Contents

INTRODUCTION.. 3

PART I: ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS. 5

I) The internal EU policies. 5

I.1 Improved reporting on the contribution of 2014-2020 MFF spending programmes to Europe 2020. 5

I.2 Increased focus on performance – the example of the European Structural and Investment Funds. 5

I.3. Annual reporting under Article 318 on programme implementation. 6

I.4. Management mode – implications for the MORE Frameworks. 6

1.5. Progressive performance reporting during 2014-2020: Which performance information becomes available when?. 8

II) External policies of the Union. 11

III) Concluding remarks. 12

PART II: OVERVIEW MORE FRAMEWORKS. 14

H1a Competitiveness for growth and jobs. 14

EGNOS and Galileo (European Satellite Navigation Programmes) 14

ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) 18

Copernicus (European Earth Observation Programme) 20

Nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia 25

Horizon 2020 (framework programme for research and innovation) 31

Euratom research and training programme. 37

COSME (Programme for the Competitiveness of Enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises) 41

Erasmus +. 48

EaSI (programme for employment and social innovation) 57

Fiscalis 2020. 60

Customs 2020. 63

HERCULE III 66

Pericles 2020. 68

CEF (Connecting Europe Facility) 69

Transport envelope. 69

Energy envelope. 76

ICT envelope. 79

Standards in the fields of financial reporting and auditing. 81

ISA (Interoperability Solutions for European Public Administrations) 83

ESP (European Statistical Programme) 87

EGF (European Globalisation Adjustment Fund) 90

H1b Cohesion policy. 92

ERDF (European Regional Development Fund) 92

CF (Cohesion fund) 99

ESF (European Social Fund) 104

FEAD (Fund for European Aid for the most deprived) 109

H2 Sustainable growth.. 111

CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) 111

EAGF (European Agricultural Guarantee Fund) 112

EAFRD (European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development) 116

EMFF (European Maritime and Fisheries Fund) 119

RFMOs and SFPAs. 129

LIFE (Environment and climate action) 137

Sub-programme for environment 137

Sub-programme for climate action. 143

H3 security and citizenship. 154

AMIF (Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund) 154

ISF (Internal Security Fund) 161

Justice Programme. 167

REC programme (Rights, Equality and Citizenship) 171

UCPM (Union Civil protection mechanism) 176

Europe for Citizens. 179

Food and Feed. 184

Third Health Programme. 187

Consumer Programme. 190

Creative Europe. 193

H4 Global Europe. 199

ENI (European Neighbourhood Instrument) 204

DCI (Development Cooperation Instrument) 209

EIDHR (European Instrument Democracy Human Rights) 212

All objectives except election observation missions. 212

Election Observation Missions. 215

PI (Partnership Instrument) 217

INSC (Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation) 221

IcSP (Instrument contributing to stability and peace) 223

relating to specific objectives 1 and 2. 223

relating to specific objective 3. 226

Humanitarian Aid. 228

EUAV (EU aid volunteers) 231

CFSP (Common foreign and Security policy) 232

Macro-financial assistance. 234

UCPM (Union Civil Protection Mechanism) 235

IPA II (Instrument for Pre-Accession assistance) 236

Cooperation with Greenland. 250

Instrument Turkish Cypriot Community. 252

INTRODUCTION

This Staff Working Document ('SWD' 1) is one of the two SWDs accompanying the Commission's fourth Article 318 Evaluation Report. It delivers on one of the actions promised by the Action Plan attached to last year's Art 318 Evaluation Report namely to[1]:

"(…) describe the framework for monitoring, evaluation and reporting to the end of the next MFF that results from the legal instruments supporting the next generation of programmes and the additional work of the Commission to complete the framework. For each policy area it will include the general and specific objectives of the programme, where appropriate linked to the main indicators attached to each objective, monitoring arrangements and the timing and content of evaluations and reporting. It will show how annual reporting on progress in the early implementation of the next MFF will be accompanied by continuing work on the ex-post evaluation of the performance of the current programmes. Alongside information on progress in implementation, it will show when the main evaluations of the performance of the current programme will have been completed and when and how progress and performance reporting on the 2014 -2020 programme will be made, including Commission and Member State contributions. It will indicate the timing of actions remaining to be taken to complete the framework".

The purpose of this SWD is to show how the spending programmes under the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) are equipped, through monitoring, reporting and evaluation arrangements, to measure progress in implementation and to evaluate the programmes' performance. It provides an outline of which type of information can be expected at different points in time during and after the current MFF period, including ex-post evaluations of the previous 2007-2013 MFF programmes, which will be consequently reported on in the Article 318 Evaluation Report.

This document is structured as follows:

Part I provides an analysis of the main features and structure of the monitoring, reporting and evaluation frameworks (hereinafter referred to as 'MORE frameworks') for the spending programmes under the MFF 2014-2020[2]. It highlights issues which the European Parliament and the European Council have considered important in recent Discharge Reports and in the European Parliament resolution of 25 February 2014 on the Article 318 Evaluation Report.

The analysis:

- confirms that the general objectives of main spending programmes are linked to the Europe 2020 objectives (in I.1) with a view to measuring and reporting better on the contribution of spending programmes towards the Union's main objectives as requested by the Discharge Authority.

- highlights an increased focus on the performance of the programmes in the MORE frameworks of the European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds through the so-called 'performance reserve' (in I.2). The Article 318 Evaluation Report will include information on its functioning.

- confirms that the implementation of the programmes is regularly monitored, which allows for annual reporting in the Article 318 Evaluation Report on progress in programme implementation and programme management on the basis of the performance information provided in the Annual Activity Reports of the Commission's departments (I.3).

- shows that there are differences between the MORE frameworks of programmes directly managed by the Commission or agencies and programmes under shared management by the Commission and Member States. The MORE frameworks of the latter type of programmes are far more complex, as a consequence data on implementation and performance becomes available later to the Commission, which affects the timing of reporting under Article 318 (I.4).

- gives indications to the Discharge Authority when the Article 318 Evaluation Report can be expected to start reporting on programme performance; addressing performance aspects such as effectiveness, efficiency and EU added value (I.5). It shows that, in the early years of implementation of the programmes, ex-post evaluations of the performance of the previous MFF programmes will become available. From 2017 onwards, so from four years into the current spending programmes, mid-term evaluations will be completed; typically focussing on lessons learned from the early years of implementation as well as providing first indications on progress towards the achievement of programme objectives. The mid-term evaluations provide input for the preparation of proposals for spending programmes for the next MFF. From 2020, when financial resources are spent, the final and ex-post evaluation work will start, later producing conclusions on the longer term impact, sustainability of the financing, the attainment of objectives and on issues as effectiveness, efficiency and EU-added value of the programmes.

Part II gives an overview for all spending programmes of the set-up of the MORE frameworks on which the analysis in Part I has been based. The MORE frameworks are based on the legal acts adopted by the EU legislators. The frameworks include the programmes' general and specific objectives, indicators and milestones, as well as the main monitoring, reporting and evaluation actions, their content and timing. In addition, they include the timing and content of ex-post evaluations of MFF-2007-2013 spending programmes. In particular, the overview in Part II provides for each spending programme:

- A description of the general and specific objectives of the spending programme and an indication of how progress in achieving the objectives will be measured. It gives the baseline values, indicators, intermediate milestones and 2020 targets.

- An explanation of how monitoring and reporting arrangements are set up; the actors involved; the provisions to allow tracking progress on achieving milestones and targets. The frequency of monitoring reports is given as well as the issues covered by these reports and the intended use of the available monitoring data.

- The timing of planned evaluations, their scope and coverage.

PART I: ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS

The MFF covers both spending programmes aimed at contributing to the internal EU policies as well as spending programmes contributing to the Union's external policy objectives. The European Parliament has asked the Article 318 Evaluation Report to deal separately with the internal and external programmes. In addition, the MORE frameworks of the latter spending programmes are rather different from the spending programmes contributing to the Union's internal policies. The analysis therefore deals first with the EU's internal policies (I), then with the EU's external policies (II), before presenting concluding remarks (III).

I) The internal EU policies

I.1 Improved reporting on the contribution of 2014-2020 MFF spending programmes to Europe 2020

The objectives of all the main spending programmes contributing to the internal policies of the Union are linked to Europe 2020 objectives. Indications are therefore given how the spending programmes of the European Union aim to contribute to the Union's core 2020 objectives of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. This is illustrated below with regard to the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) programme:

The CEF aims at "contributing to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, in line with the Europe 2020 Strategy, by developing modern and high-performing trans-European networks which take into account expected future traffic flows, thus benefiting the entire Union in terms of improving competitiveness on the global market and economic, social and territorial cohesion in the internal market (…)". Source: Article 3(a) CEF Regulation

In addition to the main spending programmes aiming to contribute to the Union's core objectives, the MFF also covers a number of smaller spending programmes focussing on problems not specifically related to Europe 2020, such as "Pericles 2020", which aims to prevent and combat counterfeiting and related fraud, or the "Union Civil Protection Mechanism", aiming to help public authorities when faced with natural and man-made disasters.

Linking the general objectives of spending programmes to the EU 2020 goals allows the focus to be maintained on the relevance of these programmes to the EU 2020 targets for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, which have become an integral part of the intervention logic of major spending programmes and funds. This should facilitate the identification of the contribution of spending programmes to the Union's main objectives. As a result, the Article 318 Evaluation Report should provide a report to the Discharge Authority which focuses more on the contribution of EU spending programmes to the Union's main objectives, as has been requested.

