Detailed Guidance on using simplified costs

Transcription

1 November 2014 Wales European Structural & Investment Fund Programmes Detailed Guidance on using simplified costs Version 1 February 2015 Version 1 1

2 Table of Contents Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Introduction and overview Optional or mandatory? Applicability: when can simplified costs be used? How do flat-rates work? How do unit costs and lump sums work? Establishing and justifying the flat-rate percentage, the unit cost or the lump sum Applying simplified costs in collaborative operations (joint beneficiaries, more than one project ); and operations that provide direct financial support to enterprises or individuals (grant schemes). Section 8 Section 9 Management, control and audit of simplified costs Other important issues Combining different simplified costs in the same operation Compatibility with State aid rules Reporting and auditing of the national co-financing contribution ( match funding ) ERDF-ESF cross-financing flexibility Operations that generate net revenue Assessing thresholds ANNEX 1 ANNEX 2 ANNEX 3 Worked examples Compatibility with State aid rules a worked example Rural Development Programme using simplified costs for EAFRD measures

3 SECTION 1: Introduction and overview Purpose of guidance The purpose of this document is to provide detailed operational guidance on the simplified costs applicable to the ESI Funds in Wales, with a view to encouraging their widest possible use to secure simplification for beneficiaries. The options and examples provided are for illustrative purposes only and their inclusion should not be interpreted as a recommendation or requirement for similar operations. Importantly, the only simplified costs available at a particular point in time, for the ESI Funds managed by the Welsh Government, are those described in the Wales national eligibility rules Rules and Conditions for support from the European Structural and Investment Funds The Welsh national eligibility rules set out the cases where the EU Regulations mandates the use of simplified costs (small ESF operations) as well as the cases where the Welsh Government has decided to offer, or mandate, some of the other possibilities provided by the Regulations. The guidance document is based on guidance prepared by the European Commission [EGESIF_ , September 2014] but modified to reflect the planned use of simplified costs in Wales and local terminology, currency etc. Why use simplified costs? Background The use of flat rates, unit costs and lump sums (referred to as simplified costs or SCOs/ Simplified Cost Options) is considered by the European Commission (EC) and European Court of Auditors as a better way of calculating eligible project costs because, when compared to the traditional real costs reimbursement method, it reduces the likelihood of error and corresponding administrative and audit burden on beneficiaries. For the period, the EC is therefore expanding the range of simplified costs for the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) as well as for other EU funds (Horizon 2020, Erasmus + for instance). In relation to the European Social Fund (ESF), the EC is aiming for simplified costs to be used for up to 50% of ESF transactions by 2017, excluding those projects not eligible for SCOs because they are fully implemented through a tendering procedure. 3

4 Advantages of simplified costs Where simplified costs are used, eligible costs are calculated according to a predefined method based on activities, outputs, results or as a fixed percentage of some other costs. The tracing of every pound of expenditure to individual supporting financial documents - such as purchase orders, invoices and bank statements - is no longer required: this is the key point of simplified costs as it significantly alleviates the administrative burden. Using simplified costs means also that the human resources and administrative effort involved in management of the ESI Funds can be focused more on the achievement of policy objectives instead of being concentrated on collecting and verifying financial documents. It could also facilitate access of small beneficiaries and/ or wider participation of the private sector to the ESI Funds thanks to the simplification of the management process. Simplified costs also contribute to more correct use of the ESI Funds (lower error rates). For many years the European Court of Auditors has repeatedly recommended to the EC to encourage and extend the use of simplified costs, especially as regards the ESF. 4

5 SECTION 2: Optional or mandatory? This guidance concerns the European Structural and Investment (ESI) fund programmes managed by the Welsh Government, namely: European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) European Social Fund (ESF) The EU legislation only insists on the use of simplified costs for small ESF operations. Beyond this, the relevant programme authorities (i.e. in Wales, the Welsh Government) determine the extent that simplified costs will be used and whether they are optional or mandatory. Details of the simplified costs available in the Wales programmes, and whether they are optional or mandatory, are set out in the Rules and Conditions for support from the European Structural and Investment Funds and are subject to change throughout the programme period, with any changes taking effect only for new operations approved from that point forward. In cases where the use of simplified costs is mandatory for some but not all operations or where differentiated SCOs are offered, the scope to be applied - i.e. the type of operations/ projects and activities of beneficiaries for which simplified costs are to be applied - will be clearly specified and published in accordance with the general principles of transparency and equal treatment. When simplified costs are approved for an operation, all relevant terms and conditions are set out in the funding agreement/ award letter (the document from the programme managing authority that sets out the conditions for support). Meaning of a small ESF operation and exceptions Small ESF operations must declare all expenditure using simplified costs. In the context of simplified costs, small operations are defined by the EC as grants and repayable assistance for which the public support does not exceed EUR 50,000. This amount has to be considered as the maximum public support that will be paid to the beneficiary, as specified in the WEFO Funding Agreement. The amount therefore includes both the expected ESF contribution and the corresponding public match funding that will be paid to the beneficiary. Therefore, the amount does not include any public contribution provided by the beneficiary itself (own match funding and therefore not paid to the beneficiary) or any salaries/ allowances disbursed by a third party for the benefit of ESF participants (e.g. employers contributions in-kind). 5

