Subsidies from the European Economic Area Fund and Norway Fund: The Czech Republic has reached 90%, but the system was complex and lacked clearly measurable targets

Press release to audit No. 17/25 – 18. 6. 2018


The Supreme Audit Office has focused on the aid that the Czech Republic received within the financial mechanisms of the European Economic Area and Norway from 2011 to 2017. The funds allocated from these mechanisms were designed to help reduce economic disparities in the European Economic Area and also strengthen relations between the participating countries. The Ministry of Finance is in charge of coordination and financial relations with these mechanisms. In the 2009 to 2014 programming period, the Czech Republic received more than CZK 3.2 billion under this aid. The audit showed that the distribution of this aid had worked - by the end of 2017, more than 90% of the money had been spent. The money-sharing system was unnecessarily complicated and administratively demanding.

Finances from the financial mechanisms of the European Economic Area and Norway flowed into a number of areas and were distributed over a large number of 15 thematic programmes. In practice, this meant necessity to create, process, and verify a large number of documents or, for example, set up control mechanisms for each programme. Also, the very coordination between the large number of involved institutions and entities was complex.

At the same time, more than 60% of the funds were distributed in only four programmes. Among other programmes, on the other hand, there were also such that contained only one project - but even such programmes had to be managed and administered, it was necessary to solve corresponding documentation and fulfil duties connected with its administration. If the aid had not been so fragmented and focused on fewer programmes, the distribution of aid would have been simpler and more efficient.

The SAO also focused on the objectives of individual programmes, which set out what should be achieved for the allocated funds. It emerged that in 11 of the 14 audited programmes this question could not be answered - the set targets were only general statements without clearly measurable criteria. For example, the objective was "a fairer and more efficient judicial system" and the like. What this means and how it is to be recognized that such a goal has been achieved is not clear.

The SAO did not reveal any major shortcomings in the sample of the audited projects. Of the estimated CZK 230 million, auditors found shortcomings of two and a half million crowns.

Communication Department
Supreme Audit Office

print the page