I.2 Increased focus on performance – the example of the European Structural and Investment Funds

Result-orientation has been envisaged as an essential feature of the European Structural and Investment ('ESI') Funds (comprising: the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF), the Cohesion Fund (CF), the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF). A special performance reserve of 6% has been put in place for this purpose. In 2019 the Commission will assess on the basis of the Annual Implementation Reports or progress reports submitted by the Member States whether the spending programmes succeeded in achieving the defined mid-term targets (milestones) for the end of 2018. If yes, the performance reserve will be released. If not, the amount for the non-performing activities will not be released and possibly payments will be suspended. The final achievements of targets will be assessed in 2025 and might form the basis of financial corrections.

In addition, ex-ante conditionalities have been introduced to ensure that all institutional and strategic policy arrangements are in place for effective and efficient implementation of the five ESI Funds. The fulfilment of these conditionalities should guarantee that appropriate regulatory framework, effective policies with clear objectives and a sufficient administrative or institutional capacity are available before the start of investments. Non-fulfilment of applicable ex-ante conditionalities may trigger suspension of payments by the Commission.

I.3. Annual reporting under Article 318 on programme implementation

Almost all spending programmes will present at least an annual report covering the implementation of the programme and later also progress on achieving objectives. Less frequent reporting takes place on a bi-annual basis for two spending programmes: the EaSi programme (Programme for Employment and Social Innovation) and European Globalisation Adjustment Fund.

For most spending programmes reporting begins either in 2014 covering implementation results of the same year, or in 2015 covering implementation results of the preceding year (n+1). The last year of reporting for most spending programmes is 2020 or 2021 (n+1), with some exceptions of reporting ending earlier[3]. However, for some programmes under shared management (such as the ERDF, the Cohesion Fund, the ESF, as well as the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund or the Internal Security Fund) annual reporting starts later in 2016 (n+2) and continues until 2024.

I.4. Management mode – implications for the MORE Frameworks

The MFF spending programmes are managed in various ways: Many spending programmes are managed either directly by the Commission or by its executive agencies (direct management). However, the main part of the MFF budget is spent through programmes which are implemented by bodies designated by Member States (shared management). The complexity of the spending programmes and their management modes are mirrored in the set-up of the MORE frameworks, as illustrated below.

The Horizon 2020 programme is a good example of a directly managed programme with a straightforward MORE framework.

Example 1: Horizon 2020

The monitoring and reporting system contains three main components:

1. The "CORDA Data Warehouse": A comprehensive system to collect all relevant data on the implementation of Horizon 2020 activities

2. The Commission's annual monitoring reports 2015-2020 giving a systematic overview of implementation and, as of 2018, of key achievements

3. Evaluations at EU level: 2015 (ex-post preceding programme); 2017(mid-term evaluation); and 2023 (ex-post evaluation). Key Performance Indicators focussing on results will be the main elements for the evaluations.

The MORE frameworks of programmes under shared management are more complicated. Given the higher number of actors involved in disbursing funds, in collecting data and in monitoring, additional steps are needed to aggregate the data at EU-level. As a consequence, EU-wide performance information from spending programmes under shared management becomes available later than for spending programmes that are centrally managed. This is illustrated by the example below.

Example 2: European Structural and Investment Funds

Common monitoring, reporting and evaluation rules are in place for the ESI Funds[4]. They set out the respective responsibilities of the Member States and the Commission in tracking the performance of the ESI Funds. Performance information is collected and aggregated at different levels: at the level of the partnership agreements (setting out per Member State the operational programmes that will be financed by the Funds); at the level of the individual operational programmes; and at the level of the individual projects carried out under the operational programmes.

|| Member states || The Commission

Monitoring || Project level: monitor and collect data Operational Programme level Monitoring Committees: monitor programme implementation and performance; assess AIRs and evaluations and monitor resulting actions. || As of 2016 holds annual review meetings with Member States

Planning and reporting on performance || Operational Programme level: Provide an evaluation plan Carry out an ex-ante evaluation In 2016-2023 submit to Commission annual implementation reports (AIRs); including as of 2017 (in particular in 2019) progress on achieving objectives. In 2024: final implementation report. Conduct retrospective evaluation(s) and provide a report in 2022 summarizing evaluation results. In 2024: Ex-post evaluation || As of 2016 submits each year to other institutions summary reports based on the annual implementation reports of the Member States.

Partnership agreement level: Submit to Commission by end August 2017 and end August 2019 a progress report on implementation of Partnership Agreement. || Submits to other institutions by end 2017 and end 2019 a strategic report summarising the progress reports of the Member States on implementation of Partnership Agreements.

Evaluations Commission || || In 2015 and 2016: ex-post evaluations of the preceding programmes In 2025: synthesis reports outlining the main conclusions of ex-post evaluations for each of the ESI Funds.

As illustrated above, the management mode of the spending programmes and the resulting set-up of the MORE frameworks affect the timing of the availability of performance information and therefore performance reporting under Article 318.

1.5. Progressive performance reporting during 2014-2020: Which performance information becomes available when?

Period 2014-2016/2017: The early years of implementation of the current spending programmes and final ex-post evaluations of the previous spending programmes

As explained above, in 2014-2016, the first implementation reports on the current MFF spending programmes will become available. In addition, performance information on the previous MFF spending programmes will become available from ex-post evaluations which will be variously produced between one and four years after the end of the programmes. Below, a chart shows the number of ex-post evaluations of the previous MFF spending programmes which will be finalised in the first four years of the MFF 2014-2020 period, namely the years 2014-2017.

Chart 1: Planning of the ex-post evaluations of 2007-2013 MFF spending programmes[5]

Ex-post evaluations typically focus on issues such as the effectiveness, efficiency, EU added value, results achieved in relation to the objectives, sustainability of results and socio-economic impact. They try to identify factors contributing to the success or failure of programmes and identify good practice. The information from the ex-post evaluations of the previous MFF-spending programmes allows accounting for the resources spent, but also serves to make adjustments where appropriate to the current MFF 2014-2020 spending programmes or to provide input for the design of any future programmes.

Reporting under Article 318 for the years 2014-2016/2017 will therefore combine early signals of progress in implementing the MFF 2014-2020 programmes with feedback on results and impact of projects financed by the earlier programmes under the 2007-2013 MFF.

Period 2017-2018: mid-term evaluations of the current spending programmes. First indications on progress in achieving objectives

In the intermediate period of the MFF feedback starts to become available as to whether the programmes are on track in terms of progress being made towards meeting their objectives; for example concluding on whether or to what extent those milestones which have a clear focus on results have been met. As of the financial years 2017-2018, the Article 318 Evaluation Report will be able to include first conclusions on programme performance and whether programmes are on track or whether adjustments need to be, or have been, made to improve performance.

Many MFF-spending programmes include mid-term evaluations in their planning. With one exception[6] these mid-term evaluations have been planned for 2017 and 2018, as can be seen from chart 2 below. Nineteen spending programmes will undertake a mid-term evaluation in 2017[7] and ten spending programmes[8] will undertake their mid-term evaluation in 2018. These include important spending programmes which aim to contribute to the EU's core objectives like the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and Horizon 2020. Mid-term evaluations typically focussing on lessons learned from the early years of implementation as well as providing first indications on the achievement of programme objectives. Their results are used to make programme adjustments and to provide input for the design of any future programme.

The mid-term evaluation planned in 2018 by the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) explains well how mid-term evaluations contribute to the mid-term stock-taking to re-examine the continued relevance of the programme:

"In 2018 the Commission and each Member State shall re-examine the situation, in the light of the interim evaluation reports submitted in 2017 by the Member States (…), the developments in Union policies and in the Member State concerned. The interim reports will include information on the implementation of the national programmes by reference to the financial data and the indicators, any significant issues which affect the implementation of the national programmes, the progress towards achieving the objectives in the national programmes, the involvement of relevant partners". Source: annexed fiche on 'AMIF'.

Not all spending programmes foresee a mid-term evaluation. Important spending programmes under shared management (for example the ESI Funds; see example 2 above) do not provide for an EU-wide mid-term evaluation. A different system has been chosen through which the conclusions of national evaluations are included into annual implementation reports. In this way, progressively, the available information on progress in achieving programme objectives becomes available on a yearly basis alongside information on progress in the implementation of the programme.

Chart 2: Planning of mid-term evaluations of 2014-2020 MFF spending programmes

Period 2019 and beyond: conclusions on achievement of programme objectives

Only as of 2019 will more conclusive performance information become available from annual reporting and from ex-post evaluations feeding into the Article 318 Evaluation Report. This includes both the data relating to the achieving of the different objectives of individual spending programmes as well as their contribution to reaching the Europe 2020 goals. As regards the learning purpose from ex-post evaluations; as possible successor schemes will be well under way when the ex-post evaluations will be completed, the results will more likely be used for the mid-term adaptation of any successor spending programme post-2020.

As regards the timing of ex-post evaluations, across the MFF spending programmes it can be observed on the basis of the MORE frameworks of all spending programmes that the vast majority of them will take place after 2020 with two exceptions[9]. The exact date of the ex-post evaluation sometimes has not yet been defined[10]. For those spending programmes for which information is available, chart 3 below indicates the year of the ex-post evaluation.