6 This assessment is only required at funding approval stage i.e. based on forecast/ programmed expenditure. The public support actually paid to the beneficiary at closure of the operation has no influence on the rule. Exceptions Simplified costs are not mandatory in small ESF operations where, either: Where the operation does not qualify for the use of simplified costs because the operation, or a project forming part of the operation, is to be fully procured; or When the ESF operation is receiving support within the framework of a state aid scheme: the rules of the state aid scheme must be applied and so, before mandating the use of simplified costs, WEFO must ensure that state aid rules do not prevent the application of simplified costs in such schemes. EAFRD Note for Welsh Government staff administering the Rural Development Programme The managing authority must ensure that the relevant calculations as regards simplified costs are adequate and accurate if established in advance on the basis of a fair, equitable and verifiable calculation [this methodology is explained in Section 6]. To this end, a body that is functionally independent from the authorities responsible for implementing the programme and possesses the appropriate expertise will perform the calculations or confirm their adequacy and accuracy. A statement confirming the adequacy and accuracy of the calculations must be included in the rural development programme (RDP) [see Article 62, EU 1305/2013]. Such calculations and the above statement do not have to be performed or submitted if the managing authority uses one of these methods to establish the simplified costs: in accordance with the rules for application of corresponding scales of unit costs, lumps sums and flat rates applicable in EU policies for a similar type of operation and beneficiary [see Section 6] in accordance with the rules for application of corresponding scales of unit costs, lumps sums and flat rates applied under schemes for grants funded entirely by the Member State for a similar type of operation and beneficiary [see section 6] Rates established directly by EU Regulation 1303/2013. Specific methods for determining amounts established in accordance with the 6

7 EAFRD fund-specific rules. The RDP should only include the methodology used for calculating the payments based on simplified costs. If this methodology does not vary throughout the programming period, the programme would not have to be modified. If a system of Simplified costs is introduced as a payment mechanism under a specific measure, the programme should be accordingly modified. Please refer to the Annex 3 for a list of EAFRD measures which fall under the scope of simplified costs. 7

8 SECTION 3: Applicability: when can simplified costs be used? Rule 1: Simplified costs are only to be used only in the case of grants or repayable assistance. Other types of financial support from the ESI Funds, such as Financial Instruments (repayable investments such as loans, equity, guarantees etc.), cannot therefore use simplified costs [EU 1303/2013 Articles 67 and 68]. Rule 2: When an entire operation is implemented exclusively through procurement, simplified costs must not be used. Rule 3: Where a project, forming part of a wider operation, is implemented exclusively through procurement, simplified costs must not be used for that particular project. Other projects in the operation can continue to use Simplified costs if not implemented exclusively through procurement. Other than these core qualifying rules, simplified costs can be considered for all operations, especially: to help focus more on outputs and results instead of inputs (spending); when real costs are difficult to verify and to demonstrate (many small cost items with little or no singular impact on the expected output of the operation, complex apportionment methodologies needed etc.; when there is a heightened risk that accounting documents will not be properly retained (by small organisations or temporary collaborations for instance); or when the operation already aligns with a standard national funding framework or when simplified costs are already established for similar types of operations and beneficiaries under national public funded schemes (UK/ Wales or local). Meaning of fully procured This means outsourced/ contracted with project activity implemented exclusively through the procurement of works, goods or services [EU 1303/2013 Article 67(4)]. The beneficiary retains the core EU project management and administration tasks for example, carrying out the procurement procedures, managing contract performance, paying invoices, submitting payment claims to the EU programme authorities - but the responsibility for delivering the associated project activity is performed by contractors, suppliers or service providers. Although full procurement means that ESI fund simplified costs are not applicable, it is still possible for contractual payments, from the beneficiary to the contractor, to be 8

