GVOP E-közigazgatási tapasztalatok - mit kerüljenek el a követők?

E-Government Hungary 2007
Learning from our failures

National
Enviromental and Development
infrastructure Plan
operative Regional
programme Operative
(KIOP) Supporting Operative Programme
programme (ROP)
Human resource for economical
development growth
Operative programme (GVOP)
(HEFOP)

4.thpriority
Information
society
and economics
development

V4DIS - 2008 04.07.Hradec Kralove
Presenter: Madarász Csaba

V4DIS Presenter: MadarászKralove
- 2008 04.07.Hradec Csaba


The characteristic of GVOP

4.3.1 targets the local 
4.3.2. the support for profit
governments modernisation us of local muncipalities data
assets

To achieve client centered
and service based operation

reach the CLBPS level 3.
relevant to the EU
recommendations at L.G.
Priority in amount of funding:
80% vs 20%



Some historical facts:

in the first round, 3 big cities/regions has won

In the beginning of planning it has said, that 4-5 pilot cities,
small regions will have the chance to develop a system

Others would adapt from these systems

The first planned amount of money was 7.6 million E




Source after re-planning the project

ERFA (Sturcutral Funds) 21,50 Million Euros
Central Government
resources 3, 59 Million Euros
From different
government resource 3,59 Million Euros
Total 28,67 Million Euros




Amount of support in 4.3.2:
Amount-percentage
The percentage of
the support, in
relation to sum of
accountable costs 87,50%
The minmal and
maximal ammount of 210 000 - 2100 000
support Euros
Funding from the
ERFA 75,00%
Self resource of local
governments 0,00%



Some criteria

Some criteria

Local governments and their groups were elegible, if they
represent more than 10,000 as inhabitants

Related to public services, they will achieve the EU
recommendations CLBPS level 2 for SMEs

Those, who has targeted the CLBPS level 4 in any levels could
have an advanced position




The results of 4.3.1


By the result of the call, various muncipalities,
districts and newly formed plannig areas (Small
regions) has enterd to the call with a diverse IT
infrastructure and knowledge background

From 56 applicants 29 received funding




Results on a map




Some notes about the enviroment

Small regions are quite newly formed (, muncipalities-
politicians don't have too much of working experience with
each other

By the result of area based P.A. Reform, 7 plannig-
statistical region has birth. The aim is economical
development, coordination and the receive of EU funds.
The result is decentralization, tasks and scope of authority
reorganization.





Many of them has never managed a complex IT
development project

The KET, containing the general rules governing the
procedures and services of public administration
authorities has started to put in use recently, put online
administration affaires on an equal footing with
traditional administration affairs




Still enviroment issues

Only a few applicant has a continous development
strategy on IT

The existing systems are heterogenous, sometimes
binded into one companies development

There is very low level of integration of the systems

The culture of horizontal cooperation is somehow missing
in most of the local muncipalities

Most of L.G. Has a sadly bad decision making structure





Challenges for both
− Political factors – lack of commitment from the leaders,
and administration has not “put into picture”
− Conecptual problems - there is no support for the
workers of the L.G., which means, thay have to provide
a lot of extra during and after working ours from the
beginning of the project till the end
− Fear of loosing autonomy by the local governments
− Negotiation and management difficulties
− Map chaos for GIS based property applications




Alternative results
− The enviroment has become really unstable for having
a good deal by the factors mentioned before- both for
companies and muncipalities
− Some core elements of the call (integration) has
become endangered by the large number of sub-
contractors
− The lack of training at the local gov. level has produced
an intensive setback for the projects





Old HR and IT management truths
− A few projects piloted is better, than financing a lot with
medium or small amount of money
− Continous IT plan development can help to tackle
obstacles of later developments
− Strong commitment to standards at the beginning could
be the bridge for later success on interoperability
− Making the staff of the L.G. prepared to work in teams,
horizontally and geographicall is must (in small regional projects).
− The training and education in right time of a project
manager is essential factor of the success of getting what
you want




and again
− Politicians also have to learn a bit IT and HR!
− Study visits can help to find what to follow and what not
to
− Browsing around and testing applications on the web
(particularly web 2.0) could help to create human
friendly applications by non-developer partners (L.G.
Staff)
− Involving expert outsiders is a good investment
− Cooperation in the marketing of e-services could be a
cost reducement factor for L.G.'s.




Some extra notes
− ASP (appilcation service providers) services could
be the best, if the small regional differences has
been investigated before
− Building cooperation between small regions in IT is
better soon
− Worth to have a (part-)startegy on e-administration
introduction
− Leadership information and decision support
systems, knowledge management



Thank you for you attention!
I do welcome the questions now
or later personally or by e-mail at:
madcs@option.hu



GVOP E-közigazgatási tapasztalatok - mit kerüljenek el a követők?

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à GVOP E-közigazgatási tapasztalatok - mit kerüljenek el a követők?

Similaire à GVOP E-közigazgatási tapasztalatok - mit kerüljenek el a követők? (20)

Plus de Madarasz Csaba

Plus de Madarasz Csaba (17)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

GVOP E-közigazgatási tapasztalatok - mit kerüljenek el a követők?