COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EVALUATION of e-Cohesion in 2014-2020
Date: 2023-07-12
Institutions: Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, European Commission
Subjects: Cohesion Fund, European Regional Development Fund, European Structural and Investment Funds, administrative formalities, data processing, distribution of EU funding, economic and social cohesion, exchange of information, information system, operational programme

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 12.7.2023  SWD(2023) 259 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EVALUATION  of e-Cohesion in 2014-2020 {SWD(2023) 258 final}  
 
 
1.  CONTEXT AND SCOPE 

Digitalisation  was  one  of  the  simplification  measures  reinforced  in  the  EU  Regulations 
governing cohesion policy investments in the 2014-2020 programming period. As such, 
electronic  data  exchange  systems  between  beneficiaries  and  programme  authorities,  or 
‘e-Cohesion  systems’,  were  created  or  further  developed  and  subsequently  used  during 
the implementation of the programmes. 

The  European  Commission’s  Directorate-General  for  Regional  and  Urban  Policy 
prepared  a  staff  working  document  to  report  on  the  results  of  the  evaluation  of 
e-Cohesion  systems  in  the  2014-2020  programming  period.  The  evaluation  was 
conducted by an external contractor between November 2020 and May 2022 and the final 
report was published in June 2022. 

The  evaluation  of  e-Cohesion  in  the  2014-2020  programming  period  sought  to:  (a) 
collect  and  provide  up-to-date  information  on  the  implementation  and  performance  of 
e-Cohesion systems in the Member States; (b) identify good practices and the challenges 
of  the  e-Cohesion  systems;  (c)  assess  whether  the  desired  policy  objectives  were 
achieved;  (d)  identify  possible  features  for  further  improving  the  performance  of  the 
e-Cohesion systems in the 2021-2027 programming period. 

the  European  Regional 
The  evaluation  examined  302  programmes  funded  by 
Development Fund (ERDF) and the Cohesion Fund (CF) in the 2014-2020 programming 
period,  for  which  108  e-Cohesion  systems  were  mapped  and  analysed.  The  evaluation 
methodology  included  documentary  research,  large-scale  surveys  addressed  to  all  users 
of  e-Cohesion  systems,  case  studies,  interviews  and  a  webinar.  Six  evaluation  criteria 
were  addressed,  covering  the  five  Better  Regulation  criteria  (effectiveness,  efficiency, 
coherence, relevance and EU added value) and the user-friendliness of the systems. 

2.  FINDINGS 

The  main  objective  of  introducing  e-Cohesion  systems  in  the  2014-2020  programming 
period  was  to  simplify  and  streamline  the  implementation  of  cohesion  policy 
programmes by reducing the administrative burden for beneficiaries and authorities. The 
evaluation found that this objective had been met, as both beneficiaries and programme 
authorities  consistently  reported  that  the  introduction  of  e-Cohesion  systems  had 
simplified  the  exchange  of  information  between  them  and  reduced  the  administrative 
burden in implementing ERDF and CF projects and programmes. 

Effectiveness 

Most  of  the  systems  had  integrated  the  expected  modules  and  features,  in  particular 
ensuring  the  availability  of  all  previously  processed  data  and  documents,  interactive 
forms  and/or  forms  prefilled  by  the  system  and  online  status  tracking.  The  e-Cohesion 
systems were used extensively for: (1) submitting and managing payment claims and (2) 

1 

 
 
reporting  on  progress.  The  systems  also  played  an  important  role  in  communication 
between  beneficiaries  and  programme  authorities  in  relation  to  these  two  processes. 
Alternative  means of  communication  between beneficiaries  and programme authorities, 
such as email, were still used in certain instances, mostly for the exchange of information 
relating to audit verifications. In this respect, the evaluation found that a possible reason 
for  the  use  of  alternative  means  of  communication,  despite  the  availability  of  an 
e-Cohesion  system,  may  be  the  absence  of  an  e-signature  feature  embedded  in  the 
system. 

Efficiency 

The evaluation found that the introduction of e-Cohesion systems led to faster and more 
economical  information  exchange.  Beneficiaries  reported  that  the  introduction  of  the 
e-Cohesion  systems  resulted  in  faster  handling  of  payment  requests  and  progress 
reporting. 

Coherence 

The  evaluation  found  that  all  targeted  categories  of  programme  authorities  (managing 
authorities, intermediate bodies, certifying authorities and audit authorities) had access to 
and were able to use the systems. The evaluation also found that the e-Cohesion systems 
were more likely to be connected to the central monitoring system than to other national 
registries,  databases  or  other  European  systems  (such  as  the  System  for  Fund 
Management in the European Union - SFC)1. The interoperability of e-Cohesion systems 
with external registers or databases at the national level is one feature considered useful 
both by both programme authorities and beneficiaries, but is not yet widely developed. A 
possible  explanation  for  the  limited  uptake  of  interconnectivity  with  other  national 
registers and databases could be a lack of harmonisation and integration of the definitions 
of common concepts (for example, different terminology used in European and national 
legislation)  and  protocols  (for  example,  different  sets  of  rules  and  guidelines  for 
communicating data) between the programme and the national systems. 

Relevance 

e-Cohesion systems were widely used by programme authorities and beneficiaries alike. 
The  evaluation  showed  that  systems  are  used  most  extensively  by  representatives  of 
managing authorities and certifying authorities, and least used by representatives of audit 
authorities. This can be explained by the use of alternative means of communication (i.e. 
emails)  identified  in  some  instances  for  the  audit  verification  process.  Embedding  an 
e-signature feature in e-Cohesion systems could be a useful way of reducing the use of 
alternative means of communication for audit verification purposes. 

1 SFC is the electronic data exchange system for all official exchanges between the Member State and the 

Commission. 

2 

 
 
                                                           
EU added value 

The  evaluation  found  that  the  regulatory  requirement  to  introduce  e-Cohesion  systems 
triggered  both  the  deployment  of  new  systems  and  the  integration  of  the  required 
functionalities  and  processes  into  existing  ones.  Constructive  dialogue  between  the 
European  Commission  and  the  programme  authorities  throughout  the  preparation  and 
implementation  of  the  2014-2020  programming  period  contributed  to  this  positive 
outcome. 

User-friendliness 

The  evaluation  found  that  e-Cohesion  systems  are  user-friendly.  The  helpdesk 
functionalities  and  the  gathering  of  user  feedback  and  its  incorporation  into  further 
system  development  were  singled  out  by  users  as  important  features  in  this  respect. 
Future developments in areas such as response time, system stability, the user interface, 
as well as the production of tutorials, guides or other user documentation, could further 
improve the user-friendliness of the systems. 

The evaluation found that e-Cohesion systems contributed to the EU’s digital progress by 
simplifying  the  exchange  of  information  and  reducing  administrative  burden.  The 
evaluation  also  found  that  further  simplification  and  reduction  of  the  administrative 
burden  could  be  achieved  with  additional  developments  targeting  the  interoperability 
between  e-Cohesion  systems  and  national  databases  and  systems.  Furthermore,  the 
integration of other processes and features (such as e-signature) into the existing systems 
could further incentivise beneficiaries to harness these simplification measures. 

3