This presentation was made by Anna Swiebocka, Deputy Director, Polish Ministry of Development Funds and Regional Policy. The webinar organised by SIGMA was held on 10 March 2021. Its main objective was to discuss how senior public managers manage the risks associated to public financial management, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis.
2. 1
Plan of presentation
• General information about Smart Growth OP,
• COVID-19 changes introduced,
• Identified risks for the changes,
• Changes in the procedures and documents
3. 2
Smart Growth Operational Programme
at a glance – facts and figures
• Innovation and R+D support 2014-2020
• 8,5 billion EUR,
• 98% contracted/61% certified to the EC
• 11 800 grant contracts signed,
• Beneficiaries: SME and large companies, universities,
start-ups, bussiness environment
• Grants and financial instruments,
• Dedicated almost 800 mln EUR for COVID support
4. 3
New measures COVID call for
proposals
Changes in the
onging call for
proposals
Changes in the
projects
implementation
Changes in OP
as responce to
COVID-19
EU law – CRII and CRII+ Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative
Polish law – special provisions on EU projects implementation due to COVID
5. New measures
SMEs
Liquidity
Interest 0%
Up to 6 years
500 mln EUR
4200 loans
Max 3,5 mln EUR
Loan
Fund
Medium companies
a decline in turnover of
at least 30%
150 mln EUR out of 300
3500 grants
on Temporary
Framework (max 800
000 EUR)
Grants
for
working
capital
4
6. New measures - RISKS
A. selection of financial
intermediaries
B. irregularities in
granting loans
C. loan default risk
A. control of the
Beneficiary and
intermediaries by MA
B. + C. - control of the
financial intermediaries
by Beneficiary
Loan
Fund
A. granting subsidies to
non-eligible enterprises
B. insufficient control of
applications
A. + B. Control of MA in
IB providing grants
A.+ B. IB on-the-spot
verifications of
individual operations
Grants
for
working
capital
5
No risk of uncompetitive selection of contractors – FI & SCO
7. COVID call for proposals
Enterprises + science
50 mln EUR
Grants
diagnosis, treatment
and counteracting
COVID 19
R+D
Enterprises
15 mln EUR
on Temporary
Framework
investment aid for
infrastructure for the
development, testing,
improvement and
preparation of products
to fight COVID-19
R+D
infrastructure
6
8. COVID call for proposals - RISKS
A. Low quality of calls for proposals,
B. Low quality of applications
accepted,
C. Irregular expenditure due to
insuficient controls of payment
claims or on-the-spot control
A.+B. +C.– MA management control
in IB
C. – IB control in beneficiary – on
documents and on-the-spot
R+D and
infrastructure
7
9. Changes in the on-going calls for
proposals
Panel of experts
working
remotely on
projects
assessment
Digitalisation
submitting
applications
Extention
of
deadlines
8
10. Changes in the on-going calls for
proposals - RISKS
A. granting subsidies
to non-eligible
enterprises
B. insufficient control
of applications
Digitalisation
9
A.+B. control of the
…Beneficiaries by MA
…and IB
11. Changes in the projects
implementation
expences are eligible –
products not delivered and
results not achieved
Eligibility
of
expendit
ure
on the
documents –
not on-the-
spot
Controls
submitting
payment
claims
project
completion
Extention
of
deadlines
10
Assessment of changes, influence of COVID on the project, vis maior
Individual
irregularities caused
by COVID – paid by
state budget
Shared
respons
ibility
12. Changes in the projects
implementation - RISKS
irregular
expenditure due to
insuficient controls
of payment claims
or on-the-spot
control
Eligibility
of
expendit
ure
Management
verifications and
audits might be less
“in depth” because
carried out remotely
and not on-the-spot
Controls
Projects extented will
fail anyway – big
amount of money left
at the end of the
programming period
Payment claims
submitted for smaller
amount
Delays in financing of
the project – money
left
Extention
of
deadlines
11
Assessment of changes, influence of COVID on the project, vis maior
Insuficient control of
Beneficiary may
cause large loss in
state budget
Shared
respons
ibility
13. Changes in the procedures of
MA and IB
Checklists of
payment
claims
Annual
control plan
12
The scope of
controls
Risk analisys of
the Program and of
all the institutions
Control procedures:
2 stages of controls:
- on the documents,
- on the spot,
- mix: on-line on the
spot controls -
recorded
Panels of experts
recorded
COVID justification
assessment
14. Thank you for your attention
in case of any questions or doubts:
anna.swiebocka@mfipr.gov.pl
13
Editor's Notes
In Poland we have 6 national and 16 regional operational programme. On the national level the Managing Authority is my Ministry.
The Programme that I am representing in called Smart Growth
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, Regulation (EU) No 1301/2013 and Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 as regards specific measures to mobilise investments in the health care systems of the Member States and in other sectors of their economies in response to the COVID-19 outbreak [Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative]
investment in products and services necessary for fostering the crisis response capacities in health services
ERDF may support the financing of working capital in SMEs where necessary as a temporary measure to provide an effective response to a public health crisis;
239 amendments to their existing Cohesion Policy programmes using the flexibilities offered by CRII and CRII Plus. The Commission has modified its internal procedures to allow for a swift treatment of all requests under lighter, faster procedures. The administrative burden has been alleviated through extension of deadlines, enlargement of project scope and other simplifications. All Member States automatically benefit from these measures regardless of whether or not they introduce any changes.
