Summary of findings for sampled FRAs

• Author: Mélissa Campagno - Goya Razavi - Brian Kessler - Léna Bonnemains - Olga Mala
• Pages: 24-26

DG REGIO

Study on the implementation of Article 125(4)(c) of the CPR in the Member States

24

5. Summary of findings for sampled

FRAs

This section examines the co ntent of the sample of FRAs gathered as part of this st udy to analyse

how Authorities assess the different categories of fraud and corruption risks, what measures they

have in place, and analyses the extent to which the measures are proportional to the risk identified.

Where relevant, it also refers to external indicators of frau d risk to challenge the self-assessme nt of

risks, or to provide context to the findings.

The analysis of the fraud risks was performed for s ix risk categories, defined from the EC FRA

template by grouping of recommended measures into logical groups. In this study we assess and

compare the level of risks across the six categories of risks, as well as analyse what measures were

used by authorities to mitigate those risks. The study also assesses the proportionality of measures

put in place to the level of risks as assessed by authorities.

The current section analyses the overarching findings across all risk categories and measures

applied for their mitigation.

The risks of fraud are high for the majority of the sampled OPs, according to the

authorities. Authorities assess fraud risks to be high or medium fo r 64% of the sampled OPs.32

Authorities across the sample of OPs analysed the severity of risk of conflict of interest as the

highest across six categories of risk. 83% of the authorities consider this r isk to be high or

medium.33 The next two highest rated r isks were avoidance or man ipulation of procurement

procedure and manipulation of project cost and quality (see figure belo w).

Figure 6: Level of fraud risks across risk categories

Source: PwC

At the other end of the spectrum, Authorities assessed risks related to lack of skills and collusive

bidding to be the lowest across risk categories, with 56% and 55% of Authorities assessing these

risks to be high or medium, respectively.

External corr uption indicators should be taken into accou nt wh en compar ing fr aud

risks across MS. The widespread use of the EC FRA template means that many authorities are

using the same structure and approach in assessing their fraud risks. However, the way authorities

32 27 out of 42 OPs where data was collected. For eight OPs authorities did not assess risks or did not do so in a template sufficiently

close to the EC one so that their assessment can be compared with the rest of the sample.

33 In 33 out of 40 OPs. For 10 OPs authorities did not assess risks related to conflict of interest or did not do so in a template sufficiently

close to the EC one so that their assessment can be compared with the rest of the sample.

18%, 7 OPs

23%, 9 OPs

24%, 10 OPs

39%, 15 OPs

44%, 17 OPs

45%, 15 OPs

45%, 18 OPs

41%, 16 OPs

41%, 17 OPs

34%, 13 OPs

38%, 15 OPs

27%, 9 OPs

38%, 15 OPs

36%, 14 OPs

34%, 14 OPs

26%, 10 OPs

18%, 7 OPs

27%, 9 OPs

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Conflict of interest

Manipulation of project costs

Manipulation of public procurement

Double funding

Lack of skills

Collussive bidding

Low risk Medium risk High risk