Evaluation Practice of Regional Operational Programmes in Poland

• Authors: Tomasz Kupiec
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Purpose: The study concentrated on the process of evaluation of public programs currently implemented with the support of European Union funds in Poland. The aim was to show how the evaluation practice was adopted in the regional administration within programming and implementation of Regional Operational Programs 2007–2013 (ROP). The author analysed what types of decisions are primarily supported by evaluation and what functions evaluation serves. Methodology: The quantitative analysis was based on data drawn from documentation of the full population of ROP evaluations completed in 2007 to 2012, which was acquired from 16 ROP evaluation units. Findings: The practice of evaluation was well adopted in regional administration and has grown rapidly in recent years. 236 studies, costing more than 16 million PLN, were completed by the end of 2012. However, most studies were of limited value as they concentrated on the implementation process, not on the effects and justification of intervention. Implications: This study focused on quantitative aspects of the knowledge production process (evaluation reports). It omitted the question of actual evaluation use, which together with evaluation process quality and development of evaluation culture should be a subject of further investigation. Originality: This study was the fi rst review of ROP evaluations in Poland. It went far beyond the scope of data collected previously by the Ministry of Regional Development and proposed novel categorizations of evaluation subjects that may be useful for other than ROP evaluations.

Keywords

EN

regional operational programmes; cohesion policy; evaluation.

• Publisher: Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
• Journal: Management and Business Administration. Central Europe
• Year: 2014
• Volume: 22
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 135-151

Dates

published

2014-09-15

Contributors

author

Tomasz Kupiec

References

• Alkin M.C. (1990). Debates on Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Ansoff H.I. (1985). Zarządzanie strategiczne. Warszawa: PWE.
• Batterbury S.C.E. (2006). Principles and purposes of European Union Cohesion policy evaluation. Regional Studies. 40(2): 179–188.
• Bienias S. et al. (2009). Evaluation in Poland: Brief overview of evaluation process of EU Cohesion Policy funds. In: S. Bienias, I. Lewandowska, Evaluation Systems in The Visegrad Member States, Warsaw: Ministry of Regional Development: 140–189.
• EGO s.c. (2010). Ocena systemu realizacji polityki spójności w Polsce w ramach perspektywy 2004–2006. Warszawa: Ministerstwo Rozwoju Regionalnego.
• EGO s.c. (2013). Ocena systemu realizacji polityki spójności w Polsce w ramach perspektywy 2007–2013. Warszawa: Ministerstwo Rozwoju Regionalnego.
• European Commission (2012). EVALSED: The resource for the evaluation of Socio-Economic Development, Guide, access: January 30, 2013, http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/evalsed/guide/index_en.htm.
• Farell K., Kratzmann M., McWilliam S., Robinson N., Saunders S., Ticknor J. and White K. (2002). Evaluation made Very easy Accessible, and Logical, Atlantic Centre of Excellence for Women’s Health, accessed: March 25, 2013, http://www.acewh.dal.ca/eng/reports/EVAL.pdf.
• Griffin R.W. (2002). Podstawy zarządzania organizacjami. Warszawa: PWN.
• Korporowicz L. (red.) (1997). Ewaluacja w edukacji. Warszawa: Oficyna Naukowa.
• Krajowa Jednostka Oceny (2007). Plan ewaluacji Narodowych Strategicznych Ram Odniesienia na lata 2007–2013. Warszawa: Ministerstwo Rozwoju Regionalnego.
• Lincoln Y.S. and Guba E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Mark M.M., Henry G.T. and Julnes G. (1999). Toward an Integrative Framework for Evaluation Practice. American Journal of Evaluation, 20(2): 177–198.
• Ministerstwo Rozwoju Regionalnego (2013). Raport z Krajowego Systemu Informatycznego - stan na 31 marca 2013, Access: April 18, 2013, http://www.funduszeeuropejskie.gov.pl/AnalizyRaportyPodsumowania/Strony/KSI_raporty.aspx.
• National Evaluation Unit and Skórska, P. (in print). Poland. In: K. Olejniczak, P. Strzęboszewski and S. Bienias (eds.), Evaluation of Cohesion Policy: Overview of practices. Warsaw: Ministry of Regional Development.
• Obłój K. (1998). Strategia organizacji. Warszawa: PWE.
• Olejniczak K. (2008). Mechanizmy wykorzystania ewaluacji. Studium ewaluacji średniookresowych INTERREG III. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
• Olejniczak K. (2009). Mini-Case Study: Building the evaluation system in Poland. In: European Policies Research Centre, Ex Post Evaluation of Cohesion Policy Programmes 2000-06 Co-financed by ERDF. Work Package 11: Management and Implementation System for Cohesion Policy. Glasgow: European Commission.
• Patton M.Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Rossi P.H., Freeman H.E. and Lipsey M.W. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach, 7th edition. Thousand Oaks. London: Sage.
• Royse D., Thyer B., Padget D. and Logan T. (2001). Program evaluation: An introduction (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• Rumelt R.P. (1980). The Evaluation of Business Strategy. In: W.F. Glueck, Strategic Management and Business Policy. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Scriven M. (2007). Key Evaluation Checklist, Evaluation Checklists Project. University of Michigan, accessed: July 15, 2013, http://dmeforpeace.org/sites/default/files/Scriven_Key%20Evaluation%20Checklist.pdf.
• Steiss A.W. (2003). Strategic Management for Public and Nonprofit Organizations. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.
• Stufflebeam D.L. (2001). Evaluation models. New Directions for Evaluation, 89: 7–92.
• Thompson A.A. and Strickland A.J. (1990). Strategic management: Concepts and cases. Boston: BPI/Irwin.
• Żuber P. and Bienias S. (2008). System ewaluacji w Polsce – dotychczasowe doświadczenia i wyzwania na przyszłość. In: K. Olejniczak, M. Kozak and B. Ledzion (red.), Teoria i praktyka ewaluacji interwencji publicznych. Podręcznik akademicki. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Akademickie i Profesjonalne.