, these shall be included in the economic analysis, if considered to adequately reflect the social marginal value of the related externalities and provided that there is no double-counting with other economic costs/benefits. 2. Conversion of market to accounting (shadow) prices by applying conversion factors to financial prices to correct for market distortions. If conversion factors are not available from a national planning office and in the absence of significant market distortion for simplification the conversion factor can be set at one (CF=1). Conversion factors may be higher (or lower) than unity when accounting prices are greater (or smaller) than market prices. 3. Monetisation of non-market impacts (corrections for externalities): externalities shall be estimated and valued, as appropriate, using stated or revealed preference method (e.g. hedonic pricing) or other methods. Economic analysis shall consider direct effects only in order to avoid double-counting while generally shadow pricing and monetisation of externalities account for indirect effects. Financial revenues in the form of user fees, charges and tariffs shall be excluded from the economic analysis, and replaced with estimation of the direct effects on users, either through ‘willingness to pay’ or accounting prices. User fees, charges and tariffs especially in sectors not exposed to market competition, in regulated sectors or strongly influenced by political considerations should not be used as a proxy for ‘willingness to pay’ of user. 4. Discounting of the estimated costs and benefits: once the stream of economic costs and benefits is estimated, the standard discounted cash flow methodology shall be applied using a social discount rate (SDR). On the basis of Social Rate of Time Preference (SRTP) the following benchmarks for social discount rate are estimated: 4,95 % for Cohesion Member States and 2,77 % for other Member States. For simplification as a general rule a social discount rate of 5 % shall be used as a benchmark in Cohesion Member States (Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia) and 3 % in other Member States (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom). Member States may establish a benchmark for the social discount rate which is different from 5 % or 3 %, on the condition that they: (1) provide justification for this reference on the basis of economic growth forecast and other parameters determining the SDR under the SRTP approach; and (2) ensure its consistent application across similar projects in the same country, region or sector. Information on the different benchmark shall be made available to beneficiaries and the Commission at the start of the operational programme. 2.3.2. Calculation of the economic performance indicators The following economic performance indicators (as defined below) are the key indicators of the economic analysis: (1) Economic Net Present Value (ENPV) is the main reference indicator for project appraisal. It is defined as the difference between the discounted total social benefits and costs. (2) For a major project to be acceptable from an economic standpoint the project's economic net present value should be positive (ENPV>0) demonstrating that the society in a given region or country gains from the project because the project's benefits exceed its costs and therefore, the project should be implemented. (3) Economic rate of return (ERR) is the internal rate of return calculated using the economic values and expressing the socio-economic profitability of a project. (4) Economic rate of return should be greater than the social discount rate (ERR>SDR) to justify EU support to a major project. (5) Benefit/Cost ratio (B/C) is defined as the net present value of project benefits divided by the net present value of project costs. (6) Benefit/Cost ratio should be greater than one (B/C>1) to justify EU support to a major project. The main economic benefits per sector to be considered in the economic analysis are set out in table 1. Additional economic benefits can be added if needed and justified. In some specific cases those benefits may become economic costs e.g. increased vehicle operating costs in certain road projects. Table 1 Sector/Subsector Economic benefits Water supply and sanitation (i) improved access to drinking water and wastewater treatment services in terms of availability, reliability and quality of the service (ii) improved drinking water quality (iii) improved quality of surface waters and preservation of ecosystem services due to pollution abatement (iv) resource cost savings for both producers and customers (v) improved health (vi) reduction of GHG emissions Waste management (i) reduction of health and environmental hazards (reduced contamination of air, water, soils) (ii) reduction of landfill space/costs (for waste treatment facilities) (iii) recovery of materials, energy and production of compost (avoided cost of alternative production/generation, including externalities) (iv) reduction of GHG emissions (i.e. CO2, CH4) (v) reduction of visual disamenities, noise and odours Energy Energy Efficiency projects (i) energy savings (expressed by the economic value of energy including externalities) (ii) increase of comfort (iii) reduction of GHG and non-GHG emissions Renewable Energy Sources projects (i) reduction of energy costs for substitution of the energy source e.g. by displacement of fossil fuels alternatives (expressed by the economic value of energy generated by likely displaced alternative, including externalities) (ii) reduction of GHG emissions Electricity/gas grids and infrastructure (i) increase and diversification of energy supply (value of incremental gas/electricity supplied, including externalities) (ii) increase of security and reliability of energy supply (reduction in supply disruptions) (iii) reduction of