External consultants at the European Commission : scope for reform. Special report 17, 2022.
Date: 2022-09-25
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: added value, consultancy, operation of the Institutions, outsourcing, performance audit, report, servant (EU)

EN 

2022 

17 

Special report  External consultants at the European 

Commission 
Scope for reform 

 
2 

Paragraph 

I-IX 

01-13 

01-03 

04-10 

11-13 

14-17 

18-84 

18-32 

20-26 

27-32 

33-56 

Contents 

Executive summary 

Introduction 

Reasons for using external consultants 

Extent and type of services delivered 

Roles and responsibilities 

Audit scope and approach 

Observations 

Significant gaps in the framework governing the engagement of 
external consultants and justifying their use 

Better regulation guidelines: a sound basis, but applicable to evaluations 
and studies only 

Needs analyses not carried out or documented systematically 

Procurement procedures complied with, but specific risks not yet 
well managed 

Purchase of external consultants’ services complied with procurement rules 

34-36 

The Commission’s oversight did not match the level of potential risk 

37-56 

Weaknesses in the way in which external consultants’ services 
are managed and used 

Individual contracts managed in accordance with the rules, but with gaps in 
performance assessment 

Weak practices in the exploitation of the results of external consultants’ 
assignments 

Partial accuracy of the Commission’s management information, 
and weak systematic reporting 

The Commission lacks accurate information on the volume and types of 
external consultants’ services it uses 

The Commission does not systematically report information on its use of 
external consultants’ services 

57-71 

58-64 

65-71 

72-84 

73-79 

80-84 

 
 
3 

85-91 

Conclusions and recommendations 

Annexes 

Annex I – Examples of incorrect and incoherent encoding of the 
legal commitment category 

Abbreviations 

Glossary 

Replies of the Commission 

Timeline 

Audit team 

 
 
 
 
4 

Executive summary 

I The European Commission increasingly uses external consultants to perform a range 
of advisory and support services. The value of services procured between 2017 and 
2020 was around €3.7 billion. The services the Commission procured include 
consultancy work, studies, evaluations and research.  

II Discharge authorities and the media have recently shown increasing interest in the 
use of such services by the Commission. Our report aims to contribute to improved 
transparency and accountability of this important area. 

III The objective of our audit was to assess whether the Commission managed its use 
of external consultants in a manner that safeguards its interests and ensures value for 
money. In particular, we examined whether the Commission: 

(a)  had a framework in place governing the use of external consultants that defines 

the forms of their support and lays down rules to justify their use; 

(b)  had procured these contracts in a sound manner, and mitigated the risks involved 

in cooperating with suppliers; 

(c)  had managed and monitored the external consultants’ performance and has 

practices to assess the results; 

(d)  had reliable and accurate management information and reported on its use of 

external consultants. 

IV This audit focused on the engagement of external consultants between 2017 and 
2019, we also considered recent relevant information when appropriate. We analysed 
financial and management information on the services procured, interviewed 
Commission staff members, and reviewed contracts to determine the planning, 
procurement, justification, evaluation and management practices in place. 

V We concluded that the Commission’s management of the use of external 
consultants does not fully ensure that it maximises value for money. The Commission’s 
framework governing the use of these services has significant gaps. While the forms of 
support that can be provided by external consultants and the extent to which tasks can 
be outsourced is defined for studies and evaluations, this is not the case for other 
services provided by external consultants.  

 
 
5 

VI The use of consultants also gave rise to potential risks of overdependence, 
competitive advantage, a concentration of suppliers and potential conflicts of interest. 
The Commission does not sufficiently monitor, manage or mitigate these risks at the 
corporate level. 

VII For the specific contracts we examined, we found that the Commission had 
followed the necessary procurement procedures and ensured that the consultants 
delivered the required services to an appropriate level of quality before paying for 
them. However, it does not consistently assess the performance of external 
consultants and, apart for studies and evaluations, it does not share information on 
these assessments across its directorates-general. This diminishes the Commission’s 
ability to identify and report on the benefits of the services delivered.  

VIII Finally, the Commission’s information systems does not provide accurate and 
reliable information on the volume and types of external consultants’ services used, 
and there is no systematic reporting on this. 

IX We recommend that the Commission should: 

— 

further develop its framework for the use of external consultants’ services; 

— 

improve its approach to monitoring and mitigating risks from using such services; 

— 

identify and use the results of such services; 

—  and report regularly on its use of these services. 

 
 
6 

Introduction 

Reasons for using external consultants 

01 Public administrations use external consultants for a variety of reasons. In recent 
years, rapidly changing circumstances coupled with constraints on administrative 
resources have led to an increase in the use of these services. As consultants have 
become increasingly involved in service design and delivery, the need for frameworks 
governing their use has also grown, with the aim of obtaining value for money. 

02 For the purposes of this report, ‘external consultants’ means private and public 
suppliers of professional knowledge-based services, who can work on or off the client’s 
premises. In our case, the ‘client’ is the European Commission. The client uses the 
output of their services as an input to its processes for making and implementing 
decisions, or as support for its administrative functioning. 

03 Table 1 gives an overview of the main reasons why the Commission uses external 
consultants. 

 
 
7 

Table 1 – Main reasons for the use of external consultants by the 
Commission 

Drivers 

Optimisation of human resource 
management  

The Commission cannot afford to employ, 
cultivate and retain the wide range of 
skills and expertise it might need for 
specific projects 

Complementary resource 

Achieving results within defined fixed 
term and cost parameters 

Programme design and 
implementation 

Assisting decision-making 

Independent view 

Source: ECA, based on interviews with the Commission. 

Benefits 

•  Complementary resource to 

implement actions for multiple 
stakeholders from Member States and 
non-EU countries, in particular in 
times of increased workload or when 
skills are needed for a limited time 

•  Specialised skills are needed to carry 
out technical and scientific work (e.g. 
data acquisition, collection, 
compilation, scientific and statistical 
support, IT development) 

• 

Improved agility and flexibility in the 
face of changing organisational and 
political priorities 

•  Support to the Commission in the 
design and implementation of 
policies and programmes, with the 
aim of promoting transparent, 
evidence-based decision-making (e.g. 
input on specific elements in the form 
of studies or evaluations) 

•  Flexible access to the right mix of 
skills to fill capacity gaps quickly, in 
particular when the need for staff is 
temporary or their presence is 
required in Member States or non-EU 
countries 

•  Cheaper alternatives to on-site 

staffing for capacity-building through 
technical assistance and technical 
support 

•  Credible independent voice (e.g. 
when needed to implement the 
objectives set in the strategic plans) 

•  External points of view to provide 

additional insights into EU policies and 
programmes 

Extent and type of services delivered 

04 Over the 2017-2019 period, which was the focus period of our audit (see 
paragraph 16), the Commission signed 8 009 contracts with external consultants. 
These contracts had a total value of €2.7 billion. The total value of contracts signed 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
8 

with external consultants increased from €799 million in 2017 to €955 million in 2019. 
In 2020, the Commission signed contracts worth €971 million. 

05 The Commission recorded these services in its financial system under one of the 
following categories: consultancy, study, evaluation or research (see Table 2). 

