Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the external evaluation of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training
Date: 2008-06-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Cedefop, EU activity, EU office or agency, report

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 13.6.2008 
COM(2008) 356 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND 
THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

on the external evaluation of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational 
Training

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

2.3. 

2.4. 

3. 

4. 

4.1. 

4.2. 

4.3. 

4.4. 

5. 

5.1. 

5.2. 

5.3. 

6. 

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3 

The European Centre for the Development of Vocational Education and Training.... 3 

Background to Cedefop................................................................................................ 3 

Priorities and activities................................................................................................. 3 

Previous evaluations, studies and reviews ................................................................... 4 

Funding ........................................................................................................................ 4 

Overview of external evaluation exercise .................................................................... 4 

Findings to Main evaluation Questions........................................................................ 5 

Relevance and Complementarity ................................................................................. 5 

Effectiveness ................................................................................................................ 6 

Efficiency ..................................................................................................................... 6 

Added value and impact............................................................................................... 7 

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE EXTERNAL EVALUATION ................. 7 

Strategic issues ............................................................................................................. 7 

Operational issues ........................................................................................................ 8 

Internal management issues ......................................................................................... 8 

Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 9 

EN 

2 

   EN 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

This  report  concerns  the  external  evaluation  of  the  European  Centre  for  the 
Development  of  Vocational  Training  (Cedefop),  a  Community  Agency  established 
under  Council  Regulation  337/75  of  10  February  19751.  Article  27(4)  of  the 
Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities2 
and Article 21.3b of the implementing rules3 specify that the Commission evaluates 
such activities on a regular basis and disseminates the evaluation results to spending, 
legislative and budgetary authorities.  

The external evaluation took place during 2006-2007 covering the period 2001-2006. 

This  report  is  based  on  the  findings,  conclusions  and  recommendations  of  the  final 
report,  submitted  by  the  evaluator  which,  is  available  in  full,  including  annexes,  at 
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/evalreports/index_en.htm. 

2. 

2.1. 

THE  EUROPEAN  CENTRE  FOR  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  VOCATIONAL  EDUCATION 
AND TRAINING 

Background to Cedefop 
Cedefop4  is  the  European  Union’s  agency  for  Vocational  Education  and  Training 
(VET);  it  is  located  in  Thessaloniki5,  Greece.  Cedefop  supports  the  European 
Commission,  Member  States  and  social  partners  in  developing  and  implementing 
European VET policy.  

It  is  administered  by  a  quadripartite  Governing  Board  with  representatives  of 
Member State governments, employer and employee organisations and the European 
Commission.  The  Centre  is  managed  by  a  directorate,  comprising  the  director  and 
deputy director and has around 130 staff (professional and support staff). Cedefop’s 
overall  budget  is  around  €  17  mil.  per  year .  Detailed  information  about  Cedefop  is 
available on its website (footnote 4). 

2.2. 

Priorities and activities 

In line with its Founding Regulations, Cedefop’s priorities and activities are defined 
in medium-term priorities (valid for 3 years) and annual work programmes6. 

Since 2000, the Lisbon strategy has stimulated a rapidly evolving and comprehensive 
European  agenda  in  vocational  education  and  training  (VET).  Over  this  period 
Cedefop has realigned its strategy to focus on supporting the European Commission, 
Member States and the social partners in developing European VET policy.  

The strategic realignment of Cedefop is reflected in its priorities: 

1 
2 

3 

4 
5 

6 

OJ L 39, 13.2.1975, p. 1–4 
Council Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No 1525/2007 of 17 December 2007 amending Regulation (EC, 
Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European 
Communities 
Commission  Regulation  (EC,  Euratom)  N°  478/2007  of  23  April  2007,  amending  Regulation  No 
2342/2002 of 23 December 2002 
Cedefop's website at http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/ 
Established  in  1975  and  originally  based  in  Berlin,  in  1995  Cedefop’s  head  office  was  transferred  to 
Thessaloniki 
The  mid-term  priorities  and  the  annual  work  programmes  are  accessible  at  Cedefop's  website  (see 
footnote 4). 

EN 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

providing  evidence  from  research,  statistical  data  and  policy  analysis  to 
support VET policy-making;  

increasing  knowledge  and  mutual  learning  on  VET  policy  and  practice  in 
Member States by reporting on developments and policy options; 

strengthening European cooperation in VET policy development by providing 
expertise to help design and support  common European VET initiatives and 
tools; 

increasing  the  visibility  and  understanding  of  VET  issues  through  effective 
communication. 