Chart 3: Planning of ex-post evaluations of 2014-2020 MFF spending programmes[11]

The ex-post evaluations which become available in 2024 concern major spending programmes under shared management like the ESI Funds for which the Commission will produce synthesis reports in 2025.

II) External policies of the Union

The spending programmes financed in the area of external actions, representing around 6.5% of the budget of the MFF spending programmes, are complex and varied. They are used in partner countries via different types of interventions (projects and programmes, pooled funds with other donors, budget support) managed mainly by EU delegations. Partner countries may use funding from several spending programmes to reach the objectives of the EU cooperation. The MORE frameworks of the spending programmes under heading 4 reflect this complex structure and try to capture progress in two dimensions: the contribution to development results and to organisational performance (effectiveness and efficiency of management of operations).

The monitoring is carried out through two different methods and the evaluations have different focusses (see table below). For details and exact planning of the different types of evaluations reference is made to Part II of this SWD (the introduction part of Heading 4 'Global Europe' and the individual programme fiches.

In order to better streamline reporting on the implementation of the Union's external actions, including reporting under Article 318, a new Implementing Regulation has been proposed. It sets common rules and a common procedure for six[12] of the 12 spending programmes under Heading 4, representing almost 50% of the budget for external actions. For each of these spending programmes annual reporting starts in 2015 and contains information on the previous year. It will indicate the progress in achieving programme objectives and issues of efficiency and include performance results from monitoring and evaluations. The 2021 annual report will consolidate the information from previous annual reports. A mid-term review report in 2017 and a final evaluation (post 2020) are also foreseen. The table below shows the structure of the MORE frameworks for programmes falling under the Common Implementing Regulation and thereby gives an indication of what type of performance information is available at which point in time to support performance reporting under Article 318.

Monitoring || External Evaluations

Internal by Commission services and EU delegations of project implementation through the collections of analysis of data from progress reports, field visits etc. || At level of projects/ programmes: These evaluations aim to provide an understanding of project performance and results and identifying lessons learned.

External by independent consultants through the Results Oriented Monitoring (ROM) system, which analysis a portion[13] of the aided projects and recommends improvements. || At level of strategies: These evaluations relate to geographic areas (co-operation with a country or region) or thematic programmes (e.g. health, conflict prevention) or use of aid channels (e.g. through intermediaries such as NGOs or UN or budget support). In 2016: meta-evaluations reviewing existing strategic evaluations relating to certain themes (e.g. on primary education).

|| At the level of the legal instrument: As of 2015: annual implementation reports 2017: Mid-term review report 2021: Final annual report consolidating information from previous reports Post 2020: Final evaluation.

In addition to the monitoring and evaluation arrangements for the six external action spending programmes covered by the Common Implementing Regulation, the Article 318 Evaluation Report will report on the results of three mid-term evaluations that are foreseen in 2017 for respectively Humanitarian Aid (EU Aid Volunteers part); the Cooperation with Greenland programme; and the assistance programme for the Turkish Cypriot community. Also ex-post evaluations will be carried out for these programmes after 2020.

III) Concluding remarks

The MORE frameworks for the MFF 2014-2020 have been established by the European Parliament and the Council in the legal bases for the programmes. Reporting under Article 318 will be based on the monitoring, reporting and evaluation provisions included in these legal bases. The frameworks are better designed than those of the previous spending programmes; increased attention having been paid to this aspect in the adoption of the new programmes. Namely, all programme frameworks have objectives and relevant indicators; where appropriate a link is made between programme objectives and Europe 2020 goals; some frameworks contain a special reserve to be released only when performance objectives have been achieved; appropriate systems are in place to allow for annual tracking of progress; almost all programmes provide for a mid-term, or strong annual performance-focused reporting (ESI Funds), as of 2017 and ex-post evaluations. All these elements are expected to contribute to the success of the 2014-2020 MFF spending programmes and a meaningful performance reporting required in Article 318 of the TFEU. The frameworks include monitoring, evaluation and reporting provisions with respect to, on the one hand, the implementation of the programmes by the European Commission, its agencies, the Member States and other bodies, and, on the other hand, the effectiveness of the programmes on the ground, subject to the wide variety of factors that influence their achievements. The timing of the different phases in this work under the MORE framework largely reflects the timing of such work under previous MFF. This is because payments continue to be made throughout most of the life of the programmes, the actions financed by the programmes only follow-on from the payments, and the impacts of the actions financed can only be measured over subsequent years, particularly for any lasting effects. Consequently, reporting under the Article 318 Evaluation Report on performance will be bound by the timing set out in the legal frameworks. The framework for each spending programme also shows how the evidence gathered through monitoring and evaluation supports evidence-based policy making, potentially feeding programme adjustments and making input to future decisions on subsequent spending programmes.

PART II: OVERVIEW MORE FRAMEWORKS

H1a Competitiveness for growth and jobs EGNOS and Galileo (European Satellite Navigation Programmes)

Title spending programme: || EGNOS and Galileo (European Satellite Navigation Programmes)

Summary, general description of the logic and sequence of the overall progress and performance reporting framework || The overall progress and performance reporting framework of the programmes' implementation is based on the following documents: - An annual work programme, in the form of an implementation plan of the actions required to meet the specific objectives of the Galileo and EGNOS programmes. This annual work programme shall also provide for the funding of those actions; - a quarterly status report on the achievements and development of the programmes in particular in terms of risk management, cost, schedule and performance; at least once a year, those reports should include the performance indicators referred to in the new GNSS Regulation; - an annual implementation report evaluating the fulfilment of the annual work programme to be proposed by the Commission each year when it presents the preliminary draft budget; that report should contain all information pertaining to the programmes, in particular in terms of risk management, overall cost, annual operating cost, revenues, schedule and performance and as regards the functioning of the delegation agreements concluded with ESA and the GSA; - a mid-term evaluation of the implementation of the Galileo and EGNOS programmes focusing on quantitative and qualitative results so far achieved to be published by 30 June 2017. Pursuant to Article 33 of the Regulation (EU) no 1285/2013 (GNSS Regulation), the Commission should also inform the European Parliament and the Council of the interim and final results of the evaluation of the procurement tenders and of the contracts with private sector entities established in the framework of the programmes. It should also inform them of any re-allocation of funds. Finally, in the day-to-day management, the Commission will implement a risk management mechanism and appropriate management tools to contain programmes' cost based on better cost estimation, taking stock of previous experience and actual system implementation. As regards the system in place to collect data, the Commission in exercising its powers of political supervision over the Galileo and EGNOS programmes will strengthen the monitoring and evaluation mechanisms over the programme management entities by requesting detailed annual management plans and implementation reports as well as organising regular programme progress meetings and carrying out financial and technological audits. Considering that the European GNSS Agency and the European Space Agency will have important roles in the implementation of the programmes in accordance to the GNSS Regulation, the delegation agreements between the Commission and those entities will provide for regular and ad-hoc reporting on programmatic, technical, contractual and financial aspects of the implementation of the tasks delegated by the Commission. This data collection system should support the reporting obligation set out in the GNSS regulation, in particular as regards the key performance indicators referred to in Article 34 thereof, which needs to be included in the Commission's reports on an annual basis. Galileo and EGNOS are complex industrial projects, which rely on the development of new technologies. The programmes are therefore adjusted on a regular basis in accordance to the latest developments and contracts' implementation. Decisions on the renewal, modification or suspension of the measures taken pursuant to the GNSS Regulation should be taken further to the mid-term evaluation report expected to be published by 30 June 2017.

General and specific objectives, indicators, milestones and targets

GENERAL OBJECTIVE || Supporting satellite navigation programmes (EGNOS and Galileo)

Impact indicator: || Current situation || Long term target 2020

Market share of EU GNSS industry in worldwide GNSS downstream market || 2012: 22% one year after EGNOS SoL declaration || 2020: 33%

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 1 || To develop and provide global satellite-based radio navigation infrastructures and services (Galileo) by 2019[14]

Indicator 1 || Cumulative number of operational satellites

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

2013: 4 || || 14 by 2015 || || || || || 30 satellites by 2020

Indicator 2 || Terrestrial infrastructure deployed version

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

Version 1 in June 2011 || || Version 2 || || || || || No target yet foreseen after 2015

Indicator 3 || Number of services implemented

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

3 initial services by 2015 || || 3 initial services || || || || || 4 services by 2020

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 2 || To provide satellite-based services improving the performance of GPS to gradually cover the whole ECAC (European Civil Aviation Conference) region by 2020 (EGNOS) ) and European neighbouring countries[15]

Indicator 1 || Result indicator: Progress of the EGNOS coverage extension versus agreed coverage extension Source: GSA

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

No baseline established yet || Establishment of EU coverage extension plan for EU-28 in Sept 2014 || || || || || || Coverage of EU-28 with EGNOS

Indicator 2 || EGNOS service availability index based on the number of airports with EGNOS-based approach procedures with an operational status versus the total number of airports with EGNOS –based approach procedures - Source: GSA

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

With operational status: 150 (2014); Total number: 150 (2014) Service availability index: 100% || Gradually increase the total number of airports with EGNOS-based approach procedures. || Maintain the service availability index constantly at least on 99%

Monitoring and reporting arrangements

Description of how progress on achieving milestones and targets of each objective is tracked || Monitoring and reporting on the implementation of the Galileo and EGNOS programmes will be mainly based on the information provided by the European GNSS Agency and the European Space Agency. On a quarterly basis, the Commission should report on the progress made to the GNSS Programme Committee. Such reporting should give a general overview of the programmes' status and developments, in particular in terms of risk management, cost, schedule and performance. Building on the information contained in the quarterly reports, the Commission should also inform, on an annual basis, the European Parliament, the Council and the GNSS Programme Committee on the progress made, in particular in terms of risk management, cost, revenues, schedule and performance. Pursuant to the GNSS Regulation, this annual reporting should also include an assessment of intellectual property rights management, an overview of the implementation of new project management systems and techniques implemented as well as an evaluation of the measures taken to maximise the socio-economic benefits of the programmes. The GNSS regulation also provides for this annual reporting to the GNSS Programme Committee to be based on specific indicators (relating to cost, schedule and performance) referred to in Article 34(2) thereof. Finally the GNSS Regulation provides for the use of best practice management systems and techniques with the support of experts in the field. These experts will support the Commission in the establishment, review and validation of the information provided by the other actors of the programmes and will contribute to the overall assessment of progress. This contribution is expected to occur for the production of each of the reports produced by the Commission at first and will become more focused on the production of the annual reports and of the mid-term evaluation in the medium term.