Table 2 – The Commission’s categories and descriptions of external 
consultants’ services 

Consultancy 

Advisory services excluding 
‘Administrative, HR and Social Services’, 
‘Communications & Publication’, ‘Conferences, 
External Meetings and Travel’, ‘Evaluation’, 
‘Studies’, ‘Audit Services’, ‘IT Services and 
Telecommunication Charges’, ‘Legal Services’, 
‘Research, Development or Scientific Activities’, 
‘Training Services’, ‘Translation and Interpretation’ 

Study 

All types of studies (including legal analysis) 

Evaluation 

Ex-ante or ex-post evaluation of projects, 
programmes, impact assessment services, etc. 

Research 

Services related to research, development or 
scientific activities that do not fit any of the 
existing service categories 

Source: ECA, using information from the Commission’s List of classes/categories of legal commitments in 
respect of procurement and grants based on the 2015 Financial Regulation. 

06 The largest amounts contracted in 2017-2019 relate to services registered as 
‘consultancy’ (72 %). Figure 1 gives an insight into the use of external consultants at 
the Commission during the period. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 1 – External consultants at the Commission1, 2017-2019 

9 

Source: ECA, based on the Commission’s financial data. 

1  Departments, services and executive agencies that contracted external consultants. 

 
 
 
                                                      
10 

07 Out of 45 Commission departments, services and executive agencies using 
external consultants, nine Commission directorates-general and one executive agency 
together accounted for €2.1 billion spent on external consultants over the 2017-2019 
period, i.e. 80 % of the overall amount. The top three highest-spending directorates-
general account for more than half of this total (see Figure 2 below for details). 

Figure 2 – The 10 Commission departments spending most on external 
consultants, 2017-2019 

Source: ECA, based on the Commission’s financial data. 

08 Of the total amounts contracted on external consultants, 98 % went to suppliers 
registered in the EU. Over the 2017-2019 period, 72 % of the total volume of such 
services was sourced from suppliers based in Belgium, Germany, France, the 
Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. 

 
 
 
11 

09 Around 57 % (€1 542 million) of the total value of contracts concluded with 
external consultants was financed under the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 
heading 4 ‘Global Europe’. These contracts include services procured under EU 
programmes aimed at improving cooperation with non-EU countries. MFF heading 1 
‘Smart and Inclusive Growth’ (€745 million, 28 % of the overall amount contracted) 
comprises the second greatest source of financing external consultants’ contracts, 
whereas only around 1 % of such contracts were funded under MFF heading 5 
‘Administration’. Figure 3 provides a breakdown of the total value of contracts 
concluded with external consultants under the various MFF headings. 

Figure 3 – Sources of financing external consultants’ contracts, 2017-
2019 

Source: ECA, based on the Commission’s financial data. 

10 External consultants are mainly involved in implementing the EU’s 
neighbourhood and enlargement policies, international partnerships, foreign policy 
instruments, and environmental and climate actions. Figure 4 presents the 10 EU 
programmes and instruments which used external consultants most heavily, with 
contracts amounting to €1.9 billion (71 % of the total amount contracted) in the 2017-
2019 period. 

 
 
 
12 

Figure 4 – The 10 EU programmes and instruments with the highest 
value of support from external consultants, 2017-2019 

Source: ECA, based on the Commission’s financial data. 

Roles and responsibilities  

11 Under the Commission’s decentralised governance structure, directorates-
general are responsible for identifying the need for external consultants, and for 
ensuring that they are used efficiently and effectively. They are also responsible for 
identifying, assessing and mitigating the risks arising from their use. If they classify some of 

 
 
 
13 

those risks as ‘critical’ (risks with high priority), they should notify them to the Secretariat-
General and the Directorate-General for Budget2. 

12 DG Budget and the Secretariat-General provide corporate guidance and advice to 
ensure that the directorates-general plan and manage external consultants’ 
engagements in a consistent manner, avoid overlaps and improve knowledge 
management and transparency. If the directorates-general, through their regular 
assessments of the risks to their activities, identify critical risks arising from the use of 
external consultants, they are to be notified to central services and included in a list of 
all the critical risks provided to the Corporate Management Board3. 

13 The Commission’s Corporate Management Board provides coordination, 
oversight and strategic orientations on corporate issues, including resource allocation 
and risk management. It oversees the risk management process and regularly informs 
the College about its findings. In particular, it reviews the list of critical risks4. 

2  European Commission, C(2018) 7703 final, Communication to the Commission: Governance 

in the European Commission, 21.11.2018. 

3  Risk Management in the Commission – Implementation Guide, version updated in 

September 2021. 

4  European Commission, C(2018) 7703 final, Communication to the Commission: Governance 

in the European Commission, 21.11.2018. 

 
 
                                                      
14 

Audit scope and approach 

14 In recent years, the Parliament5, the Council6 and the media have shown interest 
in the Commission’s increasing use of external consultants. In particular, questions 
have been raised about the type and amounts contracted, the risks of concentration, 
overdependence and conflicts of interest and the need to use external consultants, as 
opposed to using internal staff. Our report aims to contribute to improved 
transparency and accountability on the use of external consultants by the Commission. 

15 Our audit focused on whether the Commission had managed its use of external 
consultants in a manner that safeguarded the Commission’s interests and ensured 
value for money. We examined whether the Commission: 

(a)  had a framework governing the use of external consultants that defines the forms 

of support they can provide, and lays down rules to justify their use; 

(b)  had procured such contracts in a sound manner, and mitigated the potential risks 

involved in cooperating with suppliers; 

(c)  had managed and monitored external consultants’ performance and has practices 

to assess the results; 

(d)  had reliable and accurate management information and reported on its use of 

external consultants. 

16 Our audit covered the services of external consultants (see paragraph 02), which 
were financed by the EU budget and contracted by the Commission between 2017 and 
2019, and which were recorded by the Commission as consultancy, study, evaluation 
or research. We also considered recent relevant information on the use of external 
consultants when appropriate. In the course of this audit, we did not assess IT support 
services. These services are highly specific; they are procured under contracts that 

5  Letter to President of European Commission from European Parliament, 30.3.2021, 

2019 Discharge to the Commission, written questions to Commissioner Hahn, hearing on 
11.1.2021 and 2019 Discharge to the Commission, written questions to Secretary-General 
Ilze Juhansone, hearing on 6.1.2021. 

6  Detailed replies of the Commission to the specific requests made by the Council 

complementing the report from the Commission on the follow-up to the discharge for the 
2019 financial year, COM(2021) 405 final (point 33). 

 
 
                                                      
15 

involve a variety of IT services. Also, the Commission does not usually record them in 
its financial system under any of the four categories mentioned above; instead, they 
are recorded in their own specific category, ‘IT Services and Telecommunication 
Charges’. 

