Projects

IDEA Consult was commissioned by the Department of Work and Social Economy to carry out an evaluation of the REACT-EU action plan. REACT-EU is an initiative that provides funding to combat the consequences of the corona crisis and is part of the European Union’s broader recovery strategy. This assignment evaluated both the policy development process and the concrete actions supported in Flanders with REACT-EU funds.

Challenge

IDEA Consult was commissioned by the Department of Work and Social Economy to evaluate the REACT-EU action plan. REACT-EU is an initiative that provides funding to combat the consequences of the corona crisis and is part of the European Union’s broader recovery strategy. This assignment evaluated both the policy development process and the concrete actions supported by REACT-EU funds in Flanders.

• In the context of policy learning, points for attention and lessons learned were captured based on the policy process that was completed, regarding the development, management and implementation of future (crisis) policy.
• A clear and transparent overview of the results achieved was provided to justify the use of the REACT-EU funds to the European Commission. To this end, the actions were evaluated on their relevance, coherence, management quality, effectiveness and impact.

Approach & result

A mix of methods was applied to carry out the assignment:

• For the policy evaluation: a study of the scientific literature on policy planning, two in-depth interviews with the responsible parties at Europa WSE and VDAB, a document analysis of relevant policy documents, 11 in-depth interviews with identified stakeholders with additional follow-up where necessary.
• For the evaluation of the action plan: an exploratory helicopter interview with DWSE and VDAB, a document analysis of the relevant call sheets, project proposals, progress reports, etc., an inventory and analysis of the available monitoring data and reports, and 12 in-depth interviews or focus groups with the managers of the actions within the action plan.

The following conclusions were formulated based on the research:

• The REACT-EU action plan is not a coherent whole, but a compilation of actions. REACT-EU funding was one of several funding streams that could be used by Flemish policy in the midst of the corona and Ukraine crises, in addition to resources from other European funds and Flemish resources. This resulted in an incoherent set of actions financed through REACT-EU.
• The action plan contains actions developed as an explicit response to the crisis, as well as actions developed separately from the crisis.
• The actions were managed by different organisations, which caused challenges in terms of follow-up.
• Administrative and technical requirements were the main factor determining the choice of actions. These requirements ruled out many possible initiatives from the outset. There was relatively little scope for developing new actions. Most of the actions funded were either already in existence or could be launched through existing initiatives.
• In order to assess whether the actions in the REACT-EU action plan were developed according to the principles of good policy, it is important for a number of actions to also include the policy process prior to the announcement of the REACT-EU funds. A large proportion of the actions stem from VESOC agreements, which went through the usual policy development process.
• The actions relating to Ukraine were set up by the Ukraine Task Force. This is a cross-policy domain task force that was established at the level of the Flemish Government to provide a cross-policy domain response to the challenges. The policy development of the Ukraine actions can be assessed as good, although the involvement of some relevant stakeholders (e.g. local authorities) was limited.
• The ‘Preparing for Community Service’ campaign was not based on a thorough assessment and rigorous policy design, and had limited stakeholder involvement.
• Due to the short duration of the REACT-EU funds, there was perceived to be little room to adjust ongoing policy actions in a timely manner based on monitoring or feedback. There were extensive evaluations of the actions after the fact, but relatively limited feedback mechanisms throughout the duration.
• ESF does not offer the appropriate framework for the roll-out of the REACT-EU crisis funding, as the fund and its rules do not appear to be suitable for crisis policy in which agility, speed and uncertainty are key.
• Other policy areas were involved too late. However, the multidisciplinary nature of the corona crisis required the involvement of multiple actors.

And the following lessons were learnt for Flemish policy:

• Link a transversal crisis strategy to a transversal financing strategy.
• In times of crisis, increase the capacity for gathering correct information, policy design, operational translation and monitoring.
• Fill in the gaps with new solutions.
• Ensure strategic cooperation between Europe, the WSE and the cabinet.
• Set aside time to learn together from a crisis approach.

And the following lessons for European policy:

• Coordinate the various European funding streams.

• Adapt administrative and technical rules to crisis conditions.