FAQs on Infosys data fields under the European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund 2021-2027

If an operation cannot be linked to a specific "sector", should we enter the code 04 (N/A) in field 5? For example, what about investments towards transportation, processing, or some FLAG project for educational trails, museums, etc.?

For Infosys field 5 ‘Sector the operation is contributing to’, you should select the sector to which the activities of the funded operation directly contribute, using your best judgement.

For instance, for processing activities, if the operation pertains only to the processing of inland aquaculture products, then ‘02 – Inland’ should be selected. If the processing pertains only to fish caught at sea, then ‘01 – Marine’ should be selected. If the processing facility processes both inland aquaculture products and fish caught at sea then ‘03 – Both’ should be selected.

To provide another example, if educational trails or museums focus specifically on providing information on maritime/fishing activities, then ‘01 – Marine’ would be the best choice. If they focus instead on providing information on inland aquaculture activities, for instance, then ‘02 – Inland’ would be a better choice. If they provide information on both, then ‘03 – Both’ would be the best option.

‘04 - N/A’ should only be used in the rare occasions that a funded operation contributes to neither sector.

What are EMFAF ‘Specific Objectives?’

EMFAF specific objectives are policy goals, pre-defined in the EMFAF regulation, which are clearly defined in each Member State’s EMFAF programme.

The full list of EMFAF specific objectives is defined in article 14 and Annex II of the EMFAF regulation (Regulation EU 2021/1139), and is described in detail in section 2.9 and Annex 3.1 of the FAMENET working paper on the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (MEF) 2021-2027.

Are EMFAF ‘specific objectives’ related to other EU policy objectives/ goals?

EMFAF Specific Objectives are directly linked to certain policy objectives of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR), Regulation EU 2021/1060.

Annex II of the EMFAF regulation (Regulation EU 2021/1139) establishes a distinct and permanent link between the EMFAF priorities/specific objectives and the policy objectives of article 5 of the CPR. According to the regulation, EMFAF priorities 1, 2 and 4 pertain to CPR policy objective 2, and EMFAF priority 3 pertains to CPR policy objective 5.

These links are predetermined, based on overarching policy goals of the EU, and likely won’t have any major impact on Managing Authorities’ overall programming decisions, only on how the data is aggregated and evaluated.

What NUTS level should be reported for Infosys field 07? Should I enter the NUTS code of the region where the beneficiary is located? Or the region where the operation is undertaken?

When reporting NUTS codes for operations, MS should report at the highest level of detail possible, i.e., the NUTS-3 level (3 numeric digits).

If the specific scope of the project/operation being funded falls outside of this 3-digit NUTS region, then the code for a broader region of classification can be reported instead (i.e. NUTS 2 for operations covering a larger region or NUTS 1 for operations covering the entire country.) 

However, since the NUTS code is intended to provide a detailed reporting of the specific location of the operations being funded, Managing Authorities should refrain from reporting at less detailed levels if possible. In instances when MAs report at less detailed levels, the choice should be duly justified.

When reporting NUTS codes for operations in Infosys field 07, MS should report the NUTS code for the area where the activities of the project/operation takes place, not where the beneficiary is located. The NUTS code should be at the lowest administrative level possible, i.e., the NUTS-3 level (3 numeric digits).

Is it possible to enter more than one NUTS code for an operation, if the operation is undertaken in multiple regions?

Values for Infosys field 07 are limited to 5 text characters, so it is not possible to enter multiple NUTS regions.

If the project consists only of an activity outside the NUTS3 region of the beneficiary, the NUTS code of the region where the activity takes place should be reported. If the project has several activities in several regions, then the NUTS code of the highest level region possible (e.g. NUTS 2) can be reported. If the project only occasionally has an activity outside the location of the beneficiary, the NUTS code of the beneficiary should be reported.

Since the NUTS code is intended to provide detailed reporting of the specific location of the operations being funded, Managing Authorities should refrain from reporting at less detailed levels if possible.