17 We obtained our evidence from: 

(a)  desk reviews of the Commission’s instructions, guidelines and checklists relating 

to the use of external consultants, the procurement and management of such 
projects, and reporting on results obtained; 

(b)  audit interviews with 11 Commission directorates-general and one Executive 
Agency7 on their practices in engaging, managing and evaluating the work of 
external consultants, and in identifying lessons learnt. We made our selection 
based on contracted amounts throughout the EU budget and different 
management modes; 

(c)  a review of 20 contracts selected from four of these eleven directorates-general 
for services provided by external consultants, and concluded between 2017 and 
2019. For this review we selected the directorates-general which had contracted 
the largest amounts (DG NEAR, the JRC, DG REFORM, DG GROW) and different 
types of services commissioned to external consultants; 

(d)  an analysis of the financial and management information available on services 

procured from 2017 to 2019 and contracted as consultancy, studies, evaluation 
and research services. 

7  DG AGRI, DG BUDG, DG EMPL, DG ENV, DG GROW, DG HR, the JRC, DG NEAR, DG REFORM, 

Eurostat, EASME and the Secretariat-General of the European Commission. 

 
 
 
 
                                                      
16 

Observations 

Significant gaps in the framework governing the engagement of 
external consultants and justifying their use 

18 In this section of the report we focus on the Commission’s framework governing 
the use of external consultants. We assessed whether this framework provided 
common principles and guidelines on how to plan and justify the use of external 
consultants. 

19 Table 3 illustrates our analysis of the scope and type of external consultants’ 
services recorded by the Commission under the four categories included in our audit 
scope in the 2017-2019 period. 

 
 
17 

Table 3 – Types and scope of services provided by external consultants, 
2017-2019 

Scope of the work 

Type of services 

Consultancy (1)(2) 

• Technical assistance projects and 

technical support services 

EU programme implementation 
Use of external consultants (procuring 
their services) is set out in programme 
documents and financing agreements (e.g. 
SRSP, external actions, LIFE, Horizon 2020 
and grant support team for the Turkish 
Cypriot community programme) 

Support services 
Support, in the implementation of the 
directorates-general management plans, 
often concerns recurrent everyday 
operations 

Professional services  
Services, to fill in capacity gaps in new 
delivery arrangements, for example in the 
field of IT developments 

Services related to Better 
Regulation Agenda or programme 
design and implementation 

Study and 
Evaluation (1) 

Services/activities concerning 
research, development or 
scientific activities 

Research (1) 

• External experts working both in 

and off the Commission’s premises, 
with renewed contracts (e.g. 
statistical, data-compilation, 
information-acquisition services) 

• IT-related consultancy 

• Services procured by the Executive 
Agency to implement programmes 
delegated by the parent 
Directorate-General, in accordance 
with the requirements of the 
delegated programme 

• Service contracts to implement 
tasks under Management Plans 

• Conduct of studies, evaluations, 

impact assessments 

• Technical, sector-related studies 

and analysis, and data-acquisition 
services 

• Production of studies or 

evaluations, data acquisition, 
technical assistance related to the 
JRC’s research activities 

• Laboratory maintenance and 

equipment 

• Renewal of trademarks and 

payments for patents 

• Organisation of training courses 

and conferences 

• Decommissioning of nuclear 

facilities 

(1) 
(2) 

Services provided for the benefit of the Commission 
Services for the benefit of Member States and non-EU countries 

Source: ECA, based on data recorded in the Commission’s financial system. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
18 

Better regulation guidelines: a sound basis, but applicable to evaluations 
and studies only 

20 We assessed whether the Commission had a common framework covering rules, 
core principles and guidelines for the use of external consultants. We checked if the 
framework included a definition of the different forms of knowledge-based services 
and the extent to which the Commission could contract these services with external 
consultants, or should keep them in-house. Such a framework is important, particularly 
if these services are used to support recurrent activities. 

21 Overall, directorates-general use the services of external consultants within the 
framework of the Financial Regulation8, and according to the general rules for 
procuring services described in the Commission’s Vade-mecum on public 
procurement9. This framework addresses general rules for service contracts such as 
the correct use of tendering procedures, and the correct payment for services 
received. However, it does not include specific provisions for external knowledge-
based engagements, in particular risks linked to this type of engagement (see 
paragraph 55). 

22 In 2002, the Commission adopted its principles and guidelines on the collection 
and use of expertise10. The core principles of quality, openness and effectiveness, and 
guidelines for their implementation, were to be applied ‘whenever Commission 
departments collect and use advice of experts coming from outside the responsible 
department’, including through external consultants. 

23 The Commission has produced additional guidelines for studies and evaluations, 
which accounted for 22 % of the total spending on external consultants during the 
audit period (see Table 3). In 2012, the Commission produced a guidance note to 

8  OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and 

of the Council on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, 
18.7.2018. 

9  European Commission, Vade-mecum on public procurement in the Commission, 

February 2016, updated January 2020. 

10  COM(2002) 713 final, Communication from the Commission on the collection and use of 

expertise by the Commission: principles and guidelines, 11.12.2002. 

 
 
                                                      
19 

harmonise procedures for the management of studies11. These procedures cover the 
full cycle of studies’ production, from planning through ordering, dissemination and 
recording. The document includes a definition of studies and common criteria on their 
use. From 2015, the better regulation guidelines and toolbox12 provide a framework 
for carrying out evaluations, including the definition of evaluation, guidance on 
resourcing, and the activities which can be performed by external contractors13. 

24 We found no similar guidelines for consultancy and research services, which 
accounted for 78 % of the total spending on external consultants during the audit 
period. A consequence is that, as illustrated in Table 3, consultancy services covered a 
broad range of activities, from short-term ‘advisory’ services, to longer-term services 
complementing in-house expertise and resources. These recurrent services, which are 
used regularly, mostly related to the implementation of EU programmes or 
directorates-generals’ management plans. The Commission’s framework did not 
include clear guidance and definition of consultancy and research services and the 
extent to which the Commission could contract these services out to external 
consultants. 

25 We found that, in the absence of clear guidance applicable for all directorates-
general, one of the directorates-general selected for this audit analysed the factors to 
be considered when deciding whether to outsource services, which included: 

—  maintaining control over decision-making, strategy and quality; 

—  criteria applicable to activities and processes that should not be outsourced; 

— 

reasons for outsourcing, to be explained in the technical specifications. 

26 In July 2020, the Commission issued guidance on using the services of external 
contractors working on Commission premises14. It states that work assigned to the 
Commission by the Treaties should never be outsourced, but that directorates-general 

11  European Commission, Harmonised procedures for managing Commission studies, 

4.7.2012. 

12  SWD(2015) 111 final and SWD(2017) 350 final. 

13  Tool #43: ‘What is an evaluation and when is required’, Tool #44: ‘Planning & the 5 year 

rolling evaluation plan’, and Tool #48: ‘Conducting the evaluation’. 

14  European Commission, Guidelines on the use of in-house service providers and assimilated, 

27.7.2020. 

 
 
                                                      
20 

may outsource support tasks. The guideline mainly concerns service contracts related 
to IT, communication, buildings maintenance and security. The Commission has not 
adopted guidelines for external consultants based outside Commission premises to 
address the issues we raise in paragraph 24. 

Needs analyses not carried out or documented systematically 

27 We assessed whether the Commission had appropriately justified and 
documented the use of external consultants. We examined whether directorates-
general had given careful consideration to why external consultants were needed, and 
how this process was documented. We reviewed guidelines, and analysed practices in 
place in the 20 contracts we selected, complemented by interviews with selected 
directorates-general. 