energy costs for substitution of the energy source (iv) market integration: variation in surpluses stemming from price alignment effects across places (for transmission) or time (for storage) (v) improved energy efficiency (vi) reduction of GHG and non-GHG emissions Roads, Railways, Public Transport (i) reduction in generalised costs (for movement of goods/people): — time savings — vehicle operating costs savings (ii) accident savings (iii) reduction of GHG emissions (iv) reduction of non-GHG emissions (i.e. local air pollution impacts) (v) reduction of noise emissions (e.g. some urban projects) Airports, Seaports, Intermodal (i) reduction in generalised costs (for movement of goods/people) — time savings — vehicle operating costs savings (ii) quality of service improvements (e.g. provision of airport contact gates) (iii) reduction of GHG emissions (iv) reduction of non-GHG emissions (v) reduction of noise emissions Research & Innovation (i) benefits to businesses (establishment of spin-offs and start-ups, development of new/improved products and processes; knowledge spillovers) (ii) benefit to researchers and students (new research, human capital formation, social capital development) (iii) benefits to the general public (reduction of environmental risks, reduction of health risks, cultural effects for visitors) Broadband (i) Increased take-up and improved quality of digital services, including e-Commerce, for citizens and businesses (especially in rural areas); (ii) Increased take-up and improved quality of digital services, including e-Government and e-Health, for public administration. 2.3.3. Climate change mitigation and adaptation in the economic analysis The CBA must take into account costs and benefits of the project in the context of Greenhouse Gas emissions and climate change. The quantification of the project's Greenhouse Gas emissions and the estimate of economic cost of carbon (or CO2) emissions used to monetise the externalities of such emissions shall be based on a transparent methodology aligned with the EU 2050 decarbonisation objectives. As for climate adaptation, costs of measures aiming at enhancing the resilience of the project to climate change impacts that are duly justified in feasibility studies should be included in the economic analysis. The benefits of those measures, e.g. measures taken to limit the emissions of GHG or enhance the resilience to climate change and weather extremes and other natural disasters, should also be assessed and included in the economic analysis, if possible quantified, otherwise they should be properly described. 2.3.4. Simplified economic analysis in special cases In certain limited cases where the benefits of a major project are very difficult or impossible to quantify and monetise, but where costs can be predicted with reasonable confidence, notably for major projects driven by necessity to ensure compliance with EU legislation, a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) can be performed. In such cases the appraisal shall focus on verifying that the project is the most efficient solution for the society to supply a given, necessary service at the pre-defined conditions set out. In addition, qualitative description of main economic benefits should be provided. CEA is carried out by calculating the cost per unit of ‘non monetised’ benefit and is required to quantify benefits but not to attach a monetary price or economic value to the benefits. The conditions for applying CEA are as follows: — the project produces only one project output which is homogenous and easily measurable; — this output is a crucial supply, entailing that action to secure it is essential; — the aim of the major project is to achieve the output at minimum cost; — there are no significant externalities; — there is a wide evidence of appropriate benchmarks to verify that the chosen technology meets the minimum required cost performance criteria. 2.4. Risk assessment As set out in Article 101(1)(e) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, a risk assessment must be included in the CBA. This is required to deal with the uncertainty that always permeates investment projects. Risk assessment enables the project promoter to better understand the way the estimated impacts are likely to change should some key project variables turn out to be different from those expected. A thorough risk analysis constitutes the basis for a sound risk-management strategy, which in turn feeds back into the project design. Particular attention should be paid to climate change and environmental aspects. The risk assessment shall comprise two steps: (1) Sensitivity analysis, which determines the ‘critical’ variables or parameters of the model i.e. those whose variations, positive or negative, have the greatest impact on the project's performance indicators, shall take the following aspects into consideration: — the critical variables are the ones whose 1 % variation results in more than 1 % variation of the NPV; — the analysis is carried out by varying one element at a time and determining the effect of that change on the NPV; — the switching values are defined as the percentage change the critical variable should assume to make the NPV equal to zero; — scenario analysis allowing the study of the combined impact of determined sets of critical values and in particular, the combination of optimistic and pessimistic values of a group of variables to build different scenarios, which may hold under certain hypotheses. (2) Qualitative risk analysis including risk prevention and mitigation, which shall include the following elements: — a list of risks to which the project is exposed; — a risk matrix showing for each identified risk: — the possible causes of failure, — the link with the sensitivity analysis, where applicable, — the negative effects generated on the