Selection of the most relevent indicators
Each of the programme actors have their own responsibilities, their own areas of decision-making and therefore their own information needs. As a result, all indicators are not useful at all levels. On the contrary, it is generally accepted that each actor requires an operating report with a small number of indicators, selected as the most relevant in relation to the nature of the decisions that have to be made. It has been shown that in a situation of decision-making, a person cannot take into account more than about ten indicators at once. When there are too many indicators decision-makers are swamped with an excess of information.
The heterogeneity of programmes
The experience of the Cohesion Policy has shown that it is difficult to choose indicators that are absolutely necessary for the monitoring and evaluation of a programme. Because the programmes are multi-sectoral and multi-objective, there is a tendency to want to measure everything and to design systems of indicators that are so heavy that it is impossible to make them work.
In practice, it is impossible to produce and regularly use such a large amount of information.
In several European regions, evaluations have shown that a few dozen indicators are enough to meet the information needs of the authorities running the programme (as in Northern Ireland, see Box The recommendation of an evaluation: reduce the number of indicators from 330 to 52 ). This does not mean, however, that additional indicators may not be required to meet the operators' information needs.
Suggestions for limiting the size of systems of indicators
Suggestions for limiting the size of systems of indicators are typically based on the use of generic or core indicators or on the grouping of indicators by category of beneficiary. A lighter system limits the collection and circulation of information to the most essential elements at the programme level. On the other hand, this means that the progress and results of each action will not be monitored in a detailed and centralised manner. It also means that the system focuses less on the decisions to be made by the operators and more on those to be made by the authorities managing the programme.
Core indicators
At the stage of the preparations for the update of the Mid-Term Evaluation of 2005, the European Commission introduced the concept of "core indicators" in the relevant guidance document. The idea was to identify some basic (output and result) indicators which could be aggregated and compared (with caution) across regions and Member States. The core indicators were revised and developed in the Commission guidance on indicators for the 2007-2013 period. While urging the use of core indicators, the guidance paper also stresses the need for the responsible authorities to develop better quality result indicators, in line with programme objectives and with the stronger strategic focus of the new programming period.