9 based on agreed unit costs, lump sums or flat-rates if this is agreed as the preferred pricing terms for the contract. The invoices paid through such contracts still constitute real costs (actually incurred and paid by the beneficiary) even though it may be defined in the contract itself as a standard scale of unit costs, lump sum or flat-rate amounts. The simplified cost provisions set out in the EU Regulations and this guidance do not apply as they are considered to be real costs - not simplified costs. Example (ESF) If a beneficiary implements a training course via procurement, it is possible that in the call for tenders the beneficiary asks the bidders to make a price offer on the basis of a unit cost per trainee gaining certification at the end of the course. The terms of the contract could therefore be: one trainee certified = 1,250 payable to the contractor. If, at the end of the course, 10 trainees are certified, the beneficiary can declare 12,500 of eligible expenditure to WEFO. This 12,500 will be considered as real cost basis, being the amount paid to the contractor. Therefore a control or audit of this expenditure will consist in a check of the procurement procedure and observance of the terms of the contract (in this example, that there is proof of a trainee certified for each unit cost paid). The underlying costs of the training incurred by the contractor (renting of facilities, staff costs ) will not be checked as the contract does not provide for reimbursement on this basis. Where simplified costs are available to an operation, because the operation is not fully procured, it then has to be determined whether they can be applied to all or only some elements of the operation. In order to assess to which projects, within a wider operation, that simplified costs can be applied to, it is necessary to define the projects at the lowest possible level. In Wales, an operation consists of, and is implemented through, one or a group of projects. For more details of the meaning of project in Structural Funds operations, please see separate guidance document WEFO Delivery Models Similarly, the Wales Rural Development Programme clarifies meaning of operation in relation to investments supported by the EAFRD. For application of the fully procured rules, the separate parts of the operation could be projects (different beneficiaries) or separate activities within a project (same beneficiary) see ERDF example below. 9

10 If the beneficiary outsources the entire delivery of some of the projects or activities in an operation via procured contracts, simplified costs cannot be applied to those projects or activities that are subject to procurement. The remaining projects or activities remain eligible for simplified costs because they have not been outsourced. Example (ERDF): A local authority receives an ERDF grant award for a maximum amount of 1m eligible costs for the construction of a road. For this the local authority will award a public works contract of an estimated value of 700k. In addition the local authority incurs related costs of 300k itself as a beneficiary (expropriations, litigation costs, monitoring of the progress on the ground, environmental studies carried out by local authority staff, campaigns, tests for the acceptance of the road etc.). In order to assess to which projects the simplified costs can be applied to, it is necessary to define the projects at the lowest possible levels. In this case, there are two distinct activities of the operation a) construction of road by a contractor b) related support activity undertaken by the local authority. Part 1 - for the amount of 700k of procured costs, these cannot be considered for simplified costs as they are a fully procured activity. Part 2 - For the amount of 300k of direct costs (activities that are not fully procured) and insofar as these costs are eligible under the Welsh and EU provisions, simplified costs can apply e.g. the local authority s indirect costs could be calculated on a flat-rate basis (percentage of beneficiary s direct staff costs). Contracted costs in projects or activities that are not fully procured If the beneficiary itself directly delivers a project (meaning keeping full control of the management and implementation of the project not outsourcing/ not fully procured), the simplified costs remain available, even if some of the costs within the project need to be contracted (e.g. some of the project implementation costs like cleaning services, external expertise, purchase of furniture, etc.). In the case of flat rates for indirect costs in eligible research, development and innovation operations (based on the Horizon 2020 rate of 25% of direct eligible costs), the value of all procured costs must be deducted from total eligible direct costs before applying the 25% rate. In addition, the costs of resources made available by third parties which are not used on the premises of the beneficiary, and any costs of financial support to third parties, must also be excluded from the costs on the basis the rate is to be applied to calculate the eligible amounts (excluded from type 1 costs as explained in Section 4). 10

11 Fully procured public contracts or all contracts? The EU Regulations on simplified costs refer to public procurement in terms of fully procured operations and projects. This means that procurement by private beneficiaries and/ or contracts not falling within the definition of a public contract (per EC Public Contract Directives) could still participate in simplified costs. However, the EC recommends extending the rule to cover all fully procured implementation not just public contracts - in order to respect the intention to restrict the simplified costs to grants and remembering that beneficiaries are free to invite bidders to make a price offer on the basis of unit costs, lump sums and flat-rates. The Welsh Government s approach is to accept the Commission s recommendation to exclude all fully procured implementation of projects/ operations from using simplified costs, whether or not those contracts fall within the definition of a public contract. Beneficiaries are encouraged to actively consider unit costs, lump sums and similar output/performance-based payment arrangements when negotiating terms and conditions with contractors. 11