Should sole proprietors be counted under code 04 (micro enterprise) or code 15 (natural person) in Infosys field 10 'type of beneficiary'? 

The Eurostat Business register's recommendations manual defines a sole proprietorship as ‘an enterprise owned exclusively by one person’, and a micro enterprise as a businesses employing ‘fewer than 10 persons’.

By this logic, in Infosys field 10, code 15 (natural persons) should be used for sole proprietorships, where a business is owned and operated solely by one individual, and code 04 (micro enterprises) should be used for businesses with more than 1 but fewer than 10 employees.

Should a national statistics institution/government body be defined as a 'public body' or a 'research centre' in Infosys field 10 'Type of beneficiary'? It seems both could apply. Which is correct?

For national statistics institutions or government bodies where research is not the main focus, the most appropriate option for Infosys field 10 'Type of beneficiary' would be 07 'public body'.

If the main activity of the organization is performing research, then code 08 ‘research centre / university / scientists’ would be a more appropriate choice.

We only select companies/legal entities for support. Should the genders of all beneficiaries be reported as code ‘07’ (‘N/A - in the case of legal persons’), regardless of the gender of the owner of the company?

In the case of businesses/legal entities with multiple persons involved in the operation, Infosys field 11 ‘gender’ should be entered as code 07 – ‘N/A (in the case of legal persons)’.

In the case of sole proprietorships, for field 11 you should enter the code corresponding to the gender of the sole owner of the business: code 01 (‘Natural person – male’), code 02 (‘Natural person – female’) or code 03 (‘Natural person – non-defined gender’).

How should ‘number of people directly involved in the operation’ be calculated for EMFAF operations reported in Infosys?

According to Infosys implementing regulation (regulation EU 2022/79), values for Infosys field 12 should include the total number of individuals directly involved in the operation, but should not include contractors or people/employees not directly participating in the operation.

The values entered in field 12 should be the total number of individuals whose work activities will be directly affected by the respective investments in the company.

For example, for a construction project at an aquaculture facility, i.e. the construction of a new aquaculture pond or the renovation of an existing pond, the number entered in field 12 would be the total number of processing employees at the facility where the construction project is taking place, who would be directly involved in the investment being funded. It would not count the contractors and other individuals outside of the company who worked on the construction/renovations of the ponds, nor the employees within the company whose work won’t be affected by the construction of the new pond (sales, HR, marketing, etc.). It should rather refer to the number of individuals within the organization who are directly involved with the activities the operation affects.

Does ‘number of partners directly involved in the operation’, always refer to the beneficiary? Is it only necessary to enter the number of partners if the beneficiary is a ‘group’ of partners?)

EMFAF Infosys field 13 is intended to capture the number of companies/organisations/sole proprietors directly involved in delivering the activities of the operation funded by the EMFAF. This should exclude outside companies like contractors, material suppliers, etc.

If only one company/organization/sole proprietor is directly involved, then a value of 1 should be reported. If the operation is a partnership of multiple companies/organisations/sole proprietors delivering the activities, then the total number of companies/organisations/sole proprietors directly involved should be reported.

Should we report whether or not the operation has a lead partner, or whether or not the beneficiary is the lead partner?

For Infosys field 14, Managing Authorities should report whether or not the operation has a lead partner.

Which types of operations might allow for a ‘lead partner’? Is it true that only ‘cooperation’ operations will have a lead partner?

There is no legally compulsory link between Infosys field 14 and field 26 (Type of operation); the beneficiary shall choose the type of operation that best corresponds to the nature of an operation.

In most cases, operations with multiple partners and one lead partner will correspond to the type of operation ‘Cooperation’. However, several other types of operations may well be implemented with multiple partners having a lead partner. For example, 21 Studies and research; 50 Data assembly and dissemination; 56 Pilot projects; 58 Governance; 62 Assistance under Direct management may fall under such a case.

For inland environmental river restoration projects and land-based aquaculture projects, what code should be selected for field 15 'operation related to marine, inland or both?'

