Rationale

The delivery model of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 2023-2027 is designed to be more flexible and strategic, focusing on the results and performance of national strategic plans. By shifting away from detailed steering of agricultural and rural policy toward a more enabling approach, the new delivery model aims to enhance the impact and accountability of regional rural revitalization efforts.

In practice, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to the delivery of CAP strategic plans. Consequently, significant flexibility and autonomy are granted to member states regarding the general approaches and practical modalities for implementing AKIS strategies and related interventions.

Key components of this new delivery model that contribute to creating conditions for greater discretion in the programming and implementation choices of CAP Strategic Plans are:

1. Decentralization: that emphasizes the role of member states in designing and implementing their own national CAP strategic plans leading to tailored approaches that reflect local needs and priorities.
2. Performance-based model: where funding and support are linked to measurable outcomes and objectives. Member states must set specific targets and indicators to evaluate progress and effectiveness.
3. Enhanced Flexibility: in how funds are allocated and used, allowing member states to adapt their strategies based on evolving agricultural practices and market conditions.
4. Targeted support for specific needs: that regards the provision of specific measures to support young farmers, small farms, and rural development initiatives, ensuring that assistance is directed where it is most needed.
5. Digitalization and innovation: The CAP promotes the use of digital tools and innovative practices to improve efficiency, enhance productivity, and support data-driven decision-making in agriculture.
6. Cooperation and Partnerships: Encouraging collaboration among farmers, agricultural organizations, and other stakeholders is a key aspect, fostering knowledge exchange and collective action for rural development.

But what do we mean by delivery mechanisms of public strategies and interventions? These refer to the governing models and methods by which policies are translated into tangible benefits for target groups. They encompass the processes, structures, and systems through which policies, programs, and services are implemented and made accessible to these groups.

The flexibility to design and implement delivery mechanisms for AKIS strategies can greatly enhance adaptability, ultimately benefiting the execution of such complex, multilevel and multistakeholder initiatives.

So that, according to the literature, key aspects of delivery mechanisms include:

Table 1: Components and mechanisms of delivery models

Examples; not exhaustive list

First insights from practices

The practices presented in this 'Compendium' focus on the use of simplified costs in the delivery of training and cooperation interventions for innovation, as well as the methods by which some member states have ensured the setting up of transnational Operational Groups.

Regarding the use of simplified costs, the regulatory framework was explained in Compendium D1.3 (Tab. 2).

Table 2: Methodologies for calculation of simplified cost options

Some simplified cost options can be directly used without having to carry out any calculation: in this case they say «ready to use». This is the case with the following flat rates, indicated directly by the Regulations:

• Calculation of indirect costs: flat rate up to 15% of direct eligible personnel costs.
• Calculation of personnel costs: flat rate up to 20% of direct costs other than personnel costs.
• Calculation of remaining eligible costs: flat rate up to 40% of eligible direct staff costs.
• Calculation of indirect costs: flat rate up to 7% of eligible direct costs (news of 2021-2027 programming).
• Staff cost calculation (hourly rate): last documented gross annual labour cost/ 1720 hours.

The following types of SCOs require well-prepared methodologies:

• Flat rate for calculation of indirect costs (up to 25% of eligible direct costs).
• Standard scales of unit costs.
• Lump sums.

Methodologies may be developed on the basis of:

• Statistical data, other objective information or expert assessments.
• Verified historical data of individual beneficiaries.
• Draft budgets drawn up on a case-by-case basis and approved ex ante by the body selecting the operation (where the total cost does not exceed € 200,000).
• In accordance with the rules for the application of the unit costs, lump sums and flat rates applied by the Member State for similar types of operation.
• Flat rates and specific methods provided in the Fund Regulations.
• Application of normal cost accounting practices of individual beneficiaries.

Methodologies for calculation of SCOs must be fair (reasonable, based on real data), equitable (not favouring some beneficiaries or types of transactions to the disadvantage of others) and verifiable (based on documentary evidence that can be verified).

Methodologies for calculate SCOs:

• Standard scales of unit costs, lump sums, flat rate financing (simplified costs).
• A combination of the previous forms.

In case of standard scales of unit costs, all or part of the eligible costs of an operation shall be calculated on activities, inputs, outputs or quantified results, which shall be multiplied using standard tables of predetermined unit costs.

In case of lump sums, all or part of the eligible costs of an operation shall be calculated on a predetermined lump sum. The grant shall be paid if the default terms of the assets and/or outputs agreement are met.

In case of flat-rate financing, specific categories of clearly identified eligible costs shall be calculated by applying an ex ante fixed rate for one or several other categories of eligible costs.

Amounts and rates established by Member States need to be a reliable proxy to real costs. Periodic adjustments are a good practice in the context of multiannual programme implementation to take into account factors affecting rates and amounts.

In order to ensure compliance with the principles of transparency and equal treatment of beneficiaries, the scope of the simplified cost options to be applied, that is the category of projects and activities for which they will be available, should be specified and published in the call for applications.

For the transnational or cross-border Operational Groups, there is no specific regulatory framework; however, this opportunity has been underutilized due to difficulties in establishing the delivery model since the last programming period.

In this regard, as demonstrated in the case presented in this Compendium, it is possible to adopt, with some adaptations, delivery models whose implementation methods are already widely practiced and consolidated within the LEADER approach, and which are familiar to the managing authorities of CAP programs.

Besides, similarly to LEADER approach, the INTERREG initiative includes a well consolidated delivery model that might be adapted to the case of operational groups.

So far, the practices presented in this 'Compendium' showcase the full discretion of member states in choosing among the different delivery options for interventions, according to their own needs and availability. Besides, these practices let emerge the importance of streamlined processes, effective coordination, and strategic facilitation by CAP networks in enhancing the delivery mechanisms of public strategies and interventions within the AKIS strategies, and particularly.

• Streamlined Processes: Preliminary definitions of procedures, documentation, and arrangements for the implementation of certain delivery mechanisms (e.g., the use of simplified cost options and calls for transnational Operational Groups) have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing bureaucratic burdens for beneficiaries and Managing Authorities, making funding more accessible, equitable, and efficient.
• Strategic facilitation by CAP Networks: Help project applicants connect with partners even from other Member States and organize joint events to promote collaboration and knowledge sharing among stakeholders. In the cases of the simplified cost options, the CAP network helped also defining and disseminating common methods for standard costs determination.

Food for thinking

Questions for opening the discussion and reflect on how to better direct AKIS interventions towards the better integration of the advisory services are:

Delivery

• How to organize coordinated calls and arrangements for applications for trans-national/trans-regional/crossborder operational groups?
• How to ensure a transparent and efficient definitions of roles and functions within trans-national/transregional/cross-border operational groups?
• How to assess the feasibility of the different methodologies for the simplified cost options?

How to follow-up with the results of collection of AKIS-in-practice!

• The collection of "AKIS-in-Practice" must be expanded through continuous dialogue with partners to provide a broader scope of the different delivery mechanisms for supporting trans-national/trans-regional/cross-border operational groups.
• Workshops within the CoPs (WP4) might include public servants that are responsible for the implementation of LEADER approaches and for INTERREG initiatives , in view to share knowledge and experiences leading to increase familiarity and to co-develop adaptable delivery models for supporting trans-national/trans-regional/crossborder operational groups.

Further sources of information

• Presentation of Nordic-Baltic TNC EIP cooperation during the Subgroup on Innovation & Knowledge Exchange (SoIKE) 4th meeting Brussels 27 October 2023.
• LEADER transnational cooperation guidance.