12 SECTION 4: How do flat-rates work? In the case of flat rates, specific categories of eligible costs - which must always be clearly identified before the costs arise/ activities take place - are calculated by applying a fixed percentage to other categories of eligible costs. The percentage is agreed in advance, at funding approval stage, and the percentage does not change during the implementation of the operation. Defining the categories of costs In a flat rate financing system there is a maximum of three types of categories of costs to consider: Type 1: categories of eligible costs (contributing to the calculation of type 2 ) Type 2: categories of eligible costs that will be calculated using a flat rate; Type 3 (where relevant): other categories of eligible costs: the flat-rate is not applied to them and they are not calculated with the flat rate. When using flat rates the programme managing authority must identify, at funding approval stage, the categories of costs falling under each type: the proposed flat-rate calculation method must ensure that all cost categories are included in one and only one of the three types. Note that in some cases, one type can be defined by opposition to another type or the other types (for instance, in a system where there are only direct (type 1) and indirect costs (type 2), indirect costs could be considered as all the eligible costs that are not eligible direct costs). The EU Regulations do not put any restriction on categories of eligible costs that might be used for flat rate financing. However, the main objective of using flat rates should be simplification and reduction of the error rate. Hence, flat rates are best suited to costs that are relatively low and for which verification is costly e.g. indirect costs. Defining direct costs, indirect costs and staff costs The use of simplified costs requires clear definitions of the direct and indirect costs and the staff costs. These definitions are included in the Rules and Conditions for support from the European Structural and Investment Funds. These definitions comply with the general principles provided by the EC: Direct costs are those costs which are directly related to an individual activity of the entity (beneficiary) and where the link with this individual activity can be demonstrated (for instance though direct time registration). 12

13 Indirect costs, on the other hand, are usually costs which are not or cannot be connected directly to an individual activity of the entity in question. Such costs would include administrative expenses, for which it is difficult to determine precisely the amount attributable to a specific activity (typical administrative/ staff expenditure, such as: management costs, recruitment expenses, costs for the accountant or the cleaner, etc.; telephone, water or electricity expenses, and so on). Staff costs are the costs deriving from an agreement between employer and employee or service contracts for external staff (provided that these costs are clearly identifiable and separated from other costs in the corresponding invoices). For example, if a beneficiary contracts the services of an external trainer for its inhouse training sessions, the invoice needs to identify the different types of costs. The salary of the trainer will be considered as external staff costs. However, teaching materials or travel and subsistence costs included in the same invoice for example cannot be taken into account. Staff costs include the total gross salary costs together with any other related eligible staff costs as set out in the Welsh national eligibility rules e.g. employers national insurance contributions and pension scheme contributions. - Contracts with individuals, or via staffing agencies, can be considered as external staff but not contracts with firms/ companies, even if small one person limited company. Contracts with individuals is therefore intended to cover, for example, self-employed unincorporated traders, freelancers/ piecemeal/ portfolio workers, independent consultants etc. - Costs of business trips are not staff costs for the purposes of simplified costs. - Salaries or allowances disbursed for the benefit of ESF participants are also not considered to be staff costs for the purposes of simplified costs. Indirect costs: flat rates provided by the EU Regulations Calculation methods for indirect costs The EU Regulations include certain specific flat rates and methodologies for indirect costs: [Article 68(1) EU 1303/2013]: Up to 25 % of all eligible direct costs if suitably justified in advance according to one of the calculation methods under Article 67(5) (a) and (c) of EU 1303/2013. Up to 15 % of eligible direct staff costs to calculate the indirect costs. The 15 % may be used directly by the managing authority, without any justification. 13

14 Re-use a flat rate for indirect cost schemes existing in EU policies, based on those used under Horizon 2020 (25% of eligible direct costs) and under LIFE (7% of eligible direct costs). ESF operations flat-rate up to 40% applied to eligible direct staff costs to calculate all other eligible costs (whether indirect or direct costs) Article 14(2) of the ESF Regulation [EU 1304/2013] enables a flat-rate of up to 40% to be offered by the managing authority without any justification of the rate. All costs other than direct eligible staff costs both direct and indirect are considered to be covered by the flat-rate calculation, including contributions in kind such as salaries or allowances disbursed by third parties for the benefit of ESF participants. The rate to be used in Wales ESF programmes is set out in the Wales national eligibility rules. If WEFO decides not to apply the same percentage rate to all ESF beneficiaries, or not make the flat-rate available to some beneficiaries, the EC requires the managing authority to be able to prove that the principle of equal treatment was respected the flat rate cannot be arbitrarily withheld from selected beneficiaries/ operations. ERDF European Territorial Cooperation programmes - flat-rate to calculate staff costs Staff costs can be calculated at a flat rate of up to 20% of the direct costs (i.e. eligible costs other than staff costs). The flat-rate can be used without there being a requirement for the managing authority to perform a calculation to determine the applicable rate. Where this option is used, no other direct costs can be calculated using a flat-rate (direct costs must be real costs to form the basis of the staff costs flat-rate calculation). 14

