COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the mid-term evaluation of the Programme for exchange, assistance and training for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting ('Pericles 2020' Programme)
Date: 2017-12-06
Institutions: Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, counterfeiting, cross-border cooperation, euro, fraud, fraud against the EU

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 6.12.2017  SWD(2017) 444 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  Accompanying the document  COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT  on the mid-term evaluation of the Programme for exchange, assistance and training for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting ('Pericles 2020' Programme)    {COM(2017) 741 final} - {SWD(2017) 443 final}  
 
 
The  Pericles  2020  Programme  (hereinafter  ‘Pericles  2020’  or  the  ‘Programme’)  was 
established by Regulation (EU) No 331/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council 
on  11  March  2014  (hereinafter  'the  Regulation')  for  the  period  from  1  January  2014  to  31 
December 2020. It is a European Union (EU) initiative intended to contribute to the protection 
of the euro. In particular, the Programme provides financial support to activities intended to 
strengthen the capacity to prevent and combat counterfeiting of the euro and related fraud in 
relevant  authorities  in  EU  Member  States  (MS)  as  well  as  in  countries  outside  of  the  EU 
(hereinafter ‘third countries’). 

In  accordance  with  the  Regulation,  an  independent  mid-term  evaluation  (hereinafter  'the 
Evaluation')  of  the  Programme  shall  be  presented  by  the  Commission  to  the  European 
Parliament and to the Council by 31 December 2017. The Evaluation was carried out by an 
external  contractor  and  run  from  04/08/2016  until  30/06/2017;  it  assessed  the  Programme's 
implementation to date and provided an outlook on the future activities of the Programme. 

The  Evaluation  assessed  the  performance  of  the  Programme  to  date  in  the  context  of  the 
objectives detailed in Article 13 (4) of the Regulation taking into consideration all elements 
necessary  to  support  a  decision  to  either  renew,  modify  or  suspend  the  measures/types  of 
actions  financed  under  the  Programme.  In  line  with  Article  13  (5)  of  the  Regulation,  the 
Evaluation  also  assessed  the  long-term  impact  and  the  sustainability  of  the  effects  of  the 
Programme  with  a  view  to  informing  a  decision  on  a  possible  renewal,  modification  or 
suspension of any subsequent programme. Results on the long-term impact of the predecessor 
Programme  actions  such  as  the  overall  added  value,  the  prospects  of  the  Programme's 
sustainability and recommendations from previous evaluations were taken into account during 
this Evaluation.  

The Evaluation primarily focused on the Pericles 2020 actions for which a commitment was 
made  between  1  January  2014  and  30  June  2016.  In  practice,  the  Evaluation  involved  the 
analysis  of  27  actions,  involving  a  total  initial  EU  budgetary  commitment  of  about  €  2.3 
million (i.e. about one third of total Pericles 2020 resources). For the purpose of extrapolating 
the  assessment  of  long  term  effects,  the  analysis  of  the  Programme's  actions  was 
supplemented with the review of the previous Pericles Programme. 

Fact finding work involved the review of a variety of documentary sources, interviews with 
various institutions, and an online survey. The consultations with stakeholders were extensive 
and  involved  interviews  with  56  entities  as  well  as  the  surveying  of  227  participants  in 
Programme's actions. Considering the extensive consultations and owing to the very specific 
and specialised scope of the Programme, the Evaluation was exempted from carrying out an 
Open Public Consultation (OPC).  

The Evaluation covered all the five evaluation criteria typically used in the assessment of EU 
programmes, namely: (i) relevance; (ii) effectiveness; (iii) efficiency; (iv) EU added value; (v) 
coherence. In addition the evaluation also considered a sixth criteria: (vi) sustainability. 
The key findings of the Evaluation can be grouped by the following evaluation criteria. 

2 

 
 
 
  
 
 
Relevance.  All  available  evidence  suggests  that  the  general  and  specific  objectives  are 
relevant and are likely to remain so during the Programme’s life. Stakeholders concur that the 
strengthening  of  institutional  capacity  in  national  authorities,  which  constitutes  Pericles 
2020’s ‘core business’, is regarded as an essential element to safeguard the euro.  

Effectiveness  and  Sustainability.  Pericles  2020  actions  were  typically  implemented  as 
planned  and  achieved  the  intended  outputs.  Actions  were  usually  implemented  in  a  timely 
manner,  with  marginal  changes  in  the  work  plans;  only  one  action  out  of  27  incurred 
significant delays, due to justified reasons. The number of participants in events was largely 
in line with expectations. The Programme was successful in broadening its reach beyond the 
EU  with  two  thirds  of  participants  coming  from  non-euro  countries,  as  well  as  beyond  the 
‘traditional  constituency’  of  law  enforcement  officers,  with  a  significant  increase  in  the 
participation of representatives of judiciary, but also monetary, authorities. 

