Joint Programme Monitoring Committee minutes: June 2017
Minutes and associated papers from the June 2017 meeting of the Joint Programme Monitoring Committee (JPMC).
Attendees and apologies
In attendance:
Liz Ditchburn, Scottish Government (Chair)
Mary McAllan, Scottish Government
David Anderson, Scottish Government
Lorna Gregson-MacLeod, Scottish Government
Louisa Harvey, Scottish Government
Ewen Scott, Scottish Government
Ian Davidson, Scottish Government
Mike Palmer, Scottish Government
Thomas Glen, SOLACE (East Dunbartonshire Council)
Stuart Black, HOPS (Highland Council)
Alistair Buchan, Scottish Islands Local Authorities (Orkney Islands Council)
Francesca Giannini (sub), Scottish Enterprise
Sharon Thomson, (sub) SLAED (Glasgow City Council)
Vicki Swales, Environment LINK
Diane Greenlees (sub), Skills Development Scotland
Lucy McTernan (sub), Scottish Council of Voluntary Organisations
Carroll Buxton, Highlands & Islands Enterprise (phone)
Nicolas Gibert-Morin, European Commission DG Emploi
Tarja Tiainen-Balsby, European Commission DG Agri
Fiona Grossmann, European Commission DG Agri
Guus Muijzers, European Commission DG Regio
Sabine Germe, European Commission DG Regio
Apologies:
Iain Scott, Scottish Enterprise
Martin Sime, Scottish Council of Voluntary Organisations
Joanna Gawrylczyk-Malesa, European Commission DG Emploi
Mark Bevan, Scottish Council for Development and Industry
Pamela Smith, SLAED
Damian Yeates, Skills Development Scotland
Items and actions
Item 01: Welcome and Introduction
The Chair welcomed members to the meeting.
Agenda items for discussion
Item 02: Minutes from meeting on 30 November 2016
The minutes were accepted. All actions closed or addressed through agenda items.
Item 03: ESIF Programme Performance
Spend is still low due to the volume of claims received. The ESF Managing Authority is aware good progress is being made across a number of interventions following feedback as part of the review. However the MA is very aware that receiving and paying claims before the year end is high priority. ESF MA is expecting a high volume of claim submissions once the CSV upload option is available at the start of July. System testing of the CSV upload is underway and progressing well.
Concern was raised around the low spend but the MA is aware of the level of urgency in picking up the pace in this regard.
EAFRD claim figures weren’t available at the time of issuing papers. This will be provided for the next meeting.
Noted as a number of new members it would be useful to issue the remit and membership of relevant groups to the Committee.
Action 01: Issue remit and membership to group. Copy of Terms of Reference for JPMC will be issued with minutes. The TOR refers to the governance structure.
Item 04: Verbal update on Programmes
Update from Highlands and Islands Territorial Committee who discussed and welcomed the recommendations of the recent Review and the recommended use of Technical Assistance in the provision of an Information Service for funding options.
Action 02: Membership list and terms of reference of HITC to be distributed to the group for information
Item 05: ESIF Programmes Risk Register and Issues log
Discussion focused on the expanded register which now covers all of the issues and allocates a target rating. Controls are now in place ensuring lessons learned from the previous program are implemented. The majority of issues are currently at amber given the early stages of the programmes and pace of delivery but there is no complacency in the MA approach to monitoring and resolving these. Discussion over whether the current settings are the most appropriate, particularly considering pace of delivery, lack of submitted claims and around YEI. Committee also suggested the MA look to set RAG status for likelihood and impact if not achieved. MA committed to reviewing and reissuing. In addition the following issues were raised:
- Concerns over pace of spend.
- EAFRD: Getting data on progress and on the various schemes from the IT system is difficult and presenting challenges in being able to adjust and react where necessary.
- Risk register to be provided for SRDP.
- Local Authority representatives asked for clarification on the differential in LEADER and ESF spending deadlines. POST JPMC NOTE: LEADER confirmed post meeting that the date they have set for the defrayal of funds for projects is 31/12/2020.
Action 03: Take forward the development of the Risk Register. ESF risk-register to include impact of risks. To be provided to Committee for end July.
Action 04: Risk register for SRDP, including LEADER to be provided.
Action 05: Confirm date for LEADER. As per note above, point closed.