15 SECTION 5: How do unit costs and lump sums work? General principles All or part of the eligible costs of an operation will be calculated on the basis of an expected quantity of activities, outputs or results multiplied by a standard scales of unit costs, agreed at funding approval stage. This possibility can be used for any type of project, or part of a project, when it is possible to readily identify and define: the expected quantities of a certain activity, output or result that would represent the successful delivery of the operation; and a scale of unit costs for those quantities. Standard scales of unit costs apply typically to easily identifiable quantities and could be: process-based such as hourly staff costs - aiming at covering through a best approximation the real costs of delivering an operation; or outcome-based such as outputs or results; or a combination of both process and outcome-based measures. A managing authority can set out different scales of unit costs applicable to different activities. Example (ESF output-based unit costs): For advanced IT training of 1,000 hours provided for 20 trainees, the eligible costs could be calculated on the basis of a [cost per hour of training] x [number of hours of trainees]. The cost per hour would be defined in advance by WEFO and shown in the WEFO Funding Agreement that sets out all conditions for support. Assuming for example that WEFO sets the training cost at, say, 7 per hour of training per x trainee, the maximum eligible expenditure allocated to the project would be capped at 1,000 hours x 20 trainees x 7 /hr. / trainee = 140,000. At the end of the operation the final eligible costs will be set on the basis of the actual number of hours for each trainee (and this could potentially include some justified absences if agreed in advance with WEFO), according to actual participation of trainees and delivered courses. There will still be a need for accurate attendance sheets of trainees detailing the reality of the training activities and 15

16 certifying the actual presence of trainees. If at project completion, only 18 people participated in the training, 6 of them for 900 hours, 5 of them for 950 hours, 5 of them for 980 hours and the remaining 2 for 1,000 hours, the number of total hours x trainees will be equal to: 900x x x x2 = 17,050 total hours of training x trainees. The eligible expenditure will be: 17,050 hours of training x 7 unit cost = 119,350. Example (ERDF output-based unit costs): The beneficiary, a Chamber of Commerce, organises an advisory service for the SMEs of the region. This service is supplied by the advisors of the Chamber. Based on past financial accounts of the advisory department of the Chamber, a day of advice is estimated at 350/day. The eligible costs will be calculated on the basis of the following formula: [number of advice days] x 350. Grant will be paid to the beneficiary based on this eligible expenditure at the applicable grant intervention rate (national matchfunding provides the remaining amounts). There will still be a need for accurate timesheets and related documents to evidence the reality of the advisory activity and the presence of advisors. Example (ESF result-based unit costs): A job-search assistance programme lasting 6 months ( the operation ) could be financed on the basis of standard scales of unit costs (say, 2,000/ person) for each of the 20 participants in the operation who gets a job and retains it for a preestablished period, for example six months. Calculation of the maximum eligible expenditure allocated to the operation: 20 persons x 2,000 /placement = 40,000 eligible expenditure. The final eligible costs are calculated on the basis of the real outputs of the operation: if only 17 persons were placed on the labour market and retained their jobs for the requested period, the final eligible costs, on the basis of which the grant payable to the beneficiary will be calculated, would be 17 x 2,000 = 34,

17 Example (EAFRD): Investments in forest area development and improvement of the viability of forests (RDP Art. 21) A forest holder will receive support for the afforestation and maintenance of 3 hectares of forest for 7 years. The costs (afforestation and maintenance) have been defined in advance by the managing authority depending on the type of forest. This methodology will be included in the Rural Development Programme. The costs are as follows: 2,000 /ha for the establishment of the forest and, for the maintenance, 600 /ha for the first year and 500 /ha for the subsequent years. Therefore the total eligible costs would be: 3ha x 2000 /ha + 3ha x 600 /ha + (3ha x 500 /ha) x 6years= 16,800 Unit costs for beneficiary staff costs (hourly unit costs) Article 68(2) of EU 1303/2013 introduces a new rule to facilitate the use of hourly unit costs for calculating staff costs related to the implementation (management and delivery) of an operation: Hourly staff unit cost = latest documented annual gross employment costs Annual productive hours (or if preferred, 1,720 hours without justification) The 1,720 hours is a standard annual working time that can be used directly, without there being a requirement to perform any calculation or justification. However the numerator, the latest documented annual staff costs, does have to be justified, as does the annual productive hours if not using the 1,720 option. In the case of a project implemented over several years, the same hourly rate applies throughout the whole implementing period. Alternatively, the managing authority may choose to update the hourly staff cost once new data is available the approach in Wales is to undertake a review of the rate every 24 months if so requested by the beneficiary, as set out in the Wales national eligibility rules. When the rates are revised in this way, an updated Funding Agreement will be issued. 17