28 We found that the better regulation guidelines and toolbox provide guidance for 
planning and justifying the use of external consultants for evaluations. They state that 
directorates-general must consider the use of in-house expertise as the prime source 
of evidence. When planning the evaluations, directorates-general need to take into 
account key factors, such as the resources available, the data required and available, 
the type of analysis being sought, and any overlaps with other ongoing work. The 
internal and external resources allocated to an evaluation must be proportional to the 
perceived importance and expected effects of the intervention, both in terms of the 
costs and benefits generated15. 

29 For studies and evaluations procured under the better regulation guidelines, 
systems are in place to ensure project files include a request setting out the reasons 
for the study or evaluation, its objectives, expected results, impacts, intended use, 
envisaged timetable and a cost-benefit analysis. We found that the Commission had 
appropriately justified the use of external consultants in the cases examined. 

30 When the directorates-general contract out activities classified as consultancy or 
research, they document the need for outsourcing in the procurement request. 
Directorates-general are responsible for ensuring that the proposed outsourcing is 
consistent with policy requirements, and that it does not overlap with the work 
programmes of other directorates-general. 

15  Tool #4: ‘Evidence-based better regulation’ and Tool #44: ‘Planning & the 5 year rolling 

evaluation plan’. 

 
 
                                                      
21 

31 For many consultancy services procured under EU programmes, such as technical 
support to Member States and technical assistance to non-EU countries, the use of 
external consultants is a means of programme implementation embedded in their 
rules and financing agreements. In these cases, we found that the directorates-general 
did not document their assessment of whether engaging consultants was the most 
appropriate solution for any given procurement request. The Commission informed us 
that they assessed the resource options justifying the use of external consultants at 
the programming stage. However, this assessment was not documented and thus no 
evidence was available. 

32 For consultancy services procured to perform recurrent tasks, complementing in-
house resources, the directorates-general do not conduct cost-benefit and needs 
analyses to consider the relative merits of relying on external providers rather than 
internal staff before launching new procurement requests. We found that no such 
analysis was made, for example for: 

— 

services provided by external consultants working on and off the Commission’s 
premises, with renewed contracts in the field of statistics equivalent to around 
52 full time employees per year; 

— 

recurrent activities related to the implementation and monitoring of EU 
programmes. 

Procurement procedures complied with, but specific risks not 
yet well managed 

33 This section of the report deals with how the Commission procured external 
consultants’ services to obtain value for money and mitigated risks associated with 
relying on external consultants. 

Purchase of external consultants’ services complied with procurement 
rules 

34 To obtain value for money, the Financial Regulation and the Commission’s 
internal rules require the Commission to use competitive selection procedures when 
contracting out external consultants’ services. These procedures include setting and 
applying appropriate selection and award criteria. We assessed the Commission’s 

 
 
22 

procurement procedures for contracting external consultants, and we examined in 
detail the 20 contracts we selected. 

35 We found that the responsible directorates-general conducted the tender 
procedures in line with the requirements of the Financial Regulation and the Vade-
mecum on public procurement (see paragraph 21). In all 20 procurement procedures 
reviewed, the Commission used appropriate award criteria (including a price/quality 
ratio) to consider value for money and to select the winning tenders. 

36 When contracting out services, the Commission can choose between different 
procurement procedures. It mostly used open procedures (any company may submit a 
tender) or restricted procedures (a limited number of companies are invited to submit 
tenders) to engage external consultants. Contracts awarded under these two kinds of 
procedure amounted to €2.3 billion (85 % of the total contracted amounts) in 2017-
2019, as shown in Figure 5. Because these procedures are time consuming, framework 
contracts are often used as an efficient means of contracting services with external 
consultants, as they avoid the need to launch multiple procurement procedures. In 
addition, framework contracts, which are often of high value, define the terms (e.g. 
price, quality) of specific contracts to be awarded under them, so they allow the 
Commission to call upon consultants’ expertise faster, to respond to actual needs. 
Over the period audited, 70 % of the amounts contracted with external consultants 
(€1.9 billion) were based on framework contracts. 

Figure 5 – Proportion of the amounts contracted by type of procurement 
procedure, 2017-2019 

Source: ECA, based on the Commission’s financial data. 

 
 
 
23 

The Commission’s oversight did not match the level of potential risk 

37 We checked how the Commission had identified and addressed potential risks of 
concentration and overdependence, competitive advantage and conflicts of interest. 
We also looked at whether such risks had been brought to the attention of, and how 
they had been managed at the Commission’s corporate level. 

Risks of concentration and overdependence 

38 When an organisation relies extensively on specific external consultants to 
perform key activities, it assumes the risk that it may become dependent on those 
consultants for the continued performance of those activities. We analysed 
management and financial information on suppliers to assess the extent to which the 
Commission relied on specific service providers and the level of service concentration. 

39 Figure 6 provides a breakdown of contracted amounts between the top 
10 suppliers over the 2017-2019 period. Those top 10 suppliers represented less than 
0.4 % of the total number (2 769) of external consultants contracted over the period. 
At the same time, the amount contracted with them accounted for 22 % of the total 
contracted amounts over the period. 

Figure 6 – Top 10 suppliers of external consultants’ services by 
contracted amount, 2017-2019 

The Commission 
contracted over 
€240 million
with the top three 
suppliers

Supplier

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

(million euros)
95.2

81.5

64 
57.2
55.4
53.3
52.5

49 
47 
45 

The top 10 suppliers by 
amount contracted 
account for 22 % 
(€600.1 million) of the 
total contracted amount

Source: ECA, based on the Commission’s financial data. 

40 Some suppliers provide external consultants’ services across several Commission 
directorates-general. Some of those suppliers have branches or subsidiaries in various 
Member States. Formally, they are separate legal entities but their presence at the 
Commission is greater if they are considered together. 

 
 
 
24 

41 Figure 7 below shows the 10 individual suppliers with the largest number of 
contracts signed over the 2017-2019 period. The Commission concluded 
1 297 contracts with these suppliers (i.e. 16 % of the 8 009 contracts concluded over 
the period, see paragraph 04). This shows that a relatively small number of contractors 
are awarded a relatively high number of contracts throughout the Commission 
services. 

Figure 7 – Top 10 suppliers of external consultants’ services by number 
of contracts and their presence in directorates-general, 2017-2019 

Source: ECA, based on the Commission’s financial data. 

42 We also analysed the proportion of the total contracted amounts obtained by the 
top 10 suppliers in selected directorates-general16. Figure 8 shows that some 
directorates-general rely extensively on a relatively small number of contractors. In 
DG ESTAT for example, 10 suppliers represented less than 19 % of the total number of 
suppliers of external consultants’ services used by the directorates-general, but they 
were awarded 87 % (€47 million) of the entire amount contracted by the directorate-
general. In DG NEAR, the top 10 suppliers represented less than 3 % of the total 
number of suppliers, but at the same time accounted for 41 % (€277 million) of the 

16  Only directorates-general with a total contracted amount of more than €50 million are 

shown. 