The Commission also made all Coronavirus crisis related expenditure since February 1, 2020 eligible under cohesion policy rules.
Flexibility in changing OPs and in reallocation of funds between priorities - fast track of changes
Polish law was adopted on 3 of April 2020
Official approval of the changes in the Smart Growth OP was at the begginig of July – it shows how quickly the decisions were made
Extremely short time to choose intermediaries – these are banks and local development funds or organisations supporting SMEs
Intermediaries were obliged to start operating in 2 weeks –
In case of Grants for working capital – as we use Simplified cost options to calculate the amount of grant, the irregularities may be caused by insufficient control of grant applications
To give you the example of projects which were granted support – we can find laboratories to develop new types of protective coveralls, respiratories or disinfectants,
Risks of not adapting our audit approach to the new more flexible rules on State aid and public procurement
Related to public procurement
Undue use of the emergency / urgent procedures even when the necessary conditions are not/no longer satisfied (exceptional procedures used for more than to cover the gap until return to normal procedures is possible);
Simplified rules for emergency/ urgency procedures are disregarded
Lack / insufficient audit trail on the need to use emergency /urgent procedures;
Conflict of interest and corruption because of less competitive procedures;
Low quality tender specifications due to the short deadlines. The low quality may lead to changes of the contract during implementation.
Entering into contractual relationship with unreliable counterparts, i.e. insufficient verification of admissibility criteria;
In case the Member States apply the derogation to mandatory exclusion grounds the EU funding could go to companies who committed serious crimes;
Overpricing due to the emergency situation
Related to the urgency of the situation
Low quality of calls for proposals, which might make it more difficult for beneficiaries to participate, might affect the quality of the applications, it might also complicate the assessment of proposals.
Acceptance of applications for operations of lower quality/of “borderline eligibility” due to pressure to take up new possibilities within limited time;
Pressure to spend the additional money quickly could reduce the time / rigorous approach for the selection of operations and the management verifications;
Declaration of irregular expenditure due to more limited management verifications, affected by time pressure in combination with COVID confinement rules. No or less on-the-spot management verifications prior to declaration.
Related to the CRII and CRII plus amendments of the CPR and the new instruments
Retrospective funding of operations (narrowly allowed under CRII amendments back to 1st February 2020) potentially increases the risk of irregularities as the operations did not go through a complete ex-ante selection procedure.
Specific inherent risks depending on the type of investment supported (SME support, short time work schemes, health equipment and infrastructure…).
100% co-financing rate might bring a risk of less controls because national financial resources are not at stake;
“Lighter” assurance due to smaller sample of audits of operations or due to non-finalised audits of operations.
Related to the pressure / workload for the authorities
Overlap of programming periods
2014-2020: large additional funds (REACT-EU) which need to be negotiated / programmed / spend in parallel to the start of the next programming period
2021-2027: large additional funds possibly managed and controlled by the same authorities (RRF, increase of the JTF) while the negotiations are on-going, (projects may receive both RRF and ERDF/CF funding but not for the same costs), overlapping thematic objectives may generate a risk of double financing;
Insufficient administrative capacity: without prejudice to the additional Technical assistance provided, Member States need time to increase their administrative capacity in particular related to control activities.
Related to the sanitary situation
Programme implementation can be affected by the impact of sanitary situation on functioning of authorities. Confinement and Stay-at-Home measures might have negative impact on co-ordination, flow of information, and efficiency of services involved in the management and control system of the EU programmes and on the interaction with (potential) beneficiaries. Adjustments to remote working environment might take some time to settle in.
Management verifications and audits might be less “in depth” because being carried out remotely and not on the spot;
Existing projects (already selected and partially implemented before the sanitary crisis) might have difficulties to deliver (e.g. conferences that did not take place, staff for a R&D project that could not work in the laboratory).
Related to the multiplication of instruments
Risk of double funding between different funding instruments or programmes (contracting authorities may fail to exchange information on applications for funding, projects and irregularities. Risks increase in situations in which there is no listing of risky or excluded operations or of beneficiaries involved in many projects covering the whole Member State);
Due to the “competition” between different instruments, especially if for some instruments it is easier to justify costs (RRF) or if for one instrument the money needs to be spent faster (2023 (REACT) and 2026 (RRF) horizons).
It is wotrh to underline here that we as the Ministry, changed for the remote work in 3 days. Of course not everybody had sufficient hardware but we could use our private computers and VPNs to connect the Ministerial network.
But most of the information concerning European funds implementation is in the computer system. 5 years ago, in the previous financial perspective this digitalisation would not be possible.
My collegues have to go to the office only if thay deal with Polish courts or police. We can say that for European funds COVID was manageble from our home-offices.