18 The numerator is only related to the people working directly on the operation. It could be based on the real salary of each individual working on the operation or the average of the eligible employment costs of a larger aggregate of employees, those of the same grade or some similar measures that correlates roughly to salary level. The latter option is likely to be the more practical method unless the beneficiary knows with some certainty the named individuals who will work on the project(s) throughout their implementation. Once the rate is agreed, only the hours actually worked must be used for the calculation of the eligible staff costs during the implementation of the operation. The annual leave/ paid public holidays for instance are already included in the calculation of the hourly staff costs. Implementation of an operation covers all the steps of an operation. There is no intention to exclude staff costs related to specific steps of an operation, for example the pre-delivery mobilisation phase used in many WEFO operations. The Wales national eligibility rules specifies what is covered by eligible gross employment costs. The latest annual gross employment cost i.e. the latest information at the point of approving funding and not up to the beneficiary s last financial year-end for example - has to be documented through the employing beneficiary s accounts, payroll reports, etc. This information does not have to be audited or verified in advance by WEFO/ Welsh Government but does has to be auditable. In other words, hourly rates can be agreed and including in funding agreement letters based on figures reported by the beneficiary at application stage but subsequent verifications of payment claims will require sight of documents to verify the amounts reported. Employment costs based on historical data of the beneficiary is not usable given that the EU Regulation refers to latest documented annual gross employment costs. Latest document annual gross employment costs implies to have a past reference period of one year (12 consecutive months). It is not possible to use the data of periods after the signature of the document setting out the conditions for support (the grant agreement/ funding agreement); The added value of this methodology is that the 1,720 hours cannot be questioned during verifications and audits. Example (ERDF): Certain types of projects targeted at SMEs in the field of R&D and innovation often involve personnel costs as a key element. The application of standard scales of unit costs as an option is a welcome simplification for these SMEs. The unit cost for activities is expressed in this case as an hourly rate applied to 18

19 hours effectively worked by the staff. It is defined in advance in the document setting out the conditions for support that fixes the maximum amount of eligible expenditure as the maximum worked hours allowed multiplied by the unit cost (the calculated costs of the staff involved). Aiming at covering the real costs through a best approximation and in order to take into account distinctions among regions and branches, the cost for a standard unit is defined as an hourly staff cost according to the following formula: Hourly staff cost = gross annual salary divided by average contractual working hours (taking annual leave into account). For example: Hourly staff cost = 60,000 / (1,980 hours 190 hours of annual leave) = /1,790 = /hr. The eligible expenditure for the operation is calculated as the hourly rate multiplied by the real and verified number of hours worked. This requires SMEs to keep all supporting documents for hours worked by staff on the project and the managing authority must keep all the documents justifying the hourly staff cost. In principle, a reduction in the verified hours worked results in a reduction in the final amount to be paid. Alternative example: Same as above but the hourly staff cost is based on 1,720 hours without justification of the annual hours. Hourly staff cost = latest documented gross annual salary divided by 1,720 hours (without justification). For example: Hourly rate = / 1,720 hours = 60,000/1720 = /hr. Lump sums Lumps are very similar to unit costs in that all eligible costs, or part of eligible costs, of an operation are calculated on the basis of a pre-established lump sum (the setting up of the lump sum should be justified by the managing authority), in accordance with predefined terms of agreement on activity /event, milestone/ implementation step or an output. A lump sum arrangement could also be used in the case of grants where standard scales of unit costs are not an appropriate solution, for example the production of a toolkit, the organisation of a small local seminar, etc. Lumps sums are, in effect, a unit cost with an expected quantity of one unit e.g. a seminar to be delivered; a toolkit to be produced. 19

20 Lumps sums are binary in nature - the grant is paid in full if the predefined terms of agreement on activities and/or outputs are completed but none of the grant is paid if incomplete/ partially complete. The lump sum possibility is an application of the proportionality principle aiming at alleviating the administrative workload for small operations and giving nongovernmental organisations (but not exclusively NGOs) better access to ESI Funds. That is the reason why lump sums are restricted to amounts below EUR 100,000 of public contribution. Public contribution means contributions (ESI Funds and national public contributions) paid to or by the beneficiary for the activity supported through the lump sum (excluding private participation if any). It does not include the allowances or salaries disbursed by a third party for the benefit of the participants in an ESF operation. Even if several lump sums could be combined to cover different categories of eligible costs or different projects within the same operation, the total of the lump sums must not exceed EUR 100,000 of public contribution for a given operation / beneficiary. However, within a project, lump sums not exceeding EUR 100,000 of public contribution could be combined with real costs and/or other simplified cost options for a total which could exceed EUR 100,000 of public contribution. Example (ESF): A NGO managing childcare services requires support to launch a new activity. It requests a lump sum by submitting a draft detailed budget to start the activity and run it over a period of one year. The activity would be maintained independently after the initial year. For example, the lump sum would cover expenditure related to the salary of one person in charge of looking after the children during one year, depreciation of new equipment, publicity costs linked to this new activity and indirect costs related to its management and accounting costs, water, electricity, heating, rental costs, etc.). On the basis of a draft detailed budget and in comparison to similar operations, the managing authority grants a lump sum of 47,500 covering all these eligible costs. At the end of the operation, this amount would be paid to the NGO on the basis of the output; if a conventional number of additional (10) children were looked after. It would therefore not be necessary to justify the real costs incurred in relation to this activity. It means however that if only 9 children were looked after, the eligible costs would be zero and the lump sum amount would not be paid. 20