To  achieve  these  goals  Cedefop  uses  its  internal  expertise,  research  and  policy 
analysis skills, networking experience, data resources and dissemination tools to: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

support  exchanges  of  information  and  experience  and  the  sharing  of  good 
policies through study visits, networks, conferences and seminars; 

provide stakeholders and citizens with relevant information on key issues via 
electronic and printed publications; 

involve  candidate  countries  in  the  EU  VET  policy  framework,  working 
closely with the European Training Foundation (ETF). 

Cedefop’s activities are specified in detail in its annual work programmes. 

2.3. 

Previous evaluations, studies and reviews 
An  external  evaluation  was  finalised  in  20017  and  led  to  a  Commission  position 
paper8 and a Cedefop action plan9.  

2.4. 

Funding 

Cedefop’s overall budget and allocation between different titles: 

Year 

Overall budget 

Title 1: 

in € 

Staff 
expenditures 

In € 

Title 2: 
Administrative 
expenditures 

Title 3: 
Operating 
expenditures 

in € 

in € 

2008 

2007 

17.604.322 

10.603.000 

1.409.000 

5.592.322 

17.374.402 

9.881.740 

1.928.260 

5.564.402 

An overview of Cedefop's budget for the 2001 – 2006 evaluation period is provided 
in Annex 2; detailed information can be found in the Centre's annual accounts, which 
are available on Cedefop's website (footnote 4).  

3. 

OVERVIEW OF EXTERNAL EVALUATION EXERCISE 

DG  Education  and  Culture  (DG  EAC)  contracted  Ecotec  Research  and  Consulting 
Ltd10, to carry out the external evaluation of Cedefop. A Steering Committee, chaired 

7 
8 
9 

http://www.ec.europa.eu/education/programmes/evaluation/cedefop/final_report_pl_ramboll_en.pdf 
http://www.ec.europa.eu/education/programmes/evaluation/cedefop/annex_position_paper_en.pdf 
http://www.ec.europa.eu/education/programmes/evaluation/cedefop/actionpl_en.pdf 

EN 

4 

   EN 

                                                 
by  DG  EAC,  with  one  representative  of  each  of  the  different  groups  of  Cedefop’s 
Governing Board and two Cedefop staff members was set up to support and follow 
the work of the contractor. 

The overall objectives of the evaluation were agreed as: 

•  an assessment of the relevance, complementarity, effectiveness, efficiency, added-
value  and  impact  of  Cedefop’s  activities  and  organisation  in  achieving  the  key 
objectives, priorities and tasks defined in its guiding policy documents for 2001-
2006, such as the medium-term priorities and annual work programmes etc);  

•  provision  of  useful  lessons  and  recommendations  to  enable  Cedefop  to  face  the 
challenges of coming years. Particularly important are recommendations that help 
improve  Cedefop’s  programming,  management,  performance  and  impact  of  its 
products  and  services  and  its  accountability  to  the  Budgetary  Authority  and  the 
public at large. The evaluation should have a formative character. 

The  external  evaluators  followed  the  prescribed  method  and  terminology  for 
evaluation  under  the  DG  Budget  Guidelines11,  and  used  several  methodological 
tools. They gathered comprehensive evidence from literature, policy documents, web 
searches, a survey of Cedefop activities, and four in-depth case studies. To support 
this analysis, the views of over 100 key actors were captured through interviews and 
focus groups, and more than 650 respondents in two web surveys (details provided in 
Annex 3 of the report). 

4. 

FINDINGS TO MAIN EVALUATION QUESTIONS 

This section summarises the principal evaluators’ analysis and findings. Overall they 
conclude  that  Cedefop  is  a  relevant  and  effective  organisation  with  a  clear  distinct 
added value. Providing a wide range of activities and considering the ratio between 
inputs to outputs, Cedefop can also claim to be efficient. 

4.1. 