Actors involved in monitoring || The main actors involved in the monitoring process are the Commission services, the GSA, ESA and Member States. Independent experts (with technical and management background) will also be involved in the validation of the results.

Issues covered in subsequent monitoring reports || The GNSS Regulation provides for detailed reporting of the implementation of the programmes, in particular in terms of cost, schedule, risk and performance and be based on specific indicators set out in the Regulation. This reporting should also concern the effectiveness of the use of resources and European added value. .

Planned use of information || Information provided through the monitoring and reporting system will be used to perform necessary immediate actions in the programme implementation and steer the adaptation of annual work programmes for actions required in the medium term. The information provided in the performance monitoring reports will also be used for the elaboration of the mid-term evaluation, which could lead to revisions of the EGNOS and Galileo programmes.

Frequency of reporting || Programmes' reporting include annual management plans, annual and quarterly implementation reports, as well as regular programme progress meetings to be held on a quarterly basis in the framework of the GNSS Programme Committee. Additional reporting should be performed following yearly financial audits and ad-hoc technological audits performed in the event of failure, technical incident or delays significantly impacting the programmes' schedule.

Availability of reports in the timeline Please note: Reporting in years X cover activities in and up to the previous year || 2014 X[16] || 2015 X || 2016 X || 2017 X || 2018 X || 2019 X || 2020 X

Evaluations of the spending programme

Information per evaluation: 1. Deadline 2. Type 3. Main issues addressed and coverage 4. Planned use of evaluation results 5. Actors involved || Mid-term Evaluation 1. Deadline 30 June 2017 2. Mid-term evaluation 3. The evaluation will address the scope for simplification, its internal and external coherence, the relevance of all objectives, as well as the contribution of the measures to the Union priorities of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. It will take into account evaluation results on the long-term impact of the previous measures. The mid-term evaluation shall also address technological developments relating to the systems, the scope for simplification, its internal and external coherence, the relevance of all objectives, as well as the contribution of the measures to the Union priorities of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. 4. Decision on the renewal, modification or suspension of the measures. 5. Commission, ESA, GSA, independent experts To perform this mid-term evaluation, the Commission will build on the information provided in its quarterly and annual reports, as well as on the results of the financial audits and potential technical audits. The Commission should also rely on experts in the field of programme management to support it in assessing past results.

ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor)

Title spending programme: || ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor)[17]

Summary, general description of the logic and sequence of the overall progress and performance reporting framework || Monitoring and reporting are based on the management and reporting rules applied by the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy (F4E) and the ITER Organization (IO), which require the approval of all key documents by their respective governing bodies. Through its representation in these bodies on behalf of Euratom, the Commission monitors and revises the documents defining the implementing activities for ITER. F4E is currently setting up a project management and reporting process, fully integrating various aspects of the system of reporting to the Governing Board (GB). Every year and in line with the Council conclusions of 12 July 2010, F4E reports to the Council on the progress achieved in implementing the cost containment and savings plan as well as on the performance and management of F4E and the ITER project, including the fulfilment of the schedule activities within its annual budget. In response to these Council conclusions, F4E has appointed an independent expert who assesses the project progress on the basis of existing reports and submits its opinion to the F4E GB and to the Competitiveness Council once a year. F4E and the Commission have signed an Administrative Agreement which defines the modalities and conditions applicable to the transfer of the Community financial contribution to F4E. In addition, the amended Council Decision contains two new articles on the protection of Union's financial interests (Article 5a) and on the mid-term review of the spending programme (Article 5b). This mid-term review report to be provided by the Commission to the Council and the Parliament is in addition to the reporting activity already in place for F4E (Annual Report of activities, Annual Progress report on the implementation of the cost containment and savings plan, independent assessment on project progress). The modalities and conditions applicable to the transfer of the Community financial contribution to F4E are defined in the Administrative Agreement between the Commission and F4E.

|| General and specific objectives, indicators, milestones and targets

GENERAL OBJECTIVE || Development of fusion as a potentially limitless, safe, sustainable, environmentally responsible and economically competitive source of energy

Impact indicator || Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions at EU level compared to 1990

Baseline (2012) || 2016 || Target 2050

18% || 20% || 80 to 95%[18]

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE || To provide the Euratom contribution to ITER and to the ITER related activities

Indicator || Percentage of Euratom's obligations discharged by the ITER Organization (IO) through the Joint Undertaking F4E[19]

Baseline (2013) || 2014 || 2015 || Target 2020

6% || 17% || 26% || 100%

Monitoring and reporting arrangements

Description of how progress on achieving milestones and targets of each objective is tracked || The information sources used are mainly the F4E Annual Project Plan and Progress Reports submitted to the F4E Governing Board, as well as the annual independent assessment of F4E activities as requested by the Council in 2010. The Commission closely monitors F4E activities as a member of the F4E Governing Board.

Actors involved in monitoring || F4E, Commission

Issues covered in subsequent monitoring || Monitoring reports will cover implementation aspects and immediate results (subject to the availability of data).

Planned use of information || The information will be tracked to adjust the Commission's annual transfers to F4E according to the scheduled activity of F4E and its spending profile.

Frequency of reporting || F4E reports: annual Commission report: annual contribution to DG RTD's AAR; mid-term review on the implementation of the Decision

Indication of availability of reports in the timeline || 2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 || 2020

X || X || X || X || X || X || X

Evaluations of the spending programme

1. Deadline: 31 December 2017 2. Type: mid-term review 3. Main issues and coverage: The Commission should submit to the Council and to the European Parliament a progress report on the implementation of Decision 2007/198/Euratom on the basis of information provided by F4E. That report shall set out the results of the use of the Euratom contribution referred to in Article 2 of Decision 2007/198/Euratom as regards commitments and expenditure. 4. Planned use of evaluation results: The results of the evaluation will contribute to the adjustment of the profile of Commission's transfers to F4E according to the overall schedule of the ITER construction and F4E contribution to it for the period until 2020. 5. Actors involved: F4E shall provide the Commission with all the necessary information.

Copernicus (European Earth Observation Programme)

Title spending programme: || Copernicus

Summary, general description of the logic and sequence of the overall progress and performance reporting framework || The Commission services have put the following planning, monitoring and evaluation system in place for the Copernicus programme: 1. Monitoring the deliverables of the Copernicus programme via specifically designed performance-driven Key Performance Indicators. The Indicators are specified in Annual Work programmes, and are monitored via the deliverables of the delegated operators. They are applicable for all Copernicus services which have reached operational level, as well as for the Space Component. The Commission monitors the progress of the programme via annual and quarterly implementation reports received from the delegated bodies throughout the lifetime of the programme. 2. Reporting on the results and achievements of the programme. The following mechanisms have been established: · A 7-year Implementation Plan provides a high-level overview of the multi-annual programme development, and is used as basis for the annual work programmes. It contains the general and specific objectives of the programme, and defines milestones for their achievement. · The Copernicus annual work programmes describe the activities to be undertaken in a specific year, and the budget allocated to these. · Reporting on periodic basis will inform the European Parliament and the European Member States on the progress and general status of the programme, in particular in terms of risk management, costs, schedule, performance and procurement.[i] · A quarterly status report on the achievements and development of the overall programme is maintained and updated. By 31December 2017, the Commission will establish an interim evaluation of the programme.

|| General and specific objectives, indicators, milestones and targets

GENERAL OBJECTIVE 1 || Monitoring the Earth to support the protection of the environment and the efforts of civil protection and civil security

Impact indicator: || Current situation || Long term target 2020

Specific service components[20] corresponding to users’ service-level requirements to realise that Copernicus data and Copernicus information is made available for the environment, civil protection and civil security || The number of service components operational in 2015 = 6 || To increase the number of service components operational to 14

GENERAL OBJECTIVE 2 || Maximising socio-economic benefits, thus supporting of the Europe 2020 strategy and its objectives of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth by promoting the use of Earth observation in applications and services