21 Example (ERDF): In order to promote local products, a group of small enterprises wishes to participate jointly in a commercial fair. Due to the low cost of the operation, the managing authority decides to use a lump sum for calculation of the public support. For this, the group of enterprises is invited to propose a budget for the costs of renting, setting up and running the stand. On the basis of this proposal, a lump sum of 20,000 is established. The payment to the beneficiary will be made on the basis of proof of participation at the fair. The agreed budget of 20,000 should be kept for audits (verification of the ex-ante calculation of the lump sum). Example (EAFRD): Quality schemes for agricultural products, and foodstuffs (Art. 16) A group of farmers who have received support to cover new participation in a recognised quality scheme wants to organise a promotional activity for their products. The managing authority has calculated the cost of the activity as a lump sum (e.g. 15,000 / seminar min. 50 participants). The group of farmers has to provide evidence of carrying out the activity and the number of participants (at least equal to 50). 21

22 SECTION 6: Establishing and justifying the flat-rate percentage, the unit cost or the lump sum This section explains the full range of methods permitted by the EU Regulations but remember that the simplified costs available in Wales, including the rates and methodologies that will be considered, are only those set out in the Rules and Conditions for support from the European Structural and Investment Funds document. The EU Regulations [Article 67(5) EU Regulation 1303/2013 and Article 14(3) ESF] introduce several methods for calculating simplified costs: some of them are based on statistical data, others on data of the beneficiaries or elements included in the EU Regulations. Some give a lot of flexibility, while others offer strong legal certainty or can be established with a limited administrative burden. It is important to ensure a proper assessment in advance and related documentation of the method applied, where necessary, since it is only the control of the achievements that is considered during the implementation of the operation not the real costs incurred and paid. KEY REQUIREMENT: simplified costs must be established in advance It is important to communicate to the beneficiaries, in the document setting out the conditions for support (funding agreement/ grant agreements), the exact requirements for substantiating the declared expenditure and the specific output or outcome to be reached. Therefore, simplified cost have to be defined in advance (before the supported activities commence and/or the corresponding real costs are incurred, if earlier) and must be included in any call for proposals or, if open calls are used, at the latest in the document setting out the conditions for support. The relevant methods and conditions must be incorporated in the Welsh national eligibility rules document. Once simplified cost rates are established, they cannot be changed during or after the implementation of an operation to compensate for an increase in costs or underutilisation of the available budget. Given that the simplified costs have to be defined in advance, a retroactive application for operations that are already being implemented on the basis of 22

23 real costs must be avoided and would entail a significant workload for the national authorities in order to ensure equal treatment between beneficiaries. Exceptionally, in the case of multiannual operations it is possible to settle the accounts and the corresponding activities of the operation after a first part of the operation has been carried out and then to introduce the option of flat rate financing, standard scales of unit costs or lump sums for the remaining part/period of the operation. For example, WEFO operations may declare eligible costs related to mobilisation phase activities on a real costs basis and then select simplified costs for the delivery stage. In such cases, the period for which real costs are declared should be clearly separated from the period for which costs are declared on the basis of simplified cost options, in order to avoid project costs being declared twice. Contributions in kind When using simplified costs there is no need to justify the real costs of the categories of expenditure covered by the simplified costs including, where applicable, real costs in the form of depreciation charges and contributions in kind. Indeed, contributions in kind as defined by Article 69 EU Regulation 1303/2013 can be taken into account for the calculation of the value of a flat rate, a standard scale of unit cost or a lump sum. However, once the flat-rate/ unit cost has been agreed, there is no need to verify the existence of underlying contributions in kind during the implementation of the operation. Methodology 1: A fair, equitable and verifiable calculation It must be fair: The calculation has to be reasonable, i.e. based on reality, not excessive or extreme. If a given standard scales of unit cost has in the past worked out at between 10 and 20, the EC would not expect to see a scale of 70. From this point of view the method used for identifying the unit cost or the flat rate or the lump sum will be of the utmost importance. The managing authority must be able to explain and to justify its choices. An ideal fair calculation method could adapt the rates to specific conditions or needs. For example, the execution of a project may cost more in a remote region than in a central region because of higher transport costs; this element should be taken into account when deciding on a lump sum or rate to be paid for similar projects in different regions and/or urban-rural differences. In any event, simplified costs should not be misused (e.g. should not systematically lead to inflation of the costs of operations or artificial splitting of operations in order to bypass the lump sum maximum amounts). 23