 
 
 
                                                      
25 

amounts contracted on external consultants. This concentration creates a risk of 
overdependence on certain contractors. 

Figure 8 – The largest 10 suppliers obtain a high proportion of the total 
contracted amounts, 2017-2019 

Directorate-
general / executive 
agency

Top 10 contracted 
amount/total 
amount (%)

Number of suppliers in 
the directorate-general / 
executive agency

Total 
contracted amount
(million euros)

ESTAT

REFORM

EMPL

JRC

ENV

EASME

GROW

NEAR

87 %

71 %

70 %

55 %

53 %

51 %

51 %

41 %

54

148

92

953

117

98

109

378

54

69

66

122

80

169

80

660

Source: ECA, based on the Commission’s financial data. 

43 Contracts awarded to external consultants often require specific technical 
expertise, which may limit the number of potential suppliers. Nonetheless, some larger 
suppliers, which often have extensive experience in working with the Commission, 
regularly succeed in winning such contracts; smaller companies have less success. 

44 We found four cases where, even though open tender procedures were 
organised regularly, the same suppliers won successive contracts over several years. 
Consequently, we observed a risk of dependence on external consultants (see Table 4). 

 
 
 
26 

Table 4 – Risk of dependence on external contractors 

Case 

Case description 

Case 1 

Case 2 

Case 3 

Case 4 

One directorate-general signed framework contracts to the value of 
€20.8 million with a supplier for the 2014-2018 period for external 
consultancy services needed to implement an EU programme. An Executive 
Agency took over these activities from the directorate-general in the 
following programming period. It organised new tender procedures for the 
2019-2023 period. Following the open procedures, it awarded a new 
framework contract to the value of €8 million to the same supplier. 

The same supplier won two consecutive tender procedures for technical and 
legal assistance in the management of one of the Your Europe Advice Portals 
(two one-year contracts, one to the value of €1.68 million and the other to 
the value of €1.73 million).  

One directorate-general awarded a framework contract for consultancy 
services to contractors based both on and off the Commission’s premises, 
which accounted for 27 % of the total amount contracted (€14.5 million and 
104 contracts) for external consultants for the period from 2017 to 2019.  

51 % of one directorate-general’s total amounts contracted for the 2017-
2019 period (€36 million) concerned four companies which were also used 
widely by other directorates-general. 

Source: ECA. 

Risk of competitive advantage 

45 When external consultants are used heavily by various Commission departments 
(see Figure 7), they gain experience. This can be an advantage in winning future 
contracts. We checked whether the Commission had processes in place to ensure 
transparency in the selection process, so that consultants or their affiliates competing 
for a specific assignment would not derive a competitive advantage from having 
provided other services related to the assignment in question. 

46 We found that some suppliers provided a combination of advisory, 
implementation and evaluation services for one directorate-general. In such cases, 
there is a risk that such suppliers may acquire a competitive advantage because they 
are involved in designing, implementing and evaluating the same EU policy. 

47 There is also the risk that some contractors may gain a competitive advantage, 
owing to their extensive experience in delivering services to directorates-general that 
will serve them in future procurement procedures. In one case, a supplier had been 
awarded a contract in 2018 for drawing up tender documents in connection with a 
works contract (€1.1 million). In the following year, the same supplier had been 
awarded another contract for supervising the same works (€3 million). 

 
 
27 

48 Some directorates-general had developed good practices to mitigate the risks of 
limited competition when procuring external consultants’ services (see Box 1 for 
details). 

Box 1 

Good practices to limit the risk of competitive advantage 

The JRC conducts market research to get an overview of the level of competition in the area 
where it plans to procure external consultants’ services. This aims to put all contracts to 
competition on the broadest possible basis, and respect the principles of transparency, 
proportionality, equal treatment and non-discrimination. 

DG ENV set up a committee to assess selected procurement procedures (ENVAC) and 
report to senior management on the tenders conducted each year. In 2019, ENVAC 
highlighted the need to monitor the competitiveness of the procurement process, since in 
that same year, more than half of procurement procedures leading to contract signature 
had received only one offer. 

Eurostat set up a committee to provide advice on tender specifications to the responsible 
authorising officers. It also analyses market concentration to show the degree of 
competition among its contractors and to limit the risk of competitive advantage. 

Risk of conflict of interest 

49 We looked at the practices in place to deal with the risk of conflicts of interest. 
The Financial Regulation defines conflicts of interest and sets out the measures to take 
to avoid them during procurement procedures. The Commission’s Vade-mecum on 
public procurement provides further instructions. It requires declarations from the 
Commission’s evaluation committee members, and from the tenderers, to confirm 
they have no conflicts of interest. 

50 For all 20 contracts we examined, the Commission followed the requirements 
concerning checks on conflicts of interests contained in the Financial Regulation and 
the Vade-mecum. All required declarations had been signed, and all contracts included 
a standard clause stating that contractors had to declare any conflict of interest that 
might arise in the performance of the contract. Those are formal checks, which cannot 
alone ensure conflicts of interest risks are dealt with. 

 
 
28 

51 In 2021, the Commission issued guidance on the avoidance and management of 
conflicts of interest when contracting services17. However the Commission’s guidelines 
do not address the following risks: 

—  activities of the external consultants and their affiliates that conflict with their 

contract with the Commission; 

—  external consultants’ services that may be in conflict with each other; 

—  external consultants serving different clients (inside or outside the Commission) 

with conflicting interests on closely related assignments. 

52 Conflicts of interest may also arise by ‘revolving door’ career moves of 
Commission staff: where staff members leave to take up positions externally (e.g. in 
the private sector), or where individuals join the Commission from the private sector. 
These conflicts of interest may involve the inappropriate use of access to confidential 
information: for example, when former Commission staff use their knowledge and 
contacts to lobby in the interest of external employers or clients. 

53 The EU staff regulations18 require officials leaving the Commission to behave with 
integrity and discretion when they obtain new jobs after leaving. The Commission 
deals with potential ‘revolving door’ cases based on these rules. The effectiveness of 
these mechanisms depends solely on departing staff providing declarations to the 
Commission about the work they intend to do in the two years following their 
departure from the EU civil service. Staff responsible for procurement also seek to 
identify former staff members with potential conflicts of interest when evaluating 
tender documents. 

54 The Ombudsman has made several inquiries on this matter, concluding that, 
while the Commission’s practices comply with the rules, more could be done to make 
those rules more effective and more meaningful. The Ombudsman recommended that 
the Commission should take a more robust approach to the issue of revolving doors 

17  Commission notice (2021/C 121/01), Guidance on the avoidance and management of 

conflicts of interest under the Financial Regulation, 9.4.2021. 

18  As last amended by Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament 

and of the Council of 22 October 2013 (OJ L 287, 29.10.2013, Article 16). 

 
 
                                                      
29 

when dealing with cases involving senior Commission officials19. In February 2021, the 
Ombudsman launched a new wide-ranging inquiry looking at how the Commission 
handles revolving-door cases among its staff. The inquiry is part of reinforced 
monitoring of how the EU administration imposes ethics obligations on EU staff who 
move to the private sector20. 