project, — the ranked (e.g. very unlikely, unlikely, about as likely as not, likely, very likely) levels of probability of occurrence and of the severity of impact, — the risk level (i.e. combination of probability and impact). — identification of prevention and mitigation measures, including the entity in charge of preventing and mitigating the main risks, standard procedures, where appropriate and taking into account best practices, where possible, to be applied to reduce risk exposure, where considered necessary. — interpretation of risk matrix including an assessment of the residual risks after the application of prevention and mitigation measures; — In addition the risk assessment may, where appropriate (depending on project size, data availability), and should, where the residual risk exposure is still significant, include the probabilistic risk analysis, which involves the following steps: (1) Probability distributions for critical variables informing about the likelihood of occurring a given percentage change in the critical variables. Computing the probability distribution of critical variables is necessary to carry out a quantitative risk analysis. (2) Quantitative risk analysis based on Montecarlo simulation, providing probability distributions and statistical indicators for expected result, STD, etc. of project financial and economic performance indicators. The main risks per sector to be taken into account in the risk assessment are set out in Table 2. In order to assist the project promoters in preparation of qualitative risk analysis in line with this Regulation, Member States are encouraged (if they consider this appropriate and/or feasible) to develop national guidelines on valuation of certain standard project risks, and list of mitigation and prevention measures across sectors. Table 2 Sector/Subsector Specific risks Water supply and sanitation Demand risks: (i) Water consumption lower than predicted (ii) Connection rate to public sewage system slower than predicted Design risks: (iii) Inadequate surveys and investigation e.g. inaccurate hydrological predictions (iv) Inadequate design cost estimates Land acquisition risks: (v) Procedural delays (vi) Land cost higher than predicted Administrative and procurement risks: (vii) Procedural delays (viii) building or other permits (ix) utility approval (x) Legal proceedings Construction risks: (xi) Project cost overruns and delays in construction (xii) Contractor related (bankruptcy, lack of resources) Operational risks: (xiii) Reliability of identified water sources (quantity/quality) (xiv) Maintenance and repair costs higher than predicted, accumulation of technical breakdowns Financial risks: (xv) Tariff increases slower than predicted (xvi) Tariff collection lower than predicted Regulatory risks (xvii) unexpected political or regulatory factors affecting the water price Other risks: (xviii) Public opposition Waste management Demand risks: (i) Waste generation lower than predicted (ii) Waste flow control/delivery insufficient Design risks: (iii) Inadequate surveys and investigation (iv) Choice of unsuitable technology (v) Inadequate design cost estimates Land acquisition risks: (vi) Procedural delays (vii) Land cost higher than predicted Administrative and procurement risks: (viii) Procedural delays (ix) Building or other permits (x) Utility approvals Construction risks: (xi) Project cost overruns and delays in construction (xii) Contractor related (bankruptcy, lack of resources) Operational risks: (xiii) Waste composition other than predicted or having unexpectedly large variations (xiv) Maintenance and repair costs higher than predicted, accumulation of technical breakdowns (xv) Process outputs fail to meet quality targets (xvi) Failure to meet limits of emissions produced by the facility (to air and/or water) Financial risks: (xvii) Tariff increases slower than predicted (xviii) Tariff collection lower than predicted Regulatory risks: (xix) Changes of environmental requirements, economic and regulatory instruments (i.e. introduction of landfill taxes, bans on landfilling) Other risks: (xx) Public opposition Energy Demand risks: (i) Demand shortfalls (ii) Evolution of prices of different competing fuels (iii) Inadequate analysis of climatic conditions affecting the energy demand for heating and/or cooling Design risks: (iv) Inadequate design cost estimates (v) Inadequate site surveys and investigation (vi) Innovation in energy production/transmission or energy storage technology making the one in the project obsolete Land acquisition risks (vii) Land costs higher than predicted (viii) Higher costs for the acquisition of rights of way (ix) Procedural delays Administrative and procurement risks: (x) Procedural delays Construction risks: (xi) Project cost overruns and delays in construction (xii) Flooding, landslides, etc. (xiii) Accidents Operational risks: (xiv) Maintenance and repair costs higher than predicted, accumulation of technical breakdowns, for example those caused by climate change impacts (xv) Long out-of-service time for accident or external causes Financial risks: (xvi) Changes in the tariff system and/or in the system of incentives (xvii) Inadequate estimate of energy price trends Regulatory risks: (xviii) Changes of environmental requirements, economic instruments (i.e. RES support schemes, EU ETS design) Other risks: (xix) Public opposition Roads, Railways, Public Transport, Airports, Seaports, Intermodal Demand risks: (i) Traffic forecasts different than predicted Design risks: (ii) Inadequate site surveys and investigation (iii) Inadequate design cost estimates Administrative and procurement risks: (iv) Procedural delays (v) Building permits (vi) Utility approvals Land acquisition risks: (vii) Land costs higher than predicted (viii) Procedural delays Construction risks: (ix) Project cost