WRITTEN QUESTION E-1100/98

by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(8 April 1998)

Subject: External evaluation of the European Training Foundation

The external evaluation of the European Training foundation required by Article 17 of Regulation 1360/90(1) was concluded on 9 May 1997. In addition to this evaluation, Commission officials carried out their own studies. The report by the external advisors highlights a number of serious shortcomings which are hardly referred to in the Commission report.

1. How is it possible to justify studies being carried out both by external advisors and by the Commission's own officials with one and the same objective of "assessing to what extent the foundation is achieving its aims"?

2. Are there points at which the assessments by the two bodies coincided, and was there cooperation in individual cases?

3. What criteria are decisive in awarding an external evaluation contract externally, i.e. to outside experts?

4. Could the evaluation have been carried out exclusively by the Commission's own officials, and would they have come to the same critical conclusion?

5. How much was paid for the external assessment by Sofreco?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(4 June 1998)

Article 17 of Council Regulation (EEC) 1360/90 of 7 May 1990 establishing a European training foundation(2) requires the Commission to establish a monitoring and evaluation procedure of the experience acquired in the work of the European training foundation and to report to the Parliament, the Council and the Economic and social committee on the results of this procedure. The Commission submitted its report on 18 July 1997(3).

1. The Commission's report is based on an evaluation of the European training foundation as well as information gathered by continuously monitoring the Foundation. The evaluation was carried out from February to April 1997 by an external organisation (Sofreco) and not directly by the Commission. The information gathered through monitoring stems in particular from the Commission's continuous and close cooperation with the European training foundation. Both sources of information complemented each other. The Commission's report of 18 July 1997 summarises the evaluation's results (section 4) and draws certain conclusions, also using the Commission's own experience gained through monitoring (in particular section 6).

2. The evaluation by an external organisation followed specific terms of reference and did not overlap with other activities. The Commission's report was produced in the light of the external evaluation and benefited from close cooperation with the external evaluation team.

3. The support of an external contractor was sought in particular to procure sufficient resources (staff, time, administrative capacity) in order to carry out a comprehensive study during the given period of time.

4. As already stated, the Commission did not have the appropriate resources to complete such an evaluation study in the given time-scale. In its report the Commission's own observations in particular with respect to the European training foundation's future focus, draw largely on the evaluators' main recommendations.

5. The cost of the external evaluation was ECU 223 296.

(1) OJ L 131, 23.5.1990, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 131, 23.5.1990., as amended by Regulation (EC) 2063/94 (1) no L 216, 20.8.1994.

(3) COM(97) 379 final.