Impact indicator: || Current situation || Long term target 2020

Growth in downstream EO-sector directly benefiting from Copernicus, as a result of progression in number of users, available access to volume of data and added-value information, increased number of downstream services, across Member States and the Union || Expected growth in downstream EO-sector directly benefiting from Copernicus, 2012 employment = 1, representing ~5000 jobs[21] || Increase growth from 2012 of 1 to 1.8, representing ~9000 jobs

GENERAL OBJECTIVE 3 || Fostering the development of a competitive European space and services industry and maximising opportunities for European enterprises to develop and provide innovative Earth observation systems and services

Impact indicator: || Current situation || Long term target 2020

Market penetration, including expansion of the existing markets and creation of new markets and competitiveness of the European downstream operators || 2013 Index=100, representing 5 main fields (agriculture, non-life insurance, oil and gas, water transport, electricity generation from renewable sources)[22] || Increase the market penetration from 100 to 140, representing 7 main fields

GENERAL OBJECTIVE 4 || Ensuring autonomous access to environmental knowledge and key technologies for Earth observation and geo-information services, thereby enabling Europe to achieve independent decision-making and action

Impact indicator: || Current situation || Long term target 2020

Use of Copernicus data and Copernicus information by Union institutions and bodies for autonomous decision-making || Number of directives and decisions directly invoking the use of Copernicus data in 2013 = 5 || Increase the number of directives and decisions to 30

GENERAL OBJECTIVE 5 || Supporting and contributing to European policies and fostering global initiatives, such as GEOSS

Impact indicator: || Current situation || Long term target 2020

Provision of Copernicus global Earth Observation data to Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) || Percentage of Copernicus global EO data available through GEOSS in 2016 = 40% (~10% for 2014) || Increase the percentage to 100%

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 1 || Delivering accurate and reliable data and information to Copernicus users, supplied on a long term and sustainable basis enabling the services referred to in Article 4(1) and responding to the requirements of Copernicus Core Users

Indicator 1 || Number of engaged users showing sustained uptake through registered data download

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

Recognised users served during pre-operational phase = 1 || || 1 || || 1.5 || || || 2

Indicator 2 || Progression in number of satisfied users[23]

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

Percentage of returning & engaged users || || 20% || || 40% || || || 65%

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 2 || Providing sustainable and reliable access to space borne data and information from an autonomous European Earth observation capacity

Indicator 1 || The accomplishment of the space infrastructure in terms of satellites deployed and data it produces for integration into geo-information services

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

EU launched autonomous satellite capacity = 0 || 1 || 5 || 7 || || || 9 || 11

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 3 || Providing a sustainable and reliable access to in-situ data, relying, in particular, on existing capacities operated at European and national levels, and on global observation systems and networks

Indicator 1 || Sustained availability of in-situ data for supporting Copernicus services

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

Services receiving in-situ data || 2 || 4[24] || 6 || 6 || 6 || 6 || 6

Monitoring and reporting arrangements

Description of how progress on achieving milestones and targets of each objective is tracked || The Commission services will report on regular basis to the Copernicus Committee on the program status and on the progress made by comparing the indicators with the baseline. Feedback from the interim review in 2018 and the ex-post assessment upon completion of the period (2021) will contribute to the overall assessment of progress. The quarterly states reports additionally will track this progress on working level.

Actors involved in monitoring || Entrusted entities such as Union Agencies (EEA, FRONTEX, EMSA); International organizations (ESA, EUMETSAT, ECWMF); independent experts and expert groups; feedback from users at Member State level;

Issues covered in subsequent monitoring reports || The regular reports to the Copernicus Committee will contain information on each of the main areas of activity of the space component and of the six services, and of the service delivery achieved in response to user demands/requests. Each activity will be quantified via reporting on the assigned performance indicators which will be included in the implementation reports. For the Copernicus Services this will be additionally complemented by independent expert reviews which will assess the transition from research-funded projects to fully operational services (applicable to the Marine, Security, Climate Change and Atmosphere Services). A substantial section of their review will be dedicated to providing an overall perspective, an assessment of progress in light of : · service user needs and feedback; · the development of the main product portfolio; · statistics on timeliness of the service provision, and · development of indicator trends.

Planned use of information || The regular reporting by the involved stakeholders will be used as input for the evaluation of the progress of the programme. Assessment of the Copernicus Service implementation will steer the adaptation of annual work programmes submitted by service operators, and adjustments to the multi-annual implementation plans of each service. Furthermore data provided within the monitoring framework will contribute to the wider monitoring and reporting activities within DG ENTR (namely DG ENTR Management Plan and Annual Activity Report).

Frequency of reporting || Regular Monitoring Reports to the Copernicus Committee The status reports for monitoring the progress of the programme are updated every quarter based on the working-level contact from the Commission with the involved stakeholders, and the quarterly and annual implementation reports received.

Availability of reports in the timeline Please note: Reports published in the years marked with X will report on activities in (and up to) the previous year (e.g. the first report, covering activities in 2014, will become available in 2015) || 2014 || 2015 X || 2016 X || 2017 X || 2018 X || 2019 X || 2020 X

Evaluations of the spending programme

Information per evaluation: 1. Deadline 2. Type 3. Main issues addressed and coverage 4. Planned use of evaluation results 5. Actors involved || Ex-post Evaluation in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 911/2010 NB: Regulation (EU) No 911/2010 obligations were replaced by obligations foreseen in Regulation (EU) No 377/2014 thus the relevance of this evaluation will be reassessed. 1. End-2015 2. Ex-post evaluation of the GMES programme and its initial operations (GIO) in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 911/2010. 3. The evaluation would measure the overall achievement of the objectives of the GMES and its Initial Operations (GIO) programme from 2011-2013. It would address the effectiveness of all actions that were implemented in view of achievement of the general and specific programme objectives, and will draw lessons learned. 4. Based on the ex-post report, and the lessons learned therein, decisions may be taken within the routine phase of the programme in the period 2014-2021. 5. Independent experts; stakeholders. Interim Evaluation (according to the legal base Regulation (EU) No 377/2014 1. 2017 2. Interim Evaluation 3. The evaluation report shall be established by the Commission on the achievement of the objectives of all the tasks financed by Copernicus at the level of their results and impacts, their European added value and on the efficiency of the use of resources. The evaluation shall address the continued relevance of all objectives, the performance of the organisational structure and the scope of services deployed. The evaluation shall also assess the impacts of the Copernicus data and Copernicus information policy, on stakeholders, downstream users, and the influence on business as well as on national and private investments in Earth observation infrastructures. 4. The evaluation shall include an assessment of a possible involvement of relevant European agencies and if appropriate be accompanied by relevant legislative proposals The Commission communicate the result of the evaluation to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions and, if necessary, propose appropriate measures. 5. Independent experts; stakeholders, Member States. The above and possible other evaluations will be complementary to the continuous monitoring of the programme via the above-mentioned periodical monitoring reports.

Nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia

Title spending programme: || Nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia ||

Summary, general description of the logic and sequence of the overall progress and performance reporting framework || Upon Accession, the 3 Member States Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia committed to close down early some of their nuclear power plants before the end of their scheduled lifetime. In exchange the Union agreed to assist the 3 Member States financially to decommission the concerned power plants Kozloduy units 1-4, Ignalina units 1-2 and Bohunice V1 units 1-2. This programme follows on from this commitment, and regulates the financial contributions towards safe decommissioning of the afore-mentioned units. By 01/01/2014 the 3 Member States have to provide the latest version of their decommissioning plans, setting out main objectives and tasks, milestones etc. These will be listed in an annex to the Implementing Act. On the basis of these plans, in the beginning of each year the Commission will adopt a joint annual work programme for each power plant specifying objectives, expected results, target end dates and related performance indicators. These will serve as a basis for the monitoring and reporting. Projects under the different objectives will only be eligible for funding when they stem from these decommissioning plans. The Commission will, on proposal by the Member States and beneficiaries, decide which projects from the decommissioning plan need funding at a certain moment in time. Daily project execution will be monitored by the implementing bodies (national agencies and EBRD or EIB). Monitoring will be done against the baseline of these original decommissioning plans, including progress as measured against the indicators that are equally enshrined in the Implementing Act. Monitoring will be done twice a year, in the monitoring committees presided by the Commission, together with the Member States, who bear ultimate responsibility for the safe decommissioning of these power plants. Each monitoring Committee will be analysing the monitoring report, structured as a traffic light system so as to highlight easily the problems that require attention, decisions and solutions on how to overcome difficulties, delays or cost overruns. Yearly there will be a report on the implementation of the joint annual work programmes from the Commission. These reports will be taken into account when adopting subsequent annual work programmes. In addition, the framework foresees the possibility to carry out possible audits, checks and inspections. An interim evaluation will be carried out in 2017 addressing issues as progress on achievement of programme objectives. It also addresses the progress of the decommissioning plans as well as programme and funds management. It takes into account evaluation results of predecessor schemes. The results of the interim evaluation will be used to amend or suspend measures, if appropriate. An ex-post evaluation will be carried out on the effectiveness and efficiency of the programme and it includes the impact of funding and EU added value. All reports shall be communicated to the EP and the European Council. ||

Nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Bulgaria and Slovakia ||

General and specific objectives, indicators, milestones and targets ||

GENERAL OBJECTIVE 1 || to assist the Member States towards the decommissioning end state of Kozloduy units 1 to 4 and Bohunice VI units 1 and 2 ||