overruns (x) Flooding, landslides, etc. (xi) Archaeological findings (xii) Contractor related (bankruptcy, lack of resources) Operational risks: (xiii) Operation and maintenance costs higher than expected Financial risks: (xiv) Tolls collection lower than expected Regulatory risks: (xv) Changes in environmental requirements Other risks: (xvi) Public opposition RDI Demand risks: (i) Development of relevant industry (demand for research results and demand for private contracted research) (ii) Evolutions on labour market (demand for university graduates and impact on demand for education services in the area) (iii) Interest of the general public different than predicted Design risks: (iv) Inadequate design cost estimates (v) Inadequate site selection or delays in completing the project design (vi) Invention of a new RDI technology making the infrastructure's technology obsolete (vii) Lack of well-established technical engineering expertise Administrative and Procurement risks: (viii) Delays in obtaining building permits (ix) Unresolved property ownership rights (x) Delays in the acquisition of intellectual property rights or higher-than-expected costs for their acquisition (xi) Procedural delays to select the supplier and sign the procurement contract (xii) Supply bottlenecks Construction risks: (xiii) Project delays and cost overruns during installation of scientific equipment (xiv) Lack of ready-made solutions to meet the needs arisen during the construction or operation of the infrastructure (xv) Delays in complementary works outside the project promoter's control Operational risks: (xvi) Lack of academic staff/researchers (xvii) Unexpected complication connected with the installation of specialised equipment (xviii) Delays in making the equipment fully and reliably running (xix) Insufficient production of research results (xx) Unexpected environmental impacts/accidents Financial risks: (xxi) Insufficient committed funding on a national/regional level during the operational phase (xxii) Inadequate estimate of financial revenues (xxiii) Failure to meet the demand from users (xxiv) Inadequate system for protection and exploitation of intellectual property (xxv) Loss of existing clients/users due to competition from other R+D centres Broadband Context and regulatory risks: (i) Change of orientation of the strategic policy (ii) Change in excepted behaviour of future private investors (iii) Change in regulations in the retail market (iv) Unsuccessful State-aid application Demand risks: (v) Lower than estimated service take-up from retail- and/or wholesale providers (vi) Low investments in ‘last mile’ network by service providers Design risks: (vii) Inadequate design cost estimates Administrative and procurement risks: (viii) Delays in project procurement (ix) Risk of not obtaining required property rights Operational and financial risks: (x) Increase in operational cost (xi) Insufficient committed funding on a national/regional level during the operational phase (xii) Loss of key personnel during project operation Formulas Formulas for financial analysis: — Financial net present value (FNPV) — Financial rate of return (FRR) Where St is the balance of cash flow at time t and at is the financial discount factor chosen for discounting at time t; i is the financial discount rate. Formulas for economic analysis — Economic Net Present Value (ENPV) — Economic rate of return (ERR) — Benefit/Cost ratio (B/C) Where Vt is the balance of net benefits (B-C) at time t, B is total benefits flow at time t, C is total social costs flow at time t, ρ t is the social discount factor chosen for discounting at time t; r is the social discount rate. (1) Where a major project consists of a new asset, the revenues and operating costs (or the benefits and costs in the economic analysis) shall be those of the new investment. (2) The population that benefits directly from the project. (3) Specific Union's legislative provisions existing for water and waste sectors (namely: Water Framework Directive and Waste Framework Directive) shall be taken into account in application of these principles. (4) Conditions should be specified in the national guidance document on PPP. (5) If private partner has been already selected; otherwise it should be described how this aspect will be assured.

ANNEX IV Format of the model for the joint action plan (JAP) Proposal for a JAP under Articles 104 to 109 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 Title of the JAP <type='S' maxlength='255' input='M'> (1) Commission reference (CCI) <type='S' maxlength='15' input='S'> A. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS A.1. Brief JAP description <type='S' maxlength='1750' input='M'> A.2. CCI of operational programme(s) <type='S' input='S'> A.3. Region(s)(NUTS) <type='S' input='S'> A.4. Member State(s) <type='S' input='G'> A.5. Fund(s) <type='S' input='S'> A.6. Total eligible cost <type='N' input='M'> A.7. Public support (2) <type='N' input='M'> A.8. Type of JAP ( ) Normal ( ) Pilot ( ) YEI [one possibility only]; <type='C' input='M'> A.9. Categorisation of operation activity Code Amount Percentage of the total cost of the operation/per dimension A.9.1. Intervention field (more than one could be used, on a pro rata calculation, where relevant) <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> A.9.2. Form of finance (more than one could be used, on a pro rata calculation, where relevant) <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> A.9.3. Territorial dimension (more than one could be used, on a pro rata calculation, where relevant) <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> A.9.4. Territorial delivery mechanism <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> A.9.5. Thematic objective ERDF/Cohesion Fund (more than one could be used, on a pro rata calculation, where