According to Table 1 of Annex I of CIR 2022/79, in Infosys field 15 authorities must indicate whether operation relates to marine, inland, or both. According to Table 5 of Annex II of the same CIR, there are four options available: 01 – Marine; 02 – inland; 03 – Both and 04 – N/A.

Infosys field 15 is meant to indicate whether an operation takes place at sea ('marine'), or 'inland', or both. This is not to be confused with the reporting of 'sector' (fisheries, aquaculture, processing, tourism, etc.,) which is entered in field 05.

Operations related to either inland environmental river restoration or land-based aquaculture should report code 02 – 'Inland' for Infosys field 15, since these activities take place only inland and not at sea.

What is meant by code 03: ‘operation fully implemented but for which all expenses have not necessarily been paid to the beneficiary’?

In Infosys field 16, Managing Authorities report on the ‘state of progress’ of an EMFAF- funded operation. There are five different options possible, which are shown in Table 6 of Annex II of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/79.

Code 03 stands for ‘Operation fully implemented (but for which all expenses have not necessarily been paid to the beneficiary)’. Prior experience with the EFF and EMFF showed that in some cases there are significant time lags between the physical completion of an operation and the final payment to the beneficiary. This challenge was addressed by introducing code 03 for the EMFAF.

Code 03 allows Managing Authorities to count as implemented operations which have been physically completed, but for which not all support has been paid, due to administrative procedures for instance.

Code 03, together with code 04 (‘operation completed’), allows for a more precise way to:

• aggregate Infosys EMFAF implementation data
• report values of output indicator ‘Implemented operations’ in Table 5 of Annex VII of the CPR – both operations with Infosys code 03 and 04 shall be counted.

The choice of state of progress of operation is not linked to relation between total payments to the beneficiary and approved grant amount (committed funds). The purpose of code 03 is not to distinguish operations where total payment is less than commitment.

How should we handle EMFAF operations abandoned/withdrawn in Infosys field 16 'state of progress?'

When an operation is abandoned or interrupted the record should remain in Infosys and not be deleted. The value of field 16 ‘state of progress of the operation’ probably must be changed and the financial values of fields 17-19 and 21-23 adjusted. In other words, committed amounts shall correspond to the real contractual situation at hand.

The codes for field 16 ‘state of progress of the operation’, included in Regulation (EU) 2022/79, are as follows:

• 00 Operation selected
• 01 Operation interrupted/abandoned following partial implementation
• 02 Operation under implementation
• 03 Operation fully implemented (but for which all expenses have not necessarily been paid to the beneficiary)
• 04 Operation completed

This ‘state of progress’ field 16, and the financial values of fields 17-19 and 21-23 should be adjusted to reflect the current contractual situation of the selected operations. There are two options when adjusting funding for abandoned operations, depending on the situation at hand:

• For any operations interrupted/abandoned for which all funds will be de-committed and no expenditure was or will be declared by the beneficiary to the Managing Authority, the code for field 16 should be changed to 01, and fields 17-19 and 21-23 should be reported as 0 as a best practice. It is assumed here that ‘abandoning’ an operation means that no further action will be taken and thus all funds need to be de-committed (or else are lost).
• For operations which have been interrupted/abandoned following partial implementation, and for which some portion of the expenditure declared by the beneficiary to the Managing Authority will be recovered, FAMENET recommends entering a value of 01 for field 16, and subtracting from fields 17-19 and 21-23 the amount of funds recovered. Any funds already paid and not recovered should remain accounted for in Infosys.

This approach will be helpful in monitoring which operations have been abandoned; including interrupted or abandoned operations in Infosys also serves as an indicator of programme performance. 

Codes 03 and 04 should only be entered in field 16 for completed and fully implemented operations, respectively, and should never be used for any operations interrupted or abandoned.

We report advance and installment payments, as well as final payments, in fields 21 – 23 (‘eligible expenditure’ fields). This means the numbers in these columns will continue to grow as certain projects progress. Should we only report data when the final payment has been paid out?

For fields 21 - 23, the actual ‘paid amounts’ must be reported.