Impact indicator: || Baseline || Milestone 2017 || Long term target 2020 ||

Provide funding in yearly commitments. || 01/01/2014 || Commitments 2014-2017 done || The current completion dates for decommissioning of: - Kozloduy units 1 to 4: 2030; - Bohunice V1 units 1 and 2: 2025. ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 1. || (Kozloduy) Performing dismantling in the turbine halls of units 1 to 4 and in auxiliary buildings ||

Indicator: || Number and type of systems dismantled ||

Baseline 01/01/2014 Decontamination and dismantling activities in turbine halls 1 and 2 have started. || Milestones || Target 2020 Decontamination and dismantling activities in turbine halls and auxiliary buildings of Kozloduy units 1 to 4 according to the decommissioning plans ||

2014 || 2015 Continued decontamination and dismantling in auxiliary buildings in 2015 in accordance with the decommissioning plan || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 2. || (Kozloduy) Dismantling of large components and equipments in the reactor buildings of units 1 to 4 ||

Indicator: || Number and type of systems and equipment dismantled ||

Baseline Not yet started. || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 Continued decontamination and dismantling of equipment in 2015 in accordance with the decommissioning plan || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 || Decontamination and dismantling activities of large equipment according to decommissioning plans ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 3. || (Kozloduy) Safely managing the decommissioning waste in accordance with a detailed waste management plan ||

Indicator: || Quantity and type of safely conditioned waste ||

Baseline 1/01/2014 Facilities for the treatment and conditioning of waste are being constructed || Milestones || Target 2020 Treatment and conditioning of decommissioning waste according to decommissioning and waste management plans ||

2014 || 2015 Treatment and conditioning of decommissioning waste starting in 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 4. || (Bohunice) Performing dismantling in the turbine hall and auxiliary buildings of reactor V1 ||

Indicator: || Number and type of systems dismantled ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

1/01/2014 Dismantling of V1 turbine hall has started; Dismantling of external buildings (Phase 1) started || 2014 || 2015 Start of phase 2 of decommissioning || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 || Dismantling of V1 turbine hall advanced, and building to be used as temporary waste storage. Dismantling of external buildings completed as far as possible and building to be used as temporary waste storage. ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 5. || (Bohunice) Dismantling of large components and equipments in the V1 reactor buildings ||

Indicator: || Number and type of systems and equipments dismantled ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

1/01/2014 Decontamination of V1 primary circuits has started || 2014 || 2015 Start of decontamination and dismantling of large components in the reactor building || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 || Decontamination and dismantling works advanced according to the decommissioning plan. ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 6. || (Bohunice) Safely managing the decommissioning waste in accordance with a detailed waste management plan ||

Indicator: || Quantity and type of safely conditioned waste ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

1/01/2014 Stage 1 decommissioning waste management has started. || 2014 || 2015 Continued waste management according to decommissioning and waste management plan || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 || Stage 2 decommissioning waste management: 2013- end 2025. ||

Nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Lithuania ||

General Objective || to assist the Member State towards the decommissioning end state of units 1 and 2 of the Ignalina nuclear power plant ||

Indicator 1 : Number of major components and systems dismantled in all the concerned nuclear reactors in accordance with the respective decommissioning plans ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 206 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

Information to be submitted by the Member States at the end of 2014 according to the Council Regulation || || || || || || || The current completion dates for decommissioning of Ignalina units 1 and 2: 2038 ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 1. || (Ignalina) Defueling of the reactor core of unit 2 and the unit 1 and 2 reactor fuel ponds into the dry spent fuel storage facility ||

Indicator: || Number of unloaded fuel assemblies ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

1/01/2014 Unit 1 reactor core defueled, unit 2 reactor core partially defueled into the spent fuel ponds; In the ponds are used and unloaded fuel assemblies. || 2014 || 2015 || 206 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 || Complete defueling and transfer of all spent fuel assemblies to the dry spent fuel storage completed by end 2022 ||

|| Installation of defueling equipment in the units || || || || ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 2. || (Ignalina) Safely maintaining the reactor units until ||

Indicator: || Number of registered incidents ||

Baseline Safe maintenance performed without incidents. || Milestones || Target 2020 No incidents until complete defueling of units 1 and 2 ||

2014 || 2016 || 2015 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 || At least half of the fuel assemblies unloaded ||

0 || 0 || 0 || || || ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 3. || (Ignalina) Performing dismantling in the turbine hall and other auxiliary buildings and safely managing the decommissioning waste in accordance with a detailed waste management plan ||

Indicator: || Type and number of auxiliary systems dismantled and the quantity and type of safely conditioned waste ||

Baseline 1/01/2014 Start of dismantling works in turbine hall of unit 1. Facilities for waste management are being constructed. || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 Decontamination and dismantling in unit 1 ongoing according to decommissioning plan || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

Turbine halls main parts dismantled. Produced waste treated and stored safely. ||

Monitoring and reporting arrangements ||

Description of how progress on achieving milestones and targets of each objective is tracked || In accordance with the Council Regulation (Euratom) 1368/2013, Council Regulation (Euratom) 1369/2013, Corrigendum to Council Regulation (Euratom) 1368/2013, and Corrigendum to Council Regulation (Euratom) 1369/2013, on Union support for the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia, the projects and activities, milestones, targets and indicators (which + their values) will be set in an Implementing Act specifying for each power plant objectives, expected results, target end dates and related performance indicators. Day-to-day monitoring is done by the implementing bodies. Monitoring visits on-site will take place at least twice a year. Every 6 months there will be a report by the beneficiaries and the Member States on the progress witnessed, based on the pre-defined indicators. 2 times a year a monitoring committee will meet to discuss the progress report, as well as the overall monitoring of the advancement of the objectives and the decommissioning programmes as a whole. In case of problems (delays, cost overruns, critical path, and deviation in indicator values as compared to baseline setting) remedial action will be discussed and follow-up actions agreed. ||

Actors involved in monitoring Issues covered in subsequent monitoring reports || The 3 beneficiaries (JAVYS for Bohunice, INPP for Ignalina and SERAW for Kozloduy nuclear power plants); the Member States; the nuclear regulators; the implementing bodies (national agencies and EBRD or EIB). ||

Actors involved in monitoring Issues covered in subsequent monitoring reports Planned use of information || - Progress witnessed, based on the pre-defined indicators. - In case of problems (delays, cost overruns, critical path, and deviation in indicator values as compared to baseline setting) remedial action will be discussed. Main elements of monitoring reports (as per first preliminary draft implement act): (1) An updated version of the decommissioning plan, highlighting the offset compared to baseline; (2) the progress made in achieving the objectives under the respective decommissioning-related programme as set out in the corresponding annual work programmes; (3) the progress made towards meeting the expected results of the different activities and the related performance indicators; (4) any problems occurring with regard to the implementation of measures under the respective decommissioning-related programme during the monitoring period; (5) the measures and actions to be taken to address the occurring problems; (6) the financial implementation of the respective decommissioning-related programme; (7) the description of the status of concrete results of projects under the respective decommissioning-related programme as provided in the objectives of the corresponding annual work programmes and specified in the project documentation; (8) the description of activities performed during the monitoring period in respect of the implementation of measures under the respective decommissioning-related programme; (9) the contractual and financial data on projects implemented in line with the project documentation; (10) the visibility measures taken to provide information on and publicize the Union financial assistance under the respective decommissioning-related programme; (11) the steps taken by the Implementing Bodies to implement the recommendations made by the respective committee for monitoring; (12) the activities planned to implement the measures under the respective decommissioning-related programme during the next planned monitoring period. ||

Planned use of information || - Reporting to the Council and the European Parliament - Adjustments of annual work programmes - In case of delays identified in the annual reports, payments may be postponed or financial contributions reduced - Mid-term spending programme adjustments ||

Frequency of reporting || Twice yearly from beneficiaries and Member States to the Commission. Yearly from the Commission to Council and the European Parliament. ||

Availability of reports in the timeline || 2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 || 2020 ||

|| 2 to COM 0 to Council and EP || 2 to COM 1 to Council and EP || 2 to COM 1 to Council and EP || 2 to COM 1 to Council and EP || 2 to COM 1 to Council and EP || 2 to COM 1 to Council and EP || 2 to COM 1 to Council and EP ||

Evaluations of the spending programme ||

Information per evaluation: 1. Deadline 2. Type 3. Main issues addressed and coverage 4. Planned use of evaluation results 5. Actors involved || Ex-post evaluation 2007-2013 period 1. Not later than 2017: 2. Ex-post evaluation of the 3 decommissioning programmes 2007-2013 3. effectiveness, efficiency, EU added value of spending programme 4. Use: accountability to Council and European Parliament ; input for interim evaluation 2014-2020 period – 5. Commission, Member States, implementing bodies, beneficiaries Mid-term evaluation 2014-2020 period 1. 2017: 2. Mid-term evaluation of the new decommissioning programme 2014-2020 3. Effectiveness, efficiency, EU added value of spending programme; addresses the progress of the decommissioning plans; programme and funds management. 4. Will be used for remedial action and to review appropriations 5. Commission, Member States, implementing bodies, beneficiaries Ex-post evaluation 2014-2020 period 1. Beyond 2020 when all commitments have been made: 2. Ex-post evaluation of the new decommissioning programme 2014-2020 3. effectiveness, efficiency, impact of funding and EU added value of spending programme 4. Accountability to Council and European Parliament 5. Commission, Member States, implementing bodies, beneficiaries. ||