relevant) <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> A.9.6. ESF Secondary Theme <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> A.9.7. Economic activity dimension (more than one could be used, on a pro rata calculation, where relevant) <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> A.9.8. Location dimension (more than one could be used, on a pro rata calculation, where relevant) <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> <type='N' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='P' input='G'> B. CONTACT DETAILS: Authority responsible for the JAP application [to be completed by the authority submitting the application] B.1. Name <type='S' maxlength='200' input='M'> B.2. Type of authority ( ) managing authority ( ) intermediate body ( ) Other designated public law body <type='C' input='M'> B.3. Address <type='S' maxlength='400' input='M'> B4. Name of contact person <type='S' maxlength='200' input='M'> B.5. Position of contact person <type='S' maxlength='200' input='M'> B.6. Telephone <type='S' input='M'> B.7. Email <type='S' maxlength='100' input='M'> Where more than one operational programme is planned to provide support to a JAP or where the JAP proposal is not submitted by a managing authority, please attach the approval of the relevant managing authority(s). C. ANALYSIS OF THE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS AND OBJECTIVES C.1. Please describe the overall problem/situation that the JAP should contribute to solve, and the needs that the JAP should contribute to fulfil, taking into account, where applicable, relevant country-specific recommendations adopted in accordance with Article 121(2) of the Treaty and Article 148(4) of the Treaty. Where relevant, use statistical data. Please explain what alternatives to the JAP were considered to address the problems identified/the needs to be fulfilled, and why they were not selected. <type='S' maxlength='17500' input='M'> C.2. On the basis of the information provided in C.1, please set out the JAP general objective and any JAP specific objectives. Type Code Objective JAP general objective<type='S' input='S'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='S' maxlength='500' input='M'> JAP specific objective JAP specific objective … C.3. Please describe the relationship between the JAP general objective and the JAP specific objectives and specify how they will contribute to solve the problems identified and the needs to be fulfilled. <type='S' maxlength='10500' input='M'> C.4. Please identify the relevant investment priorities and specific objectives of the operational programmes, to which the JAP will contribute, and describe how the JAP will contribute to achieving them. OP Priority axis Fund Investment priority Specific objective of OP <type='S' input='S'> <type='S' input='S'> <type='S' input='S'> <type='S' input='S'> <type='S' input='S'> JAP contribution to the specific objective(s) identified: <type='S' maxlength='7000' input='M'> D. FRAMEWORK OF THE JAP D.1. Please describe the intervention logic of the JAP through answering the questions below. D.1.1. What projects are envisaged to be implemented? Please describe the planned projects or types of projects (sets of similar activities with the same indicators) and the indicative timetable by using the table below. A project may be supported by more than one OP, priority axis and/or Fund and may cover more than one category of region. Where applicable, indicate whether the completion of a (type of) project is required for the start of another (type of) project within the JAP and indicate for which (type of) project(s). (Type of) project Synthetic description JAP specific objective(s) to which it contributes Planned starting date Planned end date Indicate (‘Yes’ or ‘No’) whether the completion of this (type of) project is necessary for the start of other JAP (type of) projects and if so, indicate for which (type of) projects. (Type of) Project 1 <type=N' input='M'> <type='S' maxlength='255' input='M'> <type='N' input='S'> <type='D' input='M'> <type='D' input='M'> <type='S' maxlength='255' input='M'> (Type of) Project 2 (Type of) Project 3 Information regarding the (types of) projects planned: <type='S' maxlength='7000' input='M'> D.1.2. How will the projects contribute to achieving the JAP general and specific objectives? Please justify. <type='S' maxlength='10500' input='M'> D.1.3. What are the milestones and targets for outputs and results of these projects? Several indicators are possible for one (type of) project (one line for each indicator). Please include all indicators, including those that are not used for the financial management of the JAP. Where relevant, split the indicators by priority axis, Fund, and category of region. Where a milestone has been set for an output or a result indicator, please specify it in the table. (Type of) project Indicator OP Priority axis Fund Category of region Type Used for financial management of the JAP Baseline Milestone (if any) Milestone Year Target Target Year Measurement Unit Source of data (Type of) Project 1 <type='N' input='S'> JAP-specific Indicator <type='S' maxlength='255' input='M'> Indicator from OP <type='S' input='S'> <type='S' input='S'> <type='S' input='S'> <type='S' input='S'> <type='S' input='S'> Output or result Y or N <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> type='S' input='M'> <type='S' maxlength='200' input='M'> (Type of) Project 2 (Type of) Project 3 D.2. Please describe external factors, which could have a possible negative impact on the implementation of the JAP. Where relevant, describe what mitigating measures have been foreseen. External factor Possible impact on JAP Mitigating measure(s) foreseen <type='S' maxlength='255' input='M'> <type='S' maxlength='500' input='M'> <type='S' maxlength='500' input='M'> Additional information, if necessary: <type='S' maxlength='7000' input='M'> D.3. Please attach a representation of the intervention logic of the JAP. It should clarify the causal links between the needs/problems to be solved, the objectives of the JAP, the intended results, the set of projects to be supported and their outputs (optional). < Representation > E. GEOGRAPHIC COVERAGE AND TARGET GROUP(S) E.1. Geographic coverage of the JAP. Where relevant, please justify why the JAP is concentrated in a specific area <type='S' maxlength='1750' input='M'> E.2. Target group(s) of the JAP E.2.1. Target group(s) & its definition E2.2. Total population of the target group(s) in the geographic area covered by the JAP <type='S' maxlength='1750' input='M'> <type='S' maxlength='200' input='M'> E.2.3. Comments about the target group(s), including problems faced to be addressed by this JAP, where not covered in C.1. <type='S' maxlength='3500' input='M'> F. EXPECTED IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD OF THE JAP Please note that the standard scales of unit costs (unit costs) and lump sums of the JAP may be reimbursed only if the relevant outputs and results were attained after the date of the decision of the Commission approving the JAP and before the end of the implementation period. F.1. Starting date of implementation (Please specify if it will be aligned with the date of the decision or if it will start later) <type='D' input='M'> F.2. Final date of implementation of projects (End date of projects) <type='D' input='M'> F.3. End of the implementation period of the JAP (Date of transmission of final payment claim and final report from the beneficiary to the managing authority. If some results are delayed in time and generate some payments later on, include them in this period) <type='D' input='M'> G. ANALYSIS OF THE EXPECTED EFFECTS OF THE JAP G.1. On the promotion of equality between men and women <type='S' maxlength='3500' input='M'> G.2. On the prevention of discrimination <type='S' maxlength='3500' input='M'> G.3. On the promotion of sustainable development, where appropriate <type='S' maxlength='3500' input='M'> H. IMPLEMENTING PROVISIONS FOR THE JAP H.1. Beneficiary of the JAP. H.1.1 Contact Details H.1.1.1. Name <type='S' maxlength='200' input='M'> H.1.1.2. Address <type='S' maxlength='400' input='M'> H.1.1.3. Name of the contact person <type='S' maxlength='200' input='M'> H.1.1.4. Position of contact person <type='S' maxlength='200' input='M'> H.1.1.5. Telephone <type='S' maxlength='50' input='M'> H.1.1.6. Email <type='S' maxlength='100' input='M'> H.1.2. Please justify the capacities of the beneficiary in terms of: H.1.2.1. Competence in the domain of the JAP. Please give an overview of the beneficiary's expertise in the domain of the JAP and indicate the number of staff with such expertise available within the beneficiary and allocated to the JAP). Where appropriate, provide some information on the other key partners involved and their competencies. <type='S' maxlength='3500' input='M'> H.1.2.2. Administrative and financial management capacity of the beneficiary. Please indicate EU-funded and/or comparable projects carried out by the beneficiary, which demonstrate its administrative and financial capacity in project management. In the absence of such examples, please outline the support envisaged for capacity building (training, recruitment, etc.). Please refer to institutional arrangements such as the existence of a unit capable to implement the JAP and if possible, include the proposed organisational chart for the JAP implementation (in an annex). If the JAP includes activities to be implemented by public procurement procedures, please describe the capacity of the beneficiary in this field. In case of financial corrections of EUR 10 000 or above, pertaining to support from EU Funds, in the last 10 years, please specify the corrective measures taken. <type='S' maxlength='7000' input='M'> H.2. Arrangements for steering the JAP H.2.1. Steering Committee: Please describe the planned composition of the steering committee, including through an overview of its rules of procedures and how it will carry out its tasks, and the relevance of partners, which are to take part in the committee. Please also explain whether the steering committee or its planned members played a role in the preparation of the JAP. <type='S' maxlength='7000' input='M'> H.3. Arrangements for monitoring and evaluating the JAP H.3.1. Arrangements to ensure the quality, collection and storage of data on the level of achievement of the outputs and results. Please specify the body(ies) responsible for these three arrangements, how they will ensure the quality of data collected (guidance, trainings, etc.), the frequency of collection of data, how the data will be verified, where the data will be stored, etc. Please also describe how you will ensure reporting with regard to the common indicators set out in the Fund-specific regulations at the level of investment priority or where appropriate, specific objective. <type='S' maxlength='7000' input='M'> H.3.2. Evaluation activities planned and their justification. Please specify only activities specific to the JAP. If no specific activities are planned, please justify. <type='S' maxlength='3500' input='M'> H.4. Arrangements ensuring the dissemination of information and communication in relation to the JAP and to the Funds supporting the JAP <type='S' maxlength='3500' input='M'> I. FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS OF THE JAP I.1. Costs of achieving milestones, outputs and results (please also complete the appendix on indicators) Please fill out the following tables with the indicators to be used for the financial management of the JAP, where relevant broken down by priority axis, Fund and category of region. I.1.1. Output indicators Indicator (from D.1.3) OP Priority axis Fund Category of region Milestone (if any) Target Unit cost or Lump sum amount (national currency) Resulting amount (national currency) Additional amount from update method (if any) (3) (national currency) Maximum amount = Total eligible expenditure (national currency) Maximum amount = Total eligible expenditure (EUR) (a) (b) (c) = (a) × (b) (d) (e) = (c) + (d) (f) = (e) * exchange rate <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='M'> Total <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> I.1.2 Result indicators Indicator (from D.1.3) OP Priority axis Fund Category of region Baseline Milestone (if any) Target Unit cost or Lump sum amount (national currency) Resulting amount (national currency) Additional amount from update method (if any) (4) (national currency) Maximum amount = Total eligible expenditure (national currency) Maximum amount = Total eligible expenditure (EUR) (a) (b) (c) = (a) × (b) (d) (e) = (c) + (d) (f) = (e) * exchange rate <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='M'> Total <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> I.1.3. Financial flexibility (5): please explain if financial flexibility is required and how it will be applied <type='S' maxlength='3500' input='M'> I.2. Indicative schedule of payments to the beneficiary, linked to the milestones and targets: please provide an indicative overview of the expected payments to every JAP (type of) project (in EUR), based on the information provided in table D.1.3 and section I.1 Year 1 Year 2 Year … Total: (Type of) Project 1 <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='G'> (Type of) Project 2 <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='G'> (Type of) Project 3 <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='G'> Total: <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> I.3. Financing plan by operational programme and priority axis (and Fund and category of region where relevant) OP Priority axis Fund Category of region Total eligible expenditure (national currency) Public expenditure (national currency) Total eligible expenditure (EUR) Public expenditure (EUR) (Type of) Project 1 <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> <type='N' input='M'> (Type of) Project 2 (Type of) Project 3 Total <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> The total of ‘total eligible expenditure’ shall be equal to the sum of ‘total eligible expenditure’ from tables I.1.1 and I.1.2. Where applicable, the difference between total eligible expenditure and public expenditure corresponds to the private contribution to the JAP. (1) Legend for the characteristics of fields: type: N = Number, D = Date, S = String, C = Checkbox, P = Percentage input: M = Manual, S = Selection, G = Generated by system maxlength = Maximum number of characters including spaces (2) Including the public contribution provided by the beneficiary or other entities participating in the JAP. (3) Value indicated in section A.1.10 of the Appendix. (4) Value indicated in section A.1.10 of the Appendix. (5) Financial flexibility may be applied to up to 10 % of the total allocations to outputs or to results. An indicator may be reimbursed up to 10 % in addition to its indicative maximum amount. There may be full flexibility between indicators capturing different levels of achievement of the same output or result. Appendix Description and justification of the standard scales of unit costs and lump sums used to reimburse the JAP The purpose of this appendix is to facilitate the work of the Commission in the assessment of the standard scales of unit costs (unit costs) and lump sums used to reimburse the outputs and results of the JAP. Therefore it should cover only the indicators from tables I.1.1 and I.1.2. It has to be completed indicator by indicator. (1) A.1. Indicator (see I.1.1 and I.1.2) A.1.1. Name A.1.2.1. Unit of measurement for indicator A.1.2.2. Unit of measurement for milestone/target (where relevant) A.1.3. Definition A.1.4. Source of data (nature of the supporting documents, who produces (generates), collects and records the data, where are they stored, frequency of collection/cut-off dates, validation…) A.1.5. Verification of data (who will verify, frequency of verification, method of verification): — verification of units attained — verification of the quality level attained A.1.6. Where relevant, please explain how the verification of the respect of public procurement procedures and state aid will be ensured A.1.7. Possible perverse incentives or problems due to this indicator, how they could be mitigated, level of risk A.1.8. Reimbursement based on ( ) lump sum ( ) standard scale of unit cost A.1.9. Amount (in national currency) of one unit or lump sum A.1.10 Additional amount (in national currency) from update method (if any) A.1.11. Detailed description of the update method (if any) A.1.12. Legal basis in the ESI Funds legislative framework used to justify the unit cost/lump sum A.2. Calculation of the standard scale of unit costs and lump sums A.2.1. Please specify why the proposed method and calculation is relevant for the type of projects that will be supported by the JAP: A.2.2. Please specify how the calculations to reach the amounts in A.1.9 and A.1.10 have been carried out, including in particular the assumptions made in terms of quality, or quantities. Where relevant, statistical evidence, benchmarks should be used and attached to this appendix under a format directly reusable by the Commission. A.2.3. Please also explain, where relevant: — how revenue has been/will be taken into account, — that only eligible costs have been taken into account in the calculation, — the level of cross-financing (with reference to Article 98(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013). (1) The appendix will be uploaded as a separate document in SFC2014.