Items for decision
Item 06: Recommendations from Review
There are 5 recommendations following the analysis of survey data from Lead Partners on performance to date and a review of the Socio-Economic analysis on which the programmes were built. The review confirms that the strategy remains valid and the logic sound. However it has identified that some adjustments to both the scope of the programmes and the allocations are required in order to fully commit and to meet performance targets. These adjustments will also aid the issues with absorption which have been identified. The Committee discussed non-100% staff costs. Agreed to 40% minimum of time required to be eligible for support.
The Commission asked the Committee and MA to note that raising the co-finance rates would lead to a reduction in the total programme value and therefore will not be accepted by the Commission without strong justification. In response to queries, Lorna Gregson-MacLeod highlighted that there was insufficient evidence to suggest LUPS rates, beyond those in the Review paper, were hampering commitment and progress. However, it was agreed that there would be further discussion on using any flexibility available within the current Programmes.
Decision: JPMC content to approve recommendations with the proviso that further discussion take place around using appropriate intervention rate flexibility within the current programmes.
Action 06: Further discussion on using the flexibility within the current programmes to consider increased intervention rates.
Item 07: AIR
Papers were noted. Due to time constraints it was agreed that any comments be forwarded to Louisa Harvey for action if appropriate.
It was noted that the AIR should acknowledge the slow financial progress to date and recognise the impact this could have.
Action 07: SRDP to follow by written procedure. Issued 27/6/17. Closed.
Action 08: ESF and ERDF AIR to recognise that claimed expenditure is low and the potential impact of slow financial implementation.
Item 08: Communication Strategy Refresh & Communications Update
The majority of the work thus far has gone into the development of the new website. Proposed plan for the coming year is to launch a newsletter next month to Lead Partners, host the first of our themed Lead Partner events in August and develop a Lead Partner Social Media Toolkit. The annual event will take place in September.
Decision: JPMC approve update
Item 09: Update on technical assistance
A survey was conducted amongst a number of Third Sector organisations seeking views & comments on their ability to access the programmes which concluded that there was little evidence to support the provision of general TA to the Third Sector.
The recent HITC meeting discussed the paper and members felt TA could be better used to make the funding options available more accessible. This has still to be scoped out in order to provide a 2 year service which would better promote the funding opportunities arising from individual strategic interventions under ESF & ERDF.
Decision: No consensus was reached as the JPMC felt this merited further discussion in a smaller group. Thomas, Lucy, Diane, Francesca, Stuart and Vicki expressed an interest in taking part in these discusssions.
Action 09: MA to establish a working group to further the discussion on the use of Technical Assistance.
Items for information
Items 10 and 11: Operational Updates on EAFRD and EMFF
Update provided on EMFF.
The Atlantic Strategy Conference is taking place on 8th November in Glasgow and all welcome to attend.
Item 12: AOB
Extension letters will be issued by the end of the summer.
Next steps will be communicated with Lead Partners regarding extensions and applying for a second phase of funding.
MA asked if members could ensure the Membership list for the JPMC is correct and confirm if the representative of any group needs updating
Action 10: Members to review membership list and advice of any changes.
Next JPMC meeting: Wednesday 22nd November. Please note a meeting request will be issued shortly for the full day. Times will be set the start of November once members have confirmed they are attending and will be determined by members’ travel times.
Action points from JPMC Meeting on 2 June 2017
| Action | Owner | Complete | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Noted a number of new members sitting on Committee. Committee membership and remit will be reissued to all members | Secretariat | Issued with draft minutes 12/7/17 | |
| 2 | Membership list of HITC to be distributed to the group for information and link to website showing how groups link into each other | ESF/ERDF MA | Issued with draft minutes 12/7/17 | |
| 3 | Take forward the development of the ESF risk register. To include impact of risks. To be provided to Committee for end July. | ESF/ERDF MA | complete | |
| 4 | Take forward the development of EAFRD Risk Register, including LEADER. | EAFRD MA | complete | |
| 5 | Confirm final defrayal dates for LEADER. | EAFRD MA | Confirmed 31/12/2020 | |
| 6 | Discussion on using current programme flexibility to increase IRs | ESF/ERDF MA | complete | |
| 7 | SRDP AIR to be issued by written procedure | Issued 27/6/17. | ||
| 8 | ESF and ERDF AIR to recognise that we are behind and the potential impact of slow financial implementation. | ESF/ERDF MA | complete | |
| 9 | MA to establish a working group to further the discussion on the use of Technical Assistance. | ESF/ERDF MA | Group established. Discussions ongoing. Replaced by updated action at next meeting. This is therefore considered closed | |
| 10 | Members to ensure most appropriate person on group and confirm if any changes | Committee members | No updates provided. Closed |
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback