Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Framework



In the not so distant future in a galaxy not so far away, a new CAP is coming based on performance and looking to achieve what no CAP before it has…

The new performance monitoring and evaluation framework (PMEF) and the transition to a performance-based delivery model presents various practical challenges for the EU countries. Member States are currently concerned with understanding the new requirements, drawing the lessons from the period 2014-2020, but also to get prepared for the establishment of the new system to measure and assess the performance of the CAP.

An Evaluator’s Eye

Involving the evaluator in the set up and operation of the performance framework may lead to positive contributions in various ways (Figure 1):



  • In the setting-up phase of the performance framework the evaluator may check if there is an effective process in place which involves from an early stage relevant working groups to prepare and establish the performance framework at the national (and where applicable at regional) level.
  • The operationalisation of the conceptual elements of the performance framework includes for example, that the relevant procedures to link operations with specific objectives and result indicators are appropriate and in line with the common indicator fiches. It is also recommended to involve the future certification body from an early stage as an independent observer.
  • The evaluator may check if the requirements of the performance framework are well understood by all key actors that are involved in planning and operating the future system.
  • The evaluator can serve to recognise if the planned timing for the necessary adaptations to the IT system have started at an early enough stage to allow for smooth operations right from the beginning of the implementation period.
  • The planned process for collecting data on operations, areas and animals must be suitable for the purpose of monitoring and evaluating the CAP. The evaluator can play an important role in making sure this is achieved. This concerns for example checking the data for IACS and non-IACS interventions, but also the whole system to collect data from beneficiaries and to verify planned data with actual data, where necessary.
  • The evaluator can verify if there is a suitable process for the preparation of the Draft Performance Report and make sure it is ready for consultation with the relevant actors, in order to discuss and improve it before its submission to the European Commission.
  • The evaluator can further check the provisions to ensure that all required reports can be realistically delivered on time.
  • Lastly, the planned follow-up procedures must be suitable to deal with monitoring and evaluation findings. This is essential in order to close the cycle of policy learning and take the necessary remedial actions. In this respect, a revision of the evaluation plan may be necessary, and the evaluator can help to guide in this regard.

Figure 1 outlines the workflow to establish and operate within the PMEF. In the course of the ex ante evaluation the evaluator may check whether the relevant pre-conditions are met and the planned procedures for the performance framework are adequate. Later, during a possible ‘ongoing’ evaluation the evaluator may be asked to assess the actual functioning of the system in practice.