Some risks not assessed at corporate level 

55 We checked how the risks of concentration and overdependence, competitive 
advantage and conflicts of interest had been brought to the attention of the 
Commission, and managed at its corporate level. 

56 Overall, we found that directorates-general did not identify or rate the risks of 
concentration and overdependence, competitive advantage or conflict of interest 
when using external consultants as critical. We also found that the risks of 
overconcentration of suppliers and overdependence were not always visible at local, 
directorate-general level. Still, they can be significant at Commission level. 
Consequently, they could only be correctly addressed by a corporate-level assessment; 
however, the Commission does not conduct any such assessments. Therefore, some 
critical risks might not be identified and hence not communicated to the Corporate 
Management Board. 

Weaknesses in the way in which external consultants’ services 
are managed and used 

57 This section deals with how the Commission managed external consultants’ 
engagements and, in particular, how it assessed their performance and identified the 
work produced that could be usefully disseminated across its services. 

Individual contracts managed in accordance with the rules, but with gaps 
in performance assessment 

58 We examined whether the Commission had set clear mandates and delivery 
arrangements for external consultants’ services, and whether it had paid appropriate 
amounts for the services provided. We also assessed how it shared and assessed the 

19  https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/decision/en/110608 

20  https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/press-release/en/141928 

 
 
                                                      
30 

results of such engagements at corporate level. We assessed if the Commission 
ensured that external consultants’ engagements are managed consistently across its 
different directorates-general, with the aim of systematically assessing suppliers’ 
performance, and identified the value delivered by external consultants. 

59 The Commission managed external consultants’ engagements (consultancy, 
research, study or evaluation services) under the legal framework provided by the 
Financial Regulation and the general rules for procuring services included in its Vade-
mecum on public procurement. When procuring services, the Commission drafted 
terms of reference specifying the work to be done by the supplier, as well as the 
number and format of progress reports it expects from the supplier during its 
assignment. 

60 For all 20 contracts we examined, we found that the Commission managed the 
contracts well in accordance with its legal framework. Overall, the contracts between 
the Commission and the supplier set out the monitoring and reporting arrangements, 
as well as the process for checking deliverables. The Commission checked that 
consultants had delivered services of the quality required before proceeding with 
payments. 

61 Our analysis identified that for some consultancy services the Commission 
performed additional quality checks on certain deliverables: 

—  before paying for statistical services, the Commission checked the quality of 

statistics produced by the consultant; 

— 

for a technical support contract under the Structural Reform Support Programme, 
a steering committee was set up (with the participation of the DG REFORM 
service responsible, the Member State and the contractor) to oversee the 
contract implementation. This ensured regular monitoring (often with a monthly 
report) of the contract implementation. 

62 If the final product is delivered late or at a lower-than-expected level of quality, 
the Commission usually suspends the requested payment until the product is delivered 
satisfactorily, and opts not to apply the sanctions provided for in the contractual 
provisions. The Commission applied penalties and reduced the payments in the case of 
three of the 20 contracts selected. This required intense and significant efforts on the 
part of operational units to obtain the right level of quality of final products. 

 
 
31 

63 While there were good examples of how the Commission assesses the 
performance of external consultants in the contracts we examined, directorates-
general did not assess performance consistently. We found that only some 
directorates-general systematically performed lessons learnt exercises or ex-post cost 
benefit evaluation when contracts were completed, while others did not. We consider 
that this diminishes the Commission’s ability to identify potential areas for 
improvements. It also increases the risk of re-engaging consultants who have 
performed poorly in the past. 

64 Aside from services procured under the better regulation framework (see Box 2 
for details), directorates-general did not systematically share available information on 
the assessment of external consultants (e.g. overview of costs, quality of deliverables 
and results) across the Commission. There was no centralised collection of information 
on the engagement of consultants at the corporate level which would allow suppliers’ 
performance to be compared and assessed. 

Box 2 

Systematic and shared assessment of external consultants’ 
performance under the better regulation framework 

Once projects had been implemented, operational units prepared an evaluation 
note summarising the contractor’s performance (checks done against the 
contractual clauses), the work received and the relevance of the work 
performed21. 

For shared management programmes, the factual elements of some studies and 
evaluations are also validated with the Member States. 

In addition, the better regulation guidelines and its toolbox provided a forum, the 
better regulation network, where representatives of the ‘better regulation’ 
operational units of all relevant directorates-general discussed horizontal issues 
concerning the management of external consultants’ work. It was also a way to 
bring important issues to the attention of central Commission departments. 

21  Tool #48: ‘Conducting the evaluation’. 

 
 
 
                                                      
32 

Weak practices in the exploitation of the results of external consultants’ 
assignments 

65 We assessed whether the Commission had appropriate practices in place to make 
the best possible use of results produced by external consultants’ services, and to 
transfer knowledge and disseminate those results where needed. 

66 We found that the better regulation guidelines and toolbox have developed 
guidance for tracking and analysing the extent to which the work of external 
consultants contributes to the Commission’s evaluation process. The Commission 
presents this analysis in the staff working document which summarises the evaluation. 
This document describes how the Commission has used expert advice in the process22. 

67 We found no similar guidelines for external consultants’ services beyond the 
better regulation framework. In the selected directorates-general, we observed 
different practices in place to identify whether and how the Commission had used the 
results and conclusions provided by external consultants (see Table 5). The lack of a 
consistent approach across its different directorates-general impedes the 
Commission’s ability to assess the benefits of using these services.  

22  Tool #49: ‘The staff working document for evaluation’. 

 
 
                                                      
33 

Table 5 – The assessment of how the results of external consultants’ 
services are actually used varies across directorates-general 

Directorate-general 

Practices in place 

JRC 

DG AGRI 

The JRC has a system in place to analyse how scientific and technical 
output influenced EU policy-making, and the extent to which the JRC’s 
contributions are used by the Commission. This performance review 
concerns all JRC contributions, without distinguishing whether they 
were delivered by JRC staff or obtained from external consultants. 

DG AGRI produces analytical notes presenting the objectives, quality 
assessment and main findings of studies, as well as their use in 
developing policy. 

DG REFORM and DG NEAR procure services from external consultants 
for the benefit of Member States or non-EU countries, but are not 
responsible for the use made of project results, or for any analysis 
made of that use. This is the responsibility of the final beneficiary. 

DG REFORM and DG NEAR 

In addition to ex-post evaluation of technical support, in 2020 
DG REFORM started monitoring the extent to which Member States 
use results of consultancy projects.  

DG NEAR does not analyse the use of results of consultancy 
engagements but conducts evaluations at strategic level (e.g. climate 
change, gender equality), operational level (project/programme), and 
at instrument, modality or country level. 

Source: ECA. 

68 The issue of skills transfer from external consultants to Commission staff does not 
apply to all types of contracts. When consultants are engaged to address a gap in 
expertise at the Commission, skills transfer to the Commission may be an important 
and relevant factor. The Commission confirmed that service contracts rarely consider 
the transfer of knowledge from consultants. It does not systematically consider 
whether a transfer of skills is needed. None of the contracts we reviewed included a 
specific requirement for skills transfer from the consultants to the Commission staff. 