Relevance and Complementarity 

relevance  and 
The  evaluation  concludes  very  positively  on  Cedefop’s 
complementarity.  It  notes  that  Cedefop  is  not  only  responding  to  the  emerging  EU 
VET  policy  agenda  but  is  also  helping  influence  its  development.  Cedefop  has 
become  an  active  promoter  of  EU  VET  policy  at  the  highest  levels.  It  is  also  the 
evaluators’ assessment that Cedefop has performed a critical role as an 'open source' 
of  information  for  the  VET  community  at  large  since  its  foundation,  acquiring  a 
strong brand reputation and visibility in European VET. 

The evaluation points out that although Cedefop’s 'open source' role serving a wide 
VET community was successful, now may be the time for Cedefop to focus more on 
the  interests  of  its  immediate  stakeholders,  particularly  in  policy  development.  The 
evaluation correctly states that these two activities ('open source' – supporting policy 
development)  are  not  incompatible.  Although  Cedefop  now  provides  more  support 
for policy development, many activities serve the wider VET community. The issue 
is not one of incompatibility, but of balance that needs to be captured in strategy.  

10 

11 

Following a competitive tendering procedure, Ecotec Research and Consulting Ltd has been awarded a 
framework contract for evaluation of related activities of DG EAC  
‘Evaluating  EU  Activities:  A  practical  guide  for  the  Commission  services’,  European  Commission, 
Directorate General for the Budget, July 2004 

EN 

5 

   EN 

                                                                                                                                                         
The evaluators also perceive Cedefop to be playing a complementary role with other 
agencies, and found evidence of Cedefop being aware of the  need to guard  against 
duplication and taking active steps to be clear as to respective functions. Looking to 
the  future,  and  given  the  growing  importance  of  Cedefop’s  dual  role  (supporting 
policy  development;  'open  source'),  this  boundary  terrain  with  other  agencies  will 
continue to require active management.  

4.2. 

Effectiveness 

Cedefop is doing a good job, satisfying the majority of its users, having a very good 
reputation  and  strong  brand  image  in  European  VET.  It  is  a  valued  source  for 
reporting,  collecting  and  analysing  VET  information  at  European  level  and 
recognised  for  its  role  in  VET  research  and  disseminating  VET  information.  The 
evaluators found that Cedefop’s activities evoke good feedback across the board.  

The  evaluation  points  to  some  of  Cedefop’s  strengths  and  weaknesses.  Strengths 
include  networking,  encouraging  peer 
learning  and  providing  comparable 
information. Cedefop adds most value through bringing together policy and research, 
in  particular,  by  applying  research  findings  to  policy  issues.  In  this  way  Cedefop 
made  an  effective  contribution  to  the  follow  up  to  the  Copenhagen  process  for 
European  cooperation  in  VET12,  a  task  of  great  breadth  and  complexity  completed 
successfully  with  few  resources.  Further,  Cedefop  skills  forecasting  activities  fill  a 
knowledge gap at European level.  

Weaknesses  lie  in  Cedefop’s  communication  strategy,  in  particular  through  its 
websites, and the absence of a well developed evaluation culture. Further aspects of 
the  work  with  ReferNet,  -  Cedefop’s  main  information  providing  network  –  need 
attention, in particular ReferNet’s ability to provide information validated by national 
authorities that accurately reflects VET developments and the network's visibility in 
the Member States. 

4.3. 

Efficiency 

The  task  of  assessing  the  efficiency  of  the  agency  proved  to  be  more  difficult. 
Measuring  efficiency  requires  looking  at  how  resource  input  (staff  and  money)  are 
transformed into activity outputs, to estimate value for money and comparative costs. 
The  financial  and  project  reporting  data  available  did  not  enable  the  evaluators  to 
measure  efficiency  scientifically.  The  evaluators  consider  that  activity  based 
budgeting  started  to  be  implemented  towards  the  end  of  the  evaluation  period  and 
that  measured  performance  indicators  were  only  comprehensively  available  for  the 
first time in 2005, which allowed making partial comparability observations between 
2005 and 2006.  

To  address  the  absence  of  scientific  data,  the  evaluators  used  a  number  of  proxy 
measures to assess the degree of efficiency of Cedefop. They conclude that the scale 
of activity has been simply enormous and considering the ratio of inputs to outputs 
(wide range of activities and products), Cedefop can lay good claim to be efficient. 

Evaluators  reported  that  some  of  these  issues  were  already  taken  on  board  by  the 
current  management  team,  however  too  late  for  this  evaluation.  The  full 
implementation  of  activity-based  budgeting  in  Cedefop  in  2008  is  considered  an 
important step to facilitate future assessment exercises. 