Horizon 2020 (framework programme for research and innovation)

Title of spending programme: || Horizon 2020 (Framework Programme for Research and Innovation)

Summary, general description of the logic and sequence of the overall progress and performance reporting framework || The legal basis for Horizon 2020 specifies, for the first time in the history of EU Framework Programmes, explicit intervention logic and the Key Performance Indicators to be used in the final evaluation of Horizon 2020. Since funding of Horizon 2020 will support research and innovation activities, result-related information will only become available with a certain time lag, as findings and results are based on efforts covering several years and might take some extra years to fully materialise. Against this difficulty, which is inherent to research and innovation funding, the monitoring and reporting system for Horizon 2020 is based on three main components: 1. A comprehensive system to collect all relevant data on the implementation of Horizon 2020 activities. Based on input from several IT- Tools, the CORDA Data Warehouse will be the one and only reference for Horizon 2020 reporting. 2. In line with Art. 31 of the Horizon 2020 Regulation the Commission will publish Annual Horizon 2020 Monitoring Reports, which will provide a systematic overview on implementation and, later during the lifetime of Horizon 2020, also on the key achievements. A particular focus will be on the reporting on cross-cutting issues as mentioned in Art. 14 (1) of the Horizon 2020 Regulation and Annex III of the Specific Programme. 3. The Key Performance Indicators as specified in Annex II of the Specific Programme will be a key element for the evaluation of Horizon 2020, notably for the Ex-Post evaluation in 2023. Since these Key Performance Indicators are focused on results, they will only become available in a statistically meaningful way as from 2018 onwards.

General and specific objectives, indicators, milestones and targets

GENERAL OBJECTIVE || To build an economy based on knowledge and innovation across the whole Union, while contributing to sustainable development.

Impact indicator || Current situation || Long term target (2020)

The Europe 2020 R&D target (3% of GDP) || 2.06% of GDP (2012) || 3% of GDP

The Europe 2020 innovation headline indicator (index with reference 100 in 2010) || 104.4 (2011) || Pending decision in the context of the European Semester

Share of researchers in the EU active population || 1.06% (2011) || 1.33%

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 1 || Excellent science – European Research Council (ERC) – to reinforce the excellence, dynamism and creativity of European research ||

Indicator 1 || Share of publications from ERC-funded projects which are among the top 1% highly cited ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

New approach || || || || || 1.5 (ERC publications 2014-2016 cited until 2018) || || 1.8 ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 2 || Excellent science – Future and Emerging Technologies – to foster radically new technologies by exploring novel and high-risk ideas building on scientific foundations ||

Indicator 1 || Publications in peer-reviewed high impact journals ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

New approach || || || || 22 || || 25 || 50% of all FET publications are published in high impact peer review journals ||

Indicator 2 || Patent applications and patents awarded in Future and Emerging Technologies ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

New approach || || || || || || 1 || 1 patent application per €10 million funding[25] ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 3 || Excellent science – Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions – to ensure optimum development and dynamic use of Europe’s intellectual capital in order to generate, develop and transfer new skills and innovation and, thus, to realise its full potential across all sectors and regions ||

Indicator || Cross-sector and cross-country circulation of researchers, including PhD candidates (cumulative number) ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

50.000 (2007-2013), out of which 20% PhD || 7.500, out of which around 40% PhD || || X || 34.000, out of which around 40% PhD || X || X || 60.000 (2014-2020), out of which around 40% PhD ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 4 || Excellent science – Research infrastructures (including eInfrastructures) - to endow Europe with world-class research infrastructures which are accessible to all researchers in Europe and beyond and fully exploit their potential for scientific advance and innovation ||

Indicator || Number of researchers who have access to research infrastructures through Union support ||

Baseline (FP7, 2013) || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

22,000 || || || || || 12,000 || || 20,000 additional researchers during H2020[26] ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 5 || Industrial leadership – to boost Europe's industrial leadership through research, technological development, demonstration and innovation in the following enabling and industrial technologies: information and communication technologies; nanotechnologies; advanced materials; biotechnology; advanced manufacturing and processing; and, space ||

Indicator 1 || Patent applications and patents awarded in the different enabling and industrial technologies ||

Baseline (FP7, 2014) || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

New approach || || || || || || 3[27] || 3 patent applications per €10 million funding ||

Indicator 2 || Share of participating firms introducing innovations new to the company or the market (covering the period of the project plus three years) ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

New approach || || || || || To be developed[28] || || To be developed on the basis of the first H2020 results [29] ||

Indicator 3 || Number of joint public-private publications ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

New approach || || || || || To be developed28 || || To be developed on the basis of the first H2020 results ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 6 || Industrial leadership – to help remedy market deficiencies in accessing risk finance for research and innovation ||

Indicator 1 || Total investments mobilised via debt financing and Venture Capital investments ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

New approach || || || || 8 || || || €15 bn[30],[31] ||

Indicator 2 || Number of organisations funded and amount of private funds leveraged ||

Baseline (2013) || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

Number of organisations funded: New approach || || || || 2,000 (40% of the target) || || || 5,000 ||

Amount of private funds leveraged: New approach || || || || 15 || || || €35 bn30 ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 7 || Industrial leadership – to stimulate growth by means of increasing the levels of innovation in SMEs, covering their different innovation needs over the whole innovation cycle for all types of innovation, thereby creating more fast-growing, internationally active SMEs ||

Indicator 1 || Share of participating SMEs introducing innovations new to the company or the market (covering the period of the project plus three years) ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

New approach || || || 20% || || || || 50% ||

Indicator 2 || Growth and job creation in participating SMEs ||

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 ||

New approach || || || || || || To be developed || To be developed ||

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES 8-14 || Societal challenges ||

Indicator 1 || Publications in peer-reviewed high impact journals in the area of the different societal challenges ||

Specific Objective n° || Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 ||

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 || ||

8 || 47[32] || || || || || || On average 20 || On average, 20 publications per €10 million funding ||

9 || 22 ||

10 || 9[33] ||

11 || 2 ||

12 || 25 ||

13 || 9 ||

14 || 3 ||

Indicator 2 || Patent applications and patents awarded in the area of the different societal challenges

Specific Objective n° || Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

Patent applications || || || || || || On average: 2 || On average, 2 patent applications per €10 million funding

8 || 2

9 || 1.3

10 || 2

11 || 1

12 || 0

13 || 0

14 || New approach

Patents awarded

New approach

Indicator 3 || Number of prototypes and testing activities

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

New approach || || || || || || To be developed || To be developed on the basis of the first H2020 results

Indicator 4 || Number of joint public-private publications

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

New approach || || || || || || To be developed || To be developed on the basis of the first H2020 results

Indicator 5 || Share of the overall Energy challenge funds allocated to the following research activities: renewable energy, end-user energy-efficiency, smart grids and energy storage activities

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020 85%

2014 || 2015 || 2016 85% || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 15 || Spreading excellence and widening participation – to fully exploit the potential of Europe’s talent pool and to ensure that the benefits of an innovation-led economy are both maximised and widely distributed across the Union in accordance with the principle of excellence

Indicator || Evolution of the publications in high impact journals in the relevant research fields

Baseline || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

New approach || || || || || || To be developed[34] || To be developed on the basis of the first H2020 results

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 16 || Science with and for society – to build effective cooperation between science and society, to recruit new talent for science and to pair scientific excellence with social awareness and responsibility

Indicator 1 || Share of research organisations funded implementing actions to promote Responsible Research and Innovation

Baseline (2013) || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

New approach || || || || || || To be developed || To be developed on the basis of the first H2020 results

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 17 || Non-Nuclear Direct Actions of the Joint Research Centre – to provide customer-driven scientific and technical support to Union policies, while flexibly responding to new policy demands

Indicator 1 || Number of occurrences of tangible specific impacts on European policies resulting from technical and scientific support provided by the Joint Research Centre

Baseline (2013) || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

248 || 215 +5 || || || 220+10 || || || 230 +15

Indicator 2 || Number of peer-reviewed publications in high impact journals

Baseline (average 2010 – 2013) || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

460 || 460+10 || || || 470+15 || || || 480+20

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 18 || The European Institute of Innovation and Technology – integrating the knowledge triangle of higher education, research and innovation and thus to reinforce the Union's innovation capacity and address societal challenges

Indicator 1 || organisations from universities, business and research integrated in the Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs)

Baseline (period 2010-2012 with 3 KICs) || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

200 || 240 || || || 400 || || || 540 (2020)

Indicator 2 || collaboration inside the knowledge triangle leading to the development of innovative products, services and processes

Baseline (period 2010-2012) || Milestones || Target 2020

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019

33 start-ups and spin-offs 210 innovations in existing businesses developed || 30 300 || || || 220 2 200 || || || 600 start-ups and spin-offs created by KICs students/researchers/professors; 6 000 innovations in existing businesses developed by KIC students/researchers/professors

Monitoring and reporting arrangements

Description of how progress on achieving milestones and targets of each objective is tracked || Monitoring and reporting for Horizon 2020 will be essentially based on information provided by the grant applicants at the time of proposal submission and by grant recipients through a continuously open reporting tool during the lifetime of the grant. This information will be complemented through other sources as, for example, flagging by Commission services or the use of surveys carried out up to three years after the end of grants to identify their impacts.