Efficiency.  The  analysis  of  Programme's  documentation  and 
the  comparison  with 
documentation  on  other  EU  programmes  suggest  that  the  funds  deployed  for  the 
implementation  of  Pericles  2020  actions  are  used 
judiciously.  Cost-effectiveness 
considerations  play  a  major  role  in  the  selection  of  actions  to  be  financed,  with  beneficial 
effects on unit costs.  

Pericles 2020 is a small programme and overhead costs, although limited in absolute terms, 
shows a high incidence. However, the Programme is highly specific and its possible merging 
with  other  EU  programmes  to  achieve  economies  of  scale  would  in  all  likelihood  lead  to  a 
decline  in  the  effectiveness  of  euro  protection  actions,  which  in  turn  may  well  more  than 
offset possible financial savings. 

Coherence and EU Added Value. Feedback from stakeholders highlights that Pericles 2020 
activities can be regarded as fully complementary and additional to national euro protection 
initiatives,  without  overlaps.  Pericles  2020  activities  also  effectively  complement  other  EU 
and international euro protection initiatives. Several Competent National Authorities (CNAs) 1 
and third country authorities have been involved in other euro protection initiatives run by the 
European Central Bank (ECB), Europol, Interpol or other Commission-managed programmes 
(e.g. TAIEX in South Eastern Europe). They regard Pericles 2020 as fairly unique; effectively 
complementing other initiatives. 

The Programme’s added value lies essentially in its ability to support forms of international 
cooperation  that  are  beyond  the  reach  of  national  authorities.  As  an  example,  all  EU 
stakeholders  concur  that  initiatives  such  as  the  establishment  of  a  dialogue  (however  initial 
and  preliminary)  with  Chinese  authorities  or  the  setting  up  of  anti-counterfeit  units  in  Latin 
America would not have been feasible without the support provided by the Programme. In a 
similar vein, a discontinuation of the Programme would have serious detrimental effects, de 

1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52015XC0812(01)&from=EN 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
   
 
                                                            
 
facto  making  it  impossible  to  perform  the  same  type  of  transnational  activities  on  a 
comparable scale.  

Conclusions and Recommendations 

All the findings converge towards an unambiguously positive overall assessment, reflected in 
the feedback received from stakeholders including the ECB and Europol. There is room for 
small  improvements,  but  from  the  evaluation  it  is  clear  that  Pericles  2020  performs  well  in 
respect of all the six evaluation criteria informing this Evaluation.  The recommendations of 
earlier  assessments  were  properly  followed  up  on  and  this  contributed  to  improve 
performance.  

Relevance. Continued Emphasis on Chinese counterfeiters and the internet is recommended.  
The risks posed by Chinese counterfeiters and by the internet have already been the subject of 
significant work under Pericles 2020; the two themes continue to rank quite high in the list of 
the  ‘new  threats’  identified  by  stakeholders  and  there  is  a  keen  interest  in  further  activities 
aiming  at  strengthening  contacts  with  relevant  government  bodies  (China)  and  improving 
investigative approaches (deep/dark net). 

Efficiency-Fine Tune Administrative Procedures. In the area of administrative procedures, 
two  themes  of  potential improvement  were  identified:  the  (in)adequacy  of  daily  subsistence 
rates used for CNAs-implemented actions and the possibility of submitting applications and 
other relevant documentation online.  

Effectiveness and Sustainability. The Evaluation flags up the need for encouraging greater 
CNAs  participation.  Currently  11  CNAs  from  the  MS  most  significantly  affected  by  euro 
counterfeiting applied to the Programme. However the potential exists to attract an increased 
number  of  applications  from  other  CNAs  Therefore  consideration  should  be  given  to  the 
establishment  of  contacts  with  high  level  decision  makers  to  ensure  that  the  opportunities 
offered by the Programme are well understood. In addition, the Evaluation underlines that the 
sustainability  of  achieved  results  will  depend  significantly  on  the  continuation  of  the 
Programme as a standalone programme until its natural expiry and beyond 2020. 

Revise Performance Indicators. The Evaluation underlines that the performance indicators 
currently  in  use  are  not  fully  aligned  with  the  capacity  building  nature  of  Pericles  2020 
activities. Therefore, consideration should be given to replacing or at least complementing the 
current indicators with qualitative ones that can more accurately capture the results of Pericles 
2020 actions.  

A  detailed  description  on  how  the  Commission  will  take  into  account  the  Evaluation's 
recommendations is included in the Staff Working Document. 

4