12 

EN 

Information 
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/vocational_en.html 

the 

on 

Copenhagen 

process 

at 

6 

   EN 

                                                 
4.4. 

Added value and impact 

According  to  the  evaluators'  report,  Cedefop  is  an  organisation  with  a  very  distinct 
added value. There simply are no valid alternatives for what it does and for many of 
its activities it has no obvious peer. No other organisation has a dedicated focus on 
and a Europe-wide pool of experience and competency applied to VET. 

The evaluation noted several areas where Cedefop clearly has a positive impact and 
brings  added  value.  These  activities  represent  key  strengths  of  the  organisation, 
namely:  

•  analysing  progress  in  the  Copenhagen  process  to  enhance  European  cooperation 
in VET on an informed basis and producing reports for ministerial meetings. This 
led to Cedefop being given a stronger mandate to monitor and report on progress 
in the Member States in implementing European VET policy; 

•  bringing together relevant VET research to interpret current trends and encourage 

a European approach to tackling VET issues;  

•  filling knowledge gaps by providing much needed analysis of current and future 

skill needs in Europe;  

•  helping  strengthen  European  cooperation  by  providing  expertise  to  help  design, 
develop and implement European tools such as Europass, European qualification 
framework (EQF) and European credit system (ECVET); 

•  promoting  understanding  and  peer  learning,  by  bringing  people  together  – 
practitioners,  researchers  and,  notably,  social  partners.  In  2006,  the  European 
Commission  invited  Cedefop  to  coordinate  the  new  consolidated  study  visits 
programme in the lifelong learning programme13 from 2008-13.  

5. 

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE EXTERNAL EVALUATION 

This section provides an overview of the evaluation’s 16 recommendations. They are 
grouped under three headings: strategic, operational and internal management issues.  

5.1. 

Strategic issues 

•  Cedefop  should  continue  to search  for  ways  to  reduce  the  breadth  of  its  activity 
portfolio. It should focus its resources on fewer core activities and consolidate its 
management  to  maximise  strong  leadership  across  its  operational  areas.  The 
medium-term priorities for 2009-11, which Cedefop is currently formulating, are a 
good opportunity to address the strategic balance of its operations between 'open 
source'  provision  and  contributing  and  supporting  implementation  of  EU  VET 
policy  priorities.  An  improved  communication  policy  should  enable  Cedefop  to 
get the backing of its stakeholders and users for possible strategic readjustments. 
(recommendations 2, 3, 4 and 5); 

•  Cedefop  should  use  better  its  clear  and  coherent  strategic  objectives  to  make  its 
management-by-objectives culture a day-to-day practice, cascaded throughout the 
entire staff (recommendation 1) 

13 

Council  of  the  European  Union.  Council  Decision  establishing  an  action  programme  in  the  field  of 
lifelong learning (1720/2006/EC). Official Journal of the European Union L 327/45, 24.11. 2006. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

                                                 
•  Cedefop  should  take  steps  to  assemble  an  investment/restructuring  fund  (within 
the  allowable  rules)  to  allocate  development  resources  to  new  ventures  and  to 
break out of the zero-sum cycle of paring down (recommendation 6). 

Under this heading, the evaluator also addresses two specific recommendations to the 
Commission, namely to: 

•  assist Cedefop to explore ways to respond more flexibly to the strategic demands 

placed upon it (recommendation 7); 

•  explore  with  the  relevant  European  services  and  institutions  how  it  might  be 
possible within the regulations to give Cedefop a longer-term planning horizon for 
its actions (recommendation 8). 

5.2. 

Operational issues 

•  Research, advice and policy support: more attention should be given to producing 
concise,  timely  and  focused  outputs  for  policy  makers.  Cedefop  is  at  the 
crossroads of policy and research. This must be communicated better to its wider 
community of users and stakeholders to emphasise its unique role in applying the 
latest  research  to  EU  VET  problems  and  in  filling  knowledge  gaps.  Cedefop 
should  develop  a  'foresight'  process  exploring  emerging  VET  related  issues 
the  EU  VET  agenda 
into  development  of 
beyond  2010  and 
(recommendations 12, 13 and 14). 

feed 

•  Communication, 

information  and  dissemination:  Cedefop’s  communication 
strategy should be reviewed to take better account of stakeholder and target group 
needs.  Action  should  be  taken  to  realise  ReferNet’s  full  potential  and  use  to  the 
full the qualities embedded in the model (recommendations 9 and 10); 

•  Exchange  and  cooperation:  the  study  visits  programme  should  be  extended  and 
developed into a platform to identify, disseminate and exchange good practice in 
VET across the EU (recommendation 11); 

5.3. 