Values here shall correspond to all paid amounts as of the end of reporting period.  For example, if 100 EUR is committed, and as of 31.12.2023 two payments of 20 EUR and 30 EUR have been made, then 50 EUR shall be reported. In the next periods the beneficiary will complete the project, the remaining 50 EUR will be paid out, and 100 EUR will be reported as paid and the date of final payment provided in field 24.

Should the date of the final payment application be entered into field 24?

The date of final payment application shall be entered into field 24 when the final payment is made to the beneficiary.

Can operations which have received advance or installment payments be left blank for fir field 24?

Field 24 can be left blank until the date of final payment is made to the beneficiary.

What are EMFAF ‘Types of interventions?’

Types of interventions are pre-defined policy ‘themes’, defined in Annex IV of the EMFAF regulation (Regulation EU 2021/1139), used to indicatively allocate funds along key policy issues in the programming phase. They serve as the main thematic blocks Managing Authorities use when communicating about the allocation and use of EMFAF funds in their Member State. In addition, they are used to monitor climate and environment expenditure and for reporting on funding allocated to these topics.

In the EMFAF programming phase, Managing Authorities selected one or more Type of Intervention for each specific objective; they could choose as many as desired for each specific objective as long as they selected at least one.

Then, in the implementation phase, Managing Authorities must report only one type of intervention for each EMFAF-funded operation in their database. Managing Authorities should choose the one which best reflects the desired impact of the operation as it pertains to key policy interventions.

Is it possible to report multiple ‘types of interventions’ for the same operation in Infosys?

Types of Interventions available to be reported in field 25 are listed in Annex IV of the EMFAF regulation (regulation EU 2021/1139). The FAMENET working paper on the MEF 2021-2027 also includes a chapter (chapter 2.11) on types of interventions under the EMFAF, containing descriptions of each.

During the programming phase, types of interventions are used to indicatively allocate funds along certain predefined thematic categories related to policy issues (for example, combating climate change). They are also used during implementation to monitor climate and environment expenditure and for reporting on funding allocated to certain thematic policy categories.

The set-up of the Infosys database does not allow for the reporting of multiple types of interventions for the same operation; during implementation, you must choose the most appropriate type of intervention for each selected operation. Every operation must be linked to only one type of intervention most suitable for the operation. This condition makes reporting considerably easier and makes sure that Infosys and reporting under CPR Article 42 are consistent.

In cases where multiple Types of Interventions seem to apply to the same operation, you must select only the one Type of Intervention most applicable to the operation at hand; given the structure of the Infosys database, it is not possible to select more than one for a project.

What are EMFAF ‘types of operations?’

Types of operations are precise thematic categories used to label single operations for EMFAF monitoring. They are defined in table 7 of the Infosys regulation (Commission Implementing Regulation EU 2022/79). Each type of operation is also described in detail in table 7, section 3.4.3 of the FAMENET working paper on the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (MEF) 2021-2027.

When an operation is selected for implementation, only the most appropriate ‘type’ for each operation should be selected (this is reported in Infosys field 26). Only one ‘type of operation’ is possible per operation; for operations where multiple ‘types of operations’ seem applicable, Managing Authorities must only choose the one most applicable ‘type of operation’ for the operation at hand.

How do we report on an operation that theoretically could fall under multiple EMFAF types of operations?

In the EMFAF Infosys system, it is only possible to select one type of operation for each operation in the database. Managing Authorities should then choose the most relevant type of operation for each funded operation.

For example, if a project primarily develops new aquaculture facilities, but also plans to use some of the funds to train employees, then the most applicable type of operation for the MA to select would be type of operation ‘11 Investments to support business development’.

Which type of operation should we report for Technical Assistance?

Under the structure of the EMFAF operation-level database (Infosys), as outlined in Commission Implementing Regulation 2022/79, Member States are only able to report one Type of Operation (ToO) per EMFAF-funded operation. This is meant to facilitate a more precise aggregated reporting on the different kinds of activities being funded.