Actors involved in monitoring || Grant Applicants; Grant Recipients; Commission services; additional sources for specific information needs (e.g. impact factor of scientific journals)

Issues covered in subsequent monitoring reports || Annual Horizon 2020 Monitoring Reports will cover a wide range of implementation aspects, including notably the cross-cutting issues as specified in Annex III to the Specific Programme Decision and the respective mandatory targets related to those issues. Information on these issues will become available from 2015 onwards on a constant basis. Information on outputs, outcomes and results will be systematically monitored as from the start of the programme. However, due to the very nature of the research and innovation activities supported, reporting on a meaningful number of observations can only be expected as from 2018 onwards.

Planned use of information || Information provided through the monitoring and reporting system will be used for the preparation of subsequent Work Programmes and might be relevant for a possible revision of Horizon 2020.

Frequency of reporting || Annual Horizon 2020 Monitoring Reports Constant reporting on key implementation aspects through the CORDA Data Warehouse

Indicate the availability of reports in the timeline || 2014 || 2015 X || 2016 X || 2017 X || 2018 X || 2019 X || 2020 X

Please note: Reports published in the years marked with X will report on activities in (and up to) the previous year (e.g. the first report, covering activities in 2014, will become available in 2015)

Evaluations of the spending programme

Information per evaluation: 1. Deadline 2. Type 3. Main issues and coverage 4. Planned use of evaluation results 5. Actors involved || FP7 Ex-Post Evaluation 1. Deadline: 2015 2. Type: Ex-Post Evaluation 3. Main issues: Rationale, Implementation and Impact. Full coverage of all FP7 activities. 4. Planned use of evaluation results: Possible use for a mid-term revision of Horizon 2020. 5. Actors involved: Independent experts; stakeholders; community at large; Member States. Horizon 2020 Interim Evaluation 1. Deadline: 2017 2. Type: Interim Evaluation 3. Main issues: The achievements (in terms of results and progress) towards achieving an impact based, where applicable, on the indicators outlined in Annex II of the specific programme) of the objectives of Horizon 2020 and continued relevance of all related measures; the efficiency and use of resources, with particular attention to cross-cutting issues and other elements referred to in Article 14(1); and Union added value. Full coverage of all Horizon 2020 activities. 4. Planned use of evaluation results: Possible use for a mid-term revision of Horizon 2020. Input for the preparation of a possible successor programme as from 2020 onwards. 5. Actors involved: Independent experts; stakeholders; community at large; Member States. Horizon 2020 Ex-Post Evaluation 1. Deadline: 2023 2. Type: Ex-Post Evaluation3. Main issues: Rationale, implementation and achievements, as well as the longer-term impacts and sustainability. Full coverage of all Horizon 2020 activities 4. Planned use of evaluation results: Possible use for remedial action in the successor programme in light of specific issues identified during the evaluation of Horizon 2020. 5. Actors involved: Independent experts; stakeholders; community at large; Member States.

Euratom research and training programme

Title of spending programme: || Euratom research and training programme

Summary, general description of the logic and sequence of the overall progress and performance reporting framework || A new system will be developed for the evaluation and monitoring of the indirect actions of the Euratom Programme. It will be based on a comprehensive, well-timed and harmonised strategy, with a strong focus on throughput, output, results and impacts. It will be supported by an appropriate data archive, experts, a dedicated research activity, and increased cooperation with Member States and Associated States, and it will be valorised through appropriate dissemination and reporting.

General and specific objectives, indicators, milestones and targets

GENERAL OBJECTIVE* || Pursue nuclear research and training activities with an emphasis on continuous improvement of nuclear safety, security and radiation protection, notably to potentially contribute to the long-term decarbonisation of the energy system in a safe, efficient and secure way.

Impact indicator[35] || Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions at EU level compared to 1990

Baseline (2012) || Milestone 2016 || Target 2020

18% || 20% || 21%

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 1 || Supporting safety of nuclear systems

Indicator || Number of projects (joint research and/or coordinated actions) likely to lead to a demonstrable improvement in nuclear safety practice in Europe (cumulative indicator)

Baseline (Euratom 2007-2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

|| 2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 ||

41 || || 7 || || || 14[36]

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 2 || Contributing to the development of solutions for the management of ultimate nuclear waste

Indicator || Number of projects contributing to the development of safe long-term solutions for the management of ultimate nuclear waste (cumulative indicator)

Baseline (Euratom 2007-2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

|| 2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 ||

15 || || 5 || || || 8

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 3 || Support the development and sustainability of nuclear competences at Union level

Indicator 1 || Training through research - number of PhD students and Post-Doc researchers supported through the Euratom fission projects (cumulative indicator)

Baseline (Euratom 2007-2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

|| 2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 ||

200 || || 500 || || || 1000

Indicator 2 || Number of fellows and trainees in the Euratom fusion programme (average per year)

Baseline (Euratom FP7, 2007-2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

|| 2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 ||

27 || || 50 || || || 50

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 4 || Support radiation protection and development of medical applications of radiation, including, inter alia, the secure and safe supply and use of radioisotopes

Indicator || Number of projects likely to have a demonstrable impact on regulatory practice regarding radiation protection and on development of medical applications of radiation

Baseline (Euratom FP7, 2007-2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

33 || || 15 || || || 25

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 5 || Move toward demonstration of feasibility of fusion as a power source by exploiting existing and future fusion facilities

Indicator || Number of publications in peer-reviewed high impact journals (average per year)

Baseline (Euratom FP7, 2007-2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

800 || || || 800 || || 800[37]

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 6 || Lay the foundations for future fusion power plants by developing materials, technologies and conceptual design

Indicator || Percentage of the Fusion Roadmap's milestones established for the period 2014-2018 reached by the Euratom Programme

Baseline (Euratom FP7, 2007-2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

New approach || || || || || 90%

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 7 || Promote innovation and industrial competitiveness

Indicator 1 || Number of spin-offs from the fusion research under Euratom Programme

Baseline (Euratom FP7, 2007-2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

4 || || 5 || || || 10

Indicator 2 || Patent applications generated and patents awarded on the basis of research activities supported by the Euratom Programme (average per year)

Baseline (Euratom 2007-2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

3 || || 3 || || || 4

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 8 || Ensure availability and use of research infrastructures of pan-European relevance

Indicator || Number of researchers having access to research infrastructures through Euratom support

Baseline 2008 || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

Ca. 800 || || 800 || || || 1200

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 9 || To improve nuclear safety including: nuclear reactor and fuel safety, waste management, decommissioning, and emergency preparedness

Indicator 1 || JRC policy support indicator – The number of occurrences of tangible specific impacts on Union policies resulting from technical and scientific policy support provided by the JRC

Baseline 2013 || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

13 || || 12±1 || || || 12±2

Indicator 2 || The number of peer reviewed publications

Baseline (average 2010 – 2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

72 || || 72±4 || || || 72±8

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 10 || To improve nuclear security including: nuclear safeguards, non-proliferation, combating illicit trafficking, and nuclear forensics

Indicator 1 || JRC policy support indicator – The number of occurrences of tangible specific impacts on Union policies resulting from technical and scientific policy support provided by the JRC

Baseline 2013 || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

15 || || 14±1 || || || 14±2

Indicator 2 || The number of peer reviewed publications

Baseline (average 2010 – 2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

16 || || 16±1 || || || 16±2

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 11 || To increase excellence in the nuclear science base for standardisation

Indicator 1 || JRC policy support indicator – The number of occurrences of tangible specific impacts on Union policies resulting from technical and scientific policy support provided by the JRC

Baseline 2013 || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

15 || || 14±1 || || || 14±2

Indicator 2 || The number of peer reviewed publications

Baseline (average 2010 – 2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

58 || || 58±4 || || || 58±8

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 12 || To foster knowledge management, education and training

Indicator 1 || JRC policy support indicator – The number of occurrences of tangible specific impacts on Union policies resulting from technical and scientific policy support provided by the JRC

Baseline 2013 || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

13 || || 12±1 || || || 12±2

Indicator 2 || JRC scientific productivity indicator – The number of peer reviewed publications

Baseline (average 2010 – 2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

35 || || 34±2 || || || 34±4

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 13 || To support the policy of the Union on nuclear safety and security

Indicator 1 || JRC policy support indicator - The number of occurrences of tangible specific impacts on Union policies resulting from technical and scientific policy support provided by the JRC

Baseline 2013 || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

7 || || 6±1 || || || 6±1

Indicator 2 || JRC scientific productivity indicator – The number of peer reviewed publications

Baseline (average 2010 – 2013) || Milestones || Target 2018

2014 || 2015 || 2016 || 2017

Not applicable || || || || || Not applicable

Monitoring and reporting arrangements

Description of how progress on achieving milestones and targets of each objective is tracked || Progress will be monitored on the basis of reports from projects' consortia.

Actors involved in monitoring || Grant holders, Member States, Commission

Issues covered in subsequent monitoring reports || Monitoring reports will cover implementation aspects and immediate results (subject to the availability of data).

Planned use of information || The information collected through the monitoring and reporting arrangements will be used for AARs and to provide potential adjustments when preparing the Commission proposal for the next Euratom Research and Training Programme (2019-2