Internal management issues 

•  Activity-based  budgeting  should  be  complemented  by  activity-based  financial 
reporting. This will enable Cedefop to assess accurately the actual resources used 
for  its  activities  (as  opposed  to  those  budgeted  for).  It  will  also  assist  when 
making  strategic  choices  knowing  the  opportunity  cost  of  each  activity 
(recommendation 15); 

•  To  strengthen  Cedefop’s  evaluation  culture,  measures  for  value  for  money  and 
effectiveness  (unit  costs,  comparative  cost  analysis)  need  to  be  installed  to 
periodically  take  stock  of  performance.  This  should  include  being  able  to  report 
impact as well as visibility (recommendation 16). 

The  Commission  and  Cedefop  accept  overall  the  recommendations  made  by  the 
evaluators. Cedefop has limited resources and it is important to use them in the best 
way.  Given  the  diversity  of  the  main  stakeholders  (governments;  employer 
organisations;  trade  unions;  European  Commission)  and  of  the  user  community 
(from policy makers to practitioners), it is important to find the right mix and balance 
between the activities related to supporting policy development and implementation 
and those related to the provision of support as an 'open source' for VET issues. The 
Commission and Cedefop will draw up detailed action plans for the follow-up of the 
findings and recommendations of the external evaluation.  

EN 

8 

   EN 

6. 

CONCLUSION 

The  Commission  shares  the  evaluators’  overall  positive  assessment  of  Cedefop's 
work.  It  considers  Cedefop  has  made  a  valuable  contribution  to  the  Community's 
activities in VET. Since 2000, the Lisbon strategy, Education and training 2010, the 
Copenhagen  process  and  EU  enlargement  have  dramatically  changed  the  European 
context for VET. The evaluation acknowledges Cedefop’s increasingly complex and 
demanding environment over the last six years. It concludes that Cedefop responded 
well, delivering greater flexibility, impact and value.  

In  particular,  Cedefop  supported  the  policy  development  process  by  helping 
implement  the  Education  and  training  2010  work  programme  and  monitoring  and 
reporting  on  Member  States’  progress  in  implementing  European  VET  policy 
priorities  agreed  in  the  Copenhagen  process.  Cedefop  contributed  to  strengthening 
European cooperation by helping develop European tools such as Europass and the 
European qualifications framework and by stimulating exchanges and peer learning 
through the study visits programme.  

The  evaluation  concludes  that  Cedefop  has  a  strong  brand  image,  brings  a  very 
distinct  added-value  and  for  many  activities  has  no  obvious  peer.  "No  other 
organisation  has  a  dedicated  focus  on  VET  and  a  Europe-wide  pool  of  experience 
and  competency  applied  to  the  field.  Indeed,  there  is  a  strong  argument  that  if 
Cedefop  did  not  exist  an  organisation  that  looks  something  like  it  would  probably 
have to be invented." 

During  the  evaluation  period,  2001-06,  Cedefop  moved  away  from  its  more 
traditional role as an ‘open source’ at the disposal of the wider VET community, to 
become  more  proactive  in  supporting  the  development  of  EU  VET  policy.  This 
strategic shift started in 2002 with the Copenhagen declaration, accelerated with the 
Maastricht and Helsinki communiqués and is expected to continue. 

The evaluation found that the Governing Board largely supports Cedefop’s strategic 
realignment.  However,  to  make  such  a  shift  successful  requires  prioritising  and 
resourcing activities effectively, yet Cedefop continues as an ‘open source’ for VET 
in  Europe,  pursuing  its  support  to  the  policy  mission  in  tandem.  The  evaluators 
consider  that  ‘there  is  no  problem  with  this,  of  course,  so  long  as  the  level  of 
resources can sustain it and where the pool of competency in the organisation can 
span both.’  