ANNEX V Model for the annual and final implementation reports for the Investment for growth and jobs goal PART A DATA REQUIRED EVERY YEAR (‘LIGHT REPORTS’) (Article 50(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE ANNUAL/FINAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORT CCI <type='S' maxlength=15 input='S'> Title <type='S' maxlength=255 input='G'> Version <type='N' input='G'> Reporting year <type='N' input='G'> Date of approval of the report by the monitoring committee <type='D' input='M'> 2. OVERVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME (Article 50(2) and 111(3)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) Key information on the implementation of the operational programme for the year concerned, including on financial instruments, with relation to the financial and indicator data. <type='S' maxlength=7000 input='M'> 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRIORITY AXIS (Article 50(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) 3.1 Overview of the implementation (1) ID Priority axis Key information on the implementation of the priority axis with reference to key developments, significant problems and steps taken to address these problems <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' maxlength=1750 input='M'> 3.2 Common and programme specific indicators (Article 50(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013) (2) Data for common and programme-specific indicators by investment priority transmitted using Tables 1 to 4 below. Table 1 Result indicators for the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund (by priority axis and specific objective); applies also to Technical Assistance priority axis (3) ANNUAL VALUE ID Indicator Measurement Unit Category of region (where relevant) Baseline Value Baseline Year Target Value (2023) 2014 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Observations (if necessary) <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='N or 'S' input='G'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='N' or 'S' input='G'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='S' maxlength=875 input='M'> m w t m w t m w t m w t m w t m w t m w t m w t m w t m w t m w t

Table 2A Common result indicators for ESF (by priority axis, investment priority, and by category of region). Data on all common ESF result indicators (with and without target) shall be reported broken down by gender. For a Technical Assistance priority axis only those common indicators shall be reported for which a target has been set (4) (5) Investment priority:

ID Indicator Category of region Common output indicator used as basis for target setting Measurement Unit for baseline and target Target Value (2023) (Gender breakdown optional for the target) 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Cumulative value (calculated automatically) Achievement ratio Gender breakdown optional <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='N or 'S' input='G'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='P' input='G'> Annual Value Total M W M W M W W M M W M W M W M W M W M W M W Total M W T M W Inactive participants engaged in job searching upon leaving Participants in education/training upon leaving Participants gaining a qualification upon leaving Participants in employment including self-employment, upon leaving Disadvantaged participants engaged in job searching, education/training, gaining a qualification, in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving Participants in employment including self-employment, six months after leaving (6) Participants with an improved labour market situation six months after leaving (6) Participants above 54 of age in employment, including self-employment, six months after leaving (6) Disadvantaged participants in employment, including self-employment, six months after leaving (6)

Table 2B Result indicators for the YEI by priority axis or part of priority axis (Article 19(3), Annex I and II of the ESF Regulation) (7) ID Indicator Measurement Unit target Target Value (2023) (Gender breakdown optional for the target) 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Cumulative value (calculated automatically) Achievement ratio Gender breakdown optional <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='S' input='G'> <type='N or 'S' input='G'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' or 'S' input='M'> <type='N' input='G'> <type='P' input='G'> Annual Value total M W M W M W M W M W M W M W M W M W M W M W total M W total M W Unemployed participants who complete the YEI supported intervention Unemployed participants who receive an offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship or traineeship upon leaving Unemployed participants who are in education/training, gain a qualification, or are in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving Long-term unemployed participants who complete the YEI supported intervention Long-term unemployed participants who receive an offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship or traineeship upon leaving Long-term unemployed participants who are in education/training, gain a qualification, or are in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving Inactive participants not in education or training who complete the YEI supported intervention Inactive participants not in education or training who receive an offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship or traineeship upon leaving Inactive participants not in education or training who are in education/training, gain a qualification, or are in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving Participants in continued education, training programmes leading to a qualification, an apprenticeship or a traineeship six months after leaving (8) Participants in employment six months after leaving (8) Participants in self-employment six months after leaving (8) Inactive participants engaged in job searching upon leaving Participants in education/training upon leaving Participants gaining a qualification upon leaving Participants in employment, including self-employment upon leaving Disadvantaged participants engaged in job searching, education/training, gaining a qualification, in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving Participants in employment, including self-employment, six months after leaving (9) Participants with an improved labour market situation six months after leaving (9) Participants above 54 years of age in employment, including self-employment, six months after leaving (9) Disadvantaged participants in employment, including self-employment, six months after leaving (9)

Table 2C Programme specific result indicators for ESF (by priority axis, investment priority and by category of region, where applicable); applies also to Technical Assistance priority axis (For the YEI programme specific indicators: for each priority axis or part ther