69 The Commission has a patchwork of tools containing information which can be 
used to exchange information on external consultants’ services, but which are less 
appropriate to disseminate the work produced by those consultants, as summarised in 
Table 6. 

 
 
34 

Table 6 – The Commission’s IT tools containing information on the use of 
external consultants 

IT tool 

Purpose 

Status 

ABAC Legal 
Commitment (LC) 
Module 

Central repository for grants and 
contracts. It is the central budgetary and 
accounting information system and is 
integrated with other IT systems 

It provides data on contracts 

Quality, accuracy and reliability of data 
encoded is limited, subject of data 
quality reviews 

Financial 
Transparency 
System (FTS) 

Website that publishes data on 
beneficiaries of various funding types 
managed directly by the Commission’s 
directorates-general, its staff in the 
Union’s delegations, or executive 
agencies 

Source of information for FTS is ABAC LC 
Module, affecting the quality and 
reliability of data recorded  

It provides search capabilities for 
contracts (recipients), by type (class 
category), subject of the contract or 
zone benefiting from the action 

Information on recipients is limited 

Tenders Electronic 
Daily (TED) 

Online version of the supplement to the 
Official Journal of the EU that publishes 
the notices of procurement procedures 
(of public authorities) 

Analysis can be conducted by 
examining the procurement 
competition notice 

Publication Office 
Repository 

Central repository of EU studies IISDB, 
enables users to track the progress of 
evaluations and studies 

Information limited mostly to studies 
and evaluations, with some technical 
studies included 

Local IT tools/ 
repositories 

Repositories set up at directorates-
general level to track and manage 
expertise  

Information concerns outputs 
produced at directorates-general level 

Source: ECA. 

70 Directorates-general used different methods to share knowledge on external 
consultants’ outputs (see examples in Figure 9). This dissemination was fragmented 
and focused on the directorate-general level, which reduces the potential for the 
results of external consultants’ work to be shared efficiently across the Commission. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
35 

Figure 9 – Practices for disseminating external consultants’ outputs 

Eurostat database with published statistics 
allowing data extraction

EUROSTAT

Extensive use of the ‘Connected’ 
collaboration platform, JRC Science hub, 
meetings organised, publications, JRC 
catalogue, reports, conferences etc.

JRC

DG AGRI

Studies presented at lunchtime 
conferences, online publications, 
European Network for Rural 
Development (ENRD) and its 
Evaluation Helpdesk and 
presentations to the EP

DG ENV

Information on deliverables and results on agri-
environment-climate issues are shared with
DG AGRI and DG CLIMA. DG ENV also organises 
dissemination events (conferences, lunchtime 
presentations, etc.) within the Commission

Exercises for staff on lessons learned from 
technical support projects, deliverables are 
stored in the database, which contains links to 
the document-management repository  and 
may be consulted by staff

DG REFORM

DG NEAR

Evaluations are posted on DG NEAR’s 
internet page and are accompanied by 
a dissemination event

DG EMPL

Events like lunchtime presentations, 
staff forums where the results, 
conclusions and recommendations of 
the most important reports and 
studies are disseminated to staff

Publications on the Europa website, Your Europe 
websites, Internal Market website.  Some 
deliverables are published on the websites of 
the contractors involved and on 
researchgate.net

DG GROW

Source: ECA. 

71 We found that the interinstitutional database of EU studies (IISDB) provided 
information on planned and delivered evaluations and studies that could allow 
knowledge to be disseminated. Since March 2022, the database can be accessed by all 
institutions. We analysed the information recorded by selected directorates-general in 
this database. The directorates-general had recorded studies in different ways, with 
some technical studies (e.g. reports, recommendations, technical analyses) not 
included in the database, as shown in Table 7. Consequently, the IISDB contains partial 
information on all studies conducted, and the Commission has not designed it to be a 
comprehensive tool for sharing knowledge. 

 
 
 
36 

Table 7 – The IISDB does not contain complete information on studies 

Directorate-general 

Practices in place 

JRC 

External studies and evaluations which are carried out at the request 
of other directorates-general are not recorded in the IISDB. 

DG AGRI and DG GROW 

EUROSTAT 

DG ENV 

EMPL 

Source: ECA. 

Mainly studies and evaluations acquired under the better regulation 
agenda are recorded in the IISDB. 

Technical studies not provided for under the better regulation agenda 
are not included. 

Studies and evaluations produced are recorded, except those used for 
the internal purposes of the directorate-general. 

The studies and evaluations carried out internally (such as the mid-
term evaluations of the European statistical programme) are also 
included in the IISDB. 

Mainly studies and evaluations carried out under the better regulation 
framework are recorded in the IISDB. 

Studies undertaken to examine various links between environment 
and the economy are published on the European Commission’s 
webpage on the Environment and Economics and are not recorded in 
the IISDB. 

Only studies and evaluations acquired under the better regulation 
framework are recorded in the IISDB. 

Partial accuracy of the Commission’s management information, 
and weak systematic reporting 

72 In this section, we examine the information available to the Commission in 
connection with external consultants’ engagements, and how the Commission 
reported on their use. 

The Commission lacks accurate information on the volume and types of 
external consultants’ services it uses 

73 We assessed if the Commission had sufficient and reliable information to enable 
it to effectively supervise and report on its use of external consultants, and whether 
such information was available for the different types of services. We examined how 
the Commission’s directorates-general recorded information for such services and 
tested data from 2017 to 2019. 

 
 
37 

74 Since 2017, the Commission’s financial system has allowed external consultant 
service contracts to be recorded under four categories: consultancy, study, evaluation 
and research. The Commission has clearly defined what the ‘study’ and ‘evaluation’ 
categories mean (see paragraph 23) but it has not provided directorates-general with a 
clear definition of consultancy and research services (see paragraph 24). These two 
categories were defined more generally (see Table 2). As a result, directorates-general 
used them inconsistently when recording the use of external consultants. 

75 For example, the list describes the category ‘consultancy’, which registered the 
vast majority of external consultant services (see Table 3), as ‘advisory’ services. We 
found that the directorates-general recorded a broad range of services under this 
category. This included some services commonly contracted out, such as: 

— 

— 

— 

services for developing and operating IT systems, including licences, maintenance, 
studies and support; 

statistical, data-compilation and information-acquisition services (the core 
activities of Eurostat and secondary activities of other directorates-general); 

technical support to Member States, and technical assistance to countries 
(especially to non-EU countries). 

In the latter case, the Commission’s financial system does not identify the final 
beneficiary of the external consultants’ service. For MFF heading 4 ‘Global Europe’, the 
Commission procures the majority of such engagements for the benefit of non-EU 
countries. They accounted for €1 billion of the total amount contracted with external 
consultants in 2017-2019. This does not allow the Commission to present an accurate 
picture of its use of external consultants. 

76 The category ‘research’ includes any services related to research, development 
and scientific activities that do not fit into any of the other three categories. The JRC, 
for example, encoded around 88 % of the services it contracted (€107.2 million) in this 
category. We found that this included a wide variety of contracts, some of which 
belonging to other categories (see Table 3): the conduct of studies or evaluations, the 
provision of technical assistance, laboratory maintenance and equipment, data 
acquisition, trademarks renewals and patent payments, organisation of training 
courses and conferences, and the decommissioning of nuclear facilities. 