However,  as  Cedefop  is  expected  to  provide  even  greater  support  for  policy 
development and implementation and resources are limited, it is important to focus 
the available resources on fewer core activities. Cedefop must move away – to some 
degree  –  from  its  ‘open  source’  role.  That  means  painful  choices  about  stopping 
activities  that  have  a  value  of  their  own,  but  do  not  add  substantial  value  to  core 
stakeholders. 

Cedefop needs to review its information and communication strategy and services to 
target information to specific groups of stakeholders who require different types and 
formats.  It  is  important  that  Cedefop  involves  and  explains  to  the  wider  VET 
community its strategic realignment to policy-related support activities. 

Full implementation of activity-based budgeting in 2008 by Cedefop is an important 
step to make visible and understand better the relationship between investment and 
outcome for different activities, and so their strategic value to the organisation and its 
stakeholders.  As  recommended  by  the  evaluators,  Cedefop  should  investigate  how 

EN 

9 

   EN 

this  system  can  be  used  for  financial  monitoring  and  reporting  to  assess  accurately 
the  actual  resources  used  by  activities  (as  opposed  to  the  resources  budgeted  for). 
This should be complemented by relevant measurable indicators to make follow-up 
of  objectives  and  goals  easier  and  to  help  assess  Cedefop's  impact  in  its  areas  of 
intervention.  

Cedefop's management must continue its effort to establish a clear vision, cascading 
its strategic mission throughout the entire staff. 

The  external  evaluation  report  provides  useful  findings  and  recommendations  for 
further development of Cedefop as the EU’s agency for VET. The concrete follow-
up of the evaluation’s findings and recommendations will be ensured on two levels:  

•  an action plan submitted by Cedefop to its Governing Board outlining its analysis 
and proposed actions on the evaluation’s recommendations. Implementation of the 
action plan will be monitored by the Governing Board. 

•  an action plan drawn up by DG EAC, taking into account Cedefop’s action plan, 
but  addressing  the  findings  and  recommendations  of  the  evaluation  beyond 
Cedefop's competencies, in particular those addressed to the Commission. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

EN 

11 

EN 

 
  
 
Annex 2  

BUDGET EVOLUTION, 2001-2006 

Revenue (entered in the 
final budget and 
effectively collected) 
Revenue 
Revenue 
collected 
entered  

in 1000 € 
13.600 

in 1000 € 
13.500 

Staff 
(Title 1) 

Expenditure appropriations (entered in 
the final budget)  
per title 
Administration 
and 
infrastructure  
(Title 2) 
in 1000 € 
1.000 

in 1000 € 
5.000 

in 1000 € 
7.500 

Operations 
(Title 3) 

Expenditure appropriations 
(committed and paid) 

Human resources 

Commitments 
done 

Payments 
done 

Establishment 
Plan 

in 1000 € 
13.500 

in 1000 € 
10.600 

81 posts 

Total nb 
of staff (at 
date of 
31.12 of 
year) 
127 

14.200 

12.600 

8.100 

1.100 

5.000 

13.900 

10.900 

83 posts 

123 

14.700 

15.300 

8.000 

1.200 

5.500 

15.400 

11.300 

83 posts 

125 

16.546 

14.466 

9.243 

1.395 

5.958 

16.313 

12.270 

88 posts 

137 

17.093 

16.989 

9.468 

1.372 

5.578 

15.290 

14.381 

91 posts 

123 

17.563 

15.313 

9.443 

1.419 

5.978 

15.872 

13.475 

95 posts 

123 

Community 
subsidy 

Year 

2001  B3-1030: 8,5 m€ 
B3-1031: 4,7 m€
Total: 13,2 m€

2002  B3-1030: 9,2m€ 
B3-1031: 4,5 m€
Total: 13,7 m€ 

2003  B3-1030: 9,4 m€ 

B3-1031:5,1 m€
Total: 14,5 m€ 
2004  15 03 01 03: 

10,638 m€ 
15 03 01 04: 
5,162 m€ 
Total: 15,8 m€
2005  15 03 01 03: 

10,662 m€ 
15 03 01 04: 
5,438 m€ 
Total: 16,1 m€
2006  15 03 01 03: 

10,962 m€ 
15 03 01 04: 
5,438 m€
Total: 16,4 m€

Since move to Activity Based Budgeting in 2004: 15 03 01 03 replaces B3-1030; 15 03 01 04 replaces B3-1031 

EN 

12 

EN