24 The objective of audit and verifications work will be to examine the basis used for establishing the rates and whether the rates finally set are indeed in line with this basis. It must be equitable: The main notion underlying the term equitable is that it does not favour some beneficiaries or operations over others. The calculation of the Simplified costs has to ensure equal treatment of beneficiaries and/or operations. Examples would be differences in rates or amounts that are not justified by objective features of the beneficiaries or operations, or by express policy objectives. Managing authorities and auditors from the audit authority and the EC will not accept calculation methods which unjustifiably discriminate against particular groups of beneficiaries or types of operations. It must be verifiable: The determination of Simplified costs should be based on documentary evidence which can be verified. The managing authority has to be able to demonstrate the basis on which the simplified cost option has been established. It is a key issue to ensure compliance with the principle of sound financial management. Where Methodology 1 is used to develop Simplified costs, the managing authority should document and retain an audit trail of at least: The description of the calculation method, including key steps of the calculation; The sources of the data used for the analysis and the calculations, including an assessment of the relevance of the data to the envisaged operations, and an assessment of the quality of the data; The calculation itself to determine the value of the simplified cost option. Methodology 1 in practice The EU Regulations specifies several possibilities that will meet the fair, equitable and verifiable criteria: The use of statistical data or other objective information Statistical data or other objective information can take for instance the form of surveys, calls for proposals, benchmarking with similar types of operations. This will result generally in standard systems applicable to many operations / beneficiaries. 24

25 One source of data could be the certified expenditure from the past. In case the data used is not certified, it should be verified by the managing authority. As an alternative, calls for proposals could also be introduced: a Member State would publish in advance the basis on which it is going to calculate lump sum grants and which is, again, fair, equitable and verifiable. This means that applicants should know the criteria on which the grant will be based, and that these criteria should be standardised and apply to all applicants for the same types of projects. For example, in the case of a call for proposals, the managing authority should be able to answer such questions as: Is the call for proposals complete in the details needed? Are the elements needed to determine the lump sum well specified and explained in advance? Does the managing authority check that the costs included in the draft detailed budget submitted, for example, are reasonable and acceptable in view of determining the lump sum in the document setting out the conditions of support? Another solution could be that the Member State fixes a lump sum for a specific activity and issues calls for proposals on the basis of this amount, funding the best proposals. The use of beneficiary-specific data The methodologies presented below will be applied to beneficiaries. But given the requirements involved in the use of beneficiary-specific data, these methodologies are only likely to be simplifications for those beneficiaries who will implement many projects over the programming period. The verified historical data of individual beneficiaries: This will result in an ad hoc system that is beneficiary-specific. Where necessary, these data should cover only the cost centre or department of the beneficiary that are related to the operation. This method is based on the collection of past accounting data from the beneficiary, for actual costs incurred for the categories of eligible costs covered by the simplified costs. This, in fact, implies the existence of an acceptable analytical accounting system at beneficiary level. It furthermore implies that any ineligible expenditure is filtered out from any calculation supporting the simplified cost options. When a managing authority decides to use this method, it should describe: - the categories of costs covered; - the calculation method used; 25

26 - the length of the series to be obtained: accounting data over at least three years must be obtained so as to identify any potential exceptional circumstance which would have affected actual costs in a specific year as well as the tendencies in the cost amounts. The three-year reference period is used to take into account the yearly fluctuations; - the reference amount to be applied, for example the average costs over the reference period or the costs as registered over the last years; - adaptations, if any, that are needed to update the reference amount. Application of the usual cost accounting practices of individual beneficiaries: Usual accounting practices are practices which the beneficiary uses to account for all of its usual day to day activities and finances (which are not linked to EU support). These methods should be in compliance with national accounting rules and standards. The length of use is not critical. An accounting method is not usual if it has been customised for a particular operation or for EU support. It is important to differentiate between: actual (real) costs; and costs determined according to the usual cost accounting practices of individual beneficiaries. So, costs actually incurred by the beneficiary means costs calculated as exactly as possible, normally meaning per physical person for the time period of the operation. In practice, for hourly staff costs, use of standard hours as denominator is accepted (see for instance the 1,720 hours in unit costs section above), but the numerator for the purpose of calculating actual costs is the total eligible staff costs for each particular person assigned to the action. In contrast, an hourly cost based on the beneficiary s cost accounting practices could be calculated on the basis of an average of the remuneration costs of a larger aggregate of employees. This is normally a grade or some similar measure, which correlates roughly to salary level, but it can also be a cost centre or department (related to the operation) where salary level may vary considerably within the aggregate group of employees. This means that the cost amounts obtained by application of cost accounting practices generally: 26