The Types of Operations are designed such that there is usually a clear choice as to which one best applies to each funded operation. However, as you mentioned, this system may sometimes lead to situations where the one most suitable Type of Operation must be selected amongst others which may also seem applicable.

Since Technical Assistance can cover a broad range of activities, it is important then to focus on the specific operation at hand when selecting a ToO, rather than lumping all TA activities under the same code. For example, the following Types of Operations and their associated activities can be applicable to TA, depending on the specific operation/activity undertaken:

• 17 capacity building
  • development of training centres
  • exposure visits
  • office and documentation support
  • development of learning centres
• 61 management
  • office expenses and staff costs
  • technical assistance
  • fisheries management
  • monitoring and evaluation of the FLAGs and strategy implementation (if not separate from the FLAG operation)
• 63 evaluation
  • process evaluations
  • impact evaluations
  • thematic assessments/studies
  • ex-ante evaluations
  • interim evaluations
  • ex-post evaluations
  • support for COM evaluations
  • monitoring and evaluation of the FLAGs and strategy implementation

A best practice would be to select the type of operation most suited to the operation, based on what is proportionally the most significant activity for the operation being funded.

After narrowing down the kind of activity being funded by using Types of Operations, Managing Authorities can then more broadly define TA activities by selecting Type of Intervention code 16: ‘technical assistance’. In this way aggregate financial and indicator data can be provided for TA activities as a whole, and finer details on the specific activities undertaken by TA operations can be reported using ToO.

Type of operation 46 'Data collection': Should ToO 46 only be used for operations for data collection and processing in line with the Data Collection Framework Regulation (EU) 2017/1004?

Yes, type of operation 46 ‘Data collection’ is intended for data collection and processing operations in line with the Data Collection Framework Regulation (EU) 2017/1004.

Type of operation 50 'Data assembly and dissemination': Can ToO 50 be reported for projects and activities under shared management, intended as the assembly, aggregation and combination of data already collected in other contexts including data covered by operation 46? Can operations under ToO 50 also provide for data collection, and not only the aggregation of data (data assembly)?

Type of operation 50 ‘data assembly and dissemination’ is primarily intended for direct management, though it can be used for operations under shared management as well.

If the data dissemination is done via a study Managing Authorities may also consider type of operation 21 ‘studies and research’, or if the goal of the operation is data sharing you may consider type of operation 22 ‘knowledge sharing’. If the data collection is done for or during evaluations, you may use type of operation 63 ‘evaluation’.

Regarding whether operations reporting Type of Operation 50 may also provide for data collection and not only the aggregation of data, if the data collection is not under the Data Collection Framework Regulation (EU) 2017/1004 then ToO 50 may be used. However as mentioned above ToO 21 or 22 may also be considered.

What values should be reported for ‘increase of the gross tonnage of a fishing vessel under Article [19(3)]’ and ‘Description of the fleet segment relevant to field 27’?

In line with Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/79, under Infosys field 27 Managing Authorities report the ‘Increase of the gross tonnage of a fishing vessel under Article 19(3) of the EMFAF Regulation’. In the ‘Comments’ column it is stipulated that field 27 shall be left blank if the operation is not related to Article 19(3). Article 19(3) refers to the increase in the gross tonnage of a fishing vessel to improve safety, working conditions or energy efficiency. 

Thus, Infosys field 27 should be:

• left blank if the operation is not related to Article 19(3)
• reported as the amount of additional GT if the operation is related to Article 19(3)

In Infosys field 28, MS must provide a ‘Description of the fleet segment relevant to field 27’. Field 28 shall only be filled in cases where there is a value in field 27.

The CIR further specifies: ‘description of the fleet segment(s) of origin of the gross tonnage allocated to the vessel benefitting from the operation as presented in the annual report foreseen under Article 22(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in line with Commission guidelines COM(2014)545.’

Article 22(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 reads as follows:

‘In order to achieve the objective referred to in paragraph 1, Member States shall send to the Commission, by 31 May each year, a report on the balance between the fishing capacity of their fleets and their fishing opportunities. To facilitate a common approach across the Union, that report shall be prepared in accordance with common guidelines which may be developed by the Commission indicating the relevant technical, social and economic parameters.

The report shall contain the annual capacity assessment of the national fleet and of all fleet segments of the Member State. The report shall seek to identify structural overcapacity by segment and shall estimate the long-term profitability by segment. The reports shall be made publicly available.’

For further information please see Commission guidelines COM (2014) 545 for the analysis of the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities. It would also be beneficial to consult your colleagues in charge of this analysis.

What value should be entered for ‘increase of the gross tonnage of a fishing vessel’ for operations involving multiple vessels?

For cases involving multiple vessels, the sum of the increase of gross tonnage of all fishing vessels involved in the operation should be entered in field 27. This will depend on when the data for the operation is reported. Separate entries should be made for each individual vessel.

What is the purpose of these fields? Is it possible to leave them blank if the codes are in no way relevant to the operation/intervention?

Fields 29-34 allow EMFAF stakeholders to easily distinguish operations related to specific horizontal topics/issues like small-scale coastal fishing, landing obligation, climate change, and social inclusion topics. At the same time, it will spare MS from answering additional data requests on these horizontal issues. 

Managing Authorities should always use code ‘02’ in cases where an operation is not relevant to one of the ‘horizontal’ issues in fields 29-34. There are two good reasons for this:

• It is stipulated in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/79. Empty fields are only possible in a few occasions where it is explicitly stipulated (for example, field 04 (where relevant), field 27 (blank in specific cases), field 28 (if relevant). For all other cases, reporting an empty field would result in a formal error and will be flagged during the data validation process.
• Empty fields are not recommended from a data-integrity perspective, as it is not possible to know whether a blank value is an omission due to a mistake or a deliberate decision. For that reason the CIR 2022/79 clearly asks Managing Authorities to always fill in all Infosys fields (aside from the few exceptions listed above) accordingly.

For fields 29 – 34, when should we enter ‘yes’ or ‘no’? Can ‘yes’ be reported if the beneficiary's project proposal contributes to non-discrimination, gender equality, rights of people with disabilities, etc., or must the beneficiary has declared in their project proposal that it will respect the horizontal principles of the EU?

EMFAF Infosys ‘horizontal’ fields 29 – 34 are designed to monitor EMFAF contributions towards accomplishing certain EU-wide policy themes (SSCF, landing obligation, climate change, non-discrimination, gender equality, rights of people with disabilities).

Code 01 ‘yes’ should be reported only if the actions undertaken by the operation directly contribute to the respective policy theme. For instance: 

• A project training women to be fishers, to increase female employment in the sector, could report code 01 ‘yes’ for fields 32 and 33 (non-discrimination, gender equality).
• A project installing wheelchair ramps and/or other amenities to improve accessibility/working conditions for people with disabilities could report 01 ‘yes’ for fields 32 and 34 (non-discrimination, rights of people with disabilities).

If the operation does not directly contribute to the respective policy theme, then a value of 02 ‘no’ should be reported instead.

Only values of 01 ‘yes’ or 02 ‘no’ can be entered, as per the codes in Table 4 of Annex II of the Infosys implementing regulation 2022/79, so it is not possible to report ‘N/A’ for fields 29 – 34.

How should we report values for field 36? Do we need to adjust values of this field for operations that have been interrupted/abandoned?

Field 36 of Table 1 of Annex I of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/79 asks, ‘Did the beneficiary previously receive EMFF/EMFAF support?’

• If the beneficiary has ever received any EMFF or EMFAF support before, the code to be reported is ‘01’, which means ‘Yes, I have received EMFF/EMFAF support before’
• If the beneficiary has never received EMFF or EMFAF support before, the code to be reported is ‘02’, which means ‘No, I have not received EMFF/EMFAF support before – this is my first time’
• For operations already reported in Infosys, the code in field 36 shall never be changed. Modifications of the state of progress of implementation does not influence the status of a beneficiary as it was at the moment of application for the EMFAF support.