77 The Commission has a decentralised structure with many different departments 
responsible for recording data in the central financial system. Aware of problems in the 

 
 
38 

accuracy of data recording, the Commission launched ‘cleaning exercises’ in 2020 and 
2021, to rectify encoding errors or inaccuracies related to external consultants’ 
contracts. It also created a Data Quality Dashboard in 2021, to follow up systematically 
on the quality of contract data recorded. 

78 Despite these initiatives, we still observed a number of inconsistencies and errors 
in the directorates-generals’ encoding of contracts with external consultants (see 
Annex I for details). 

79 As a consequence of insufficiently specific contract categories, together with 
errors in encoding, the Commission lacked accurate information on the volume and 
types of external consultants’ services it had contracted. 

The Commission does not systematically report information on its use of 
external consultants’ services 

80 Given the scale of the use of external consultants by the Commission, we 
assessed if appropriate and systematic corporate reporting was in place. The discharge 
authorities and other stakeholders have sent requests to the Commission asking for 
information on the amounts it spends on external consultants (see paragraph 14). 
These queries reflect a genuine public interest in the number and cost of external 
consultants, types of services provided, and the potential associated risks. 

81 There is no corporate reporting and analysis on the Commission’s use of or 
spending on external consultants. The Commission’s Corporate Management Board 
has dealt with the matter of external consultants on an ad hoc basis, e.g. when it 
endorsed guidance on in-house service providers23. 

82 Reporting on the use of external consultants is mostly demand-driven. When 
requested (e.g. by the European Parliament), the Commission prepares a report, based 
on the information recorded in its financial system. However, the Commission’s 
directorates-general have to perform manual checks on the data to ensure that only 
the correct amounts corresponding to the services in question are reported. Our audit 
found errors in the Commission’s data (see paragraph 78). 

23  Guidelines on the use of in-house service providers and assimilated. 

 
 
                                                      
39 

83 The Commission’s Annual Management and Performance Report is the main 
high-level performance report on the results achieved from the EU budget. The Annual 
Activity Reports of directorates-general report on the performance at local level. Both 
sets of reports do not disclose information on the use of external consultants. 

84 Spending on external consultants is financed by the operational credits of various 
EU programmes, and forms a very small proportion of total operational expenditure. It 
therefore tends to escape the careful oversight of and reporting on the use of internal 
resources financed from administrative expenditure. The lack of comprehensive 
corporate reporting weakens the Commission’s ability to manage such services 
effectively in the context of overall resource utilisation, and to identify risks related to 
their provision. 

 
 
40 

Conclusions and recommendations 

85 The European Commission contracts about €1 billion each year on external 
consultants’ services, using them to support it in a wide range of consultancy, study, 
evaluation and research activities. We conclude that the Commission’s management of 
the use of external consultants does not ensure that it maximises value for money nor 
fully safeguards its interests. 

86 We found that the Commission’s framework governing the use of external 
consultants had significant gaps. The Commission’s framework for consultancy and 
research, representing the bulk of the amount contracted out to external consultants, 
did not contain guidance about the extent to which tasks could be outsourced, how 
external consultants’ services are defined, and which capabilities and capacities should 
be kept in-house (paragraphs 18-26). 

87 For studies and evaluations, the Commission’s framework provided clear 
guidance for justifying and documenting the use of external consultants, as opposed to 
relying on internal staff. The Commission regularly used consultants to perform 
recurring activities. In many such cases, there was no evidence of a needs assessment 
having been carried out (paragraphs 24 and 28-32). 

Recommendation 1 – Complete the existing framework 
governing the use of external consultants’ services 

The Commission should further develop its framework governing the use of external 
consultants. The framework should: 

(a)  define the different forms of support that external consultants can provide; 

(b) 

include guidance on how to carry out needs assessments (including when to carry 
out cost-benefit analyses), including methods to assess the need to outsource 
work instead of using internal staff; 

(c)  provide criteria applicable to activities and processes that should remain within 

the Commission and not be outsourced. 

Target implementation date: by December 2023 

 
 
41 

88 We found that the Commission followed the Financial Regulation and its own 
internal rules when it procured services from external consultants. The criteria the 
Commission used to select winning tenders were appropriate (paragraphs 34-36). 

89 The Commission did not sufficiently monitor and manage important risks 
associated with its use of external consultants. These include the risks of supplier 
concentration and overdependence on a relatively small number of service providers. 
This brings with it the risk that some suppliers with an extensive experience of working 
with the Commission are more successful in winning contracts because they have 
obtained competitive advantage. In addition, the Commission made all of the 
necessary formal checks on conflicts of interest. However, these checks cannot ensure 
that all important risks are flagged and dealt with. Consequently, some significant risks 
associated with services provided by external consultants had not been sufficiently 
analysed at corporate level (paragraphs 38-56). 

Recommendation 2 – Improve monitoring and mitigation of 
risks arising from using external consultants’ services 

The Commission should improve its approach to monitoring and mitigating risks 
associated with its use of external consultants by: 

(a)  periodically analysing the risks of concentration and overdependence at the level 

of directorates-general and the Commission; 

(b)  clarifying the processes in place related to competitive advantages obtained by 

external providers with long-term EU experience; 

(c)  completing the guidance on avoidance of conflicts of interest by integrating risks 

not yet covered; 

(d)  ensuring that directorates-general identify and report critical risks, and that these 

risks are brought to the attention of the corporate management board, for it to 
coordinate and advise on the assessment and management of such risks. 

Target implementation date: by December 2023 

90 The Commission managed individual contracts with external consultants well. For 
example, it ensured that the consultants delivered the services at an appropriate level 
of quality before paying them. However, it did not consistently assess the performance 

 
 
42 

of external consultants and, apart from studies and evaluations, it did not share 
information about these assessments across its directorates-general. Service contracts 
rarely consider the transfer of knowledge from consultants, and the Commission does 
not systematically consider whether a transfer of skills is needed. The dissemination of 
the results of consultants’ work was fragmented and focused at the level of the 
directorates-general; in some cases, the information was incomplete (paragraphs 57-
71). 

Recommendation 3 – Make better use of the results of external 
consultants’ services 

The Commission should identify and make use of the value it obtains from external 
consultants’ services in a consistent manner, by performing, where appropriate: 

(a)  systematic post-completion assessments to learn lessons; 

(b)  systematic analysis of whether the transfer of knowledge from the consultants to 

Commission staff is needed; 

(c)  corporate-level arrangements to disseminate lessons learnt and results, and 

identify good practices of external consultants’ assignments. 

Target implementation date: by December 2023 

91 The Commission’s information systems did not provide accurate information on 
the volume and types of external consultants’ services used, even though it uses them 
as a complementary resource to deliver its outputs. The Commission is aware of this 
situation, and has recently started working on improvements. It does not 
systematically report information to the Parliament and the Council on its use of 
external consultants’ services, and there is no corporate-level reporting 
(paragraphs 72-84). 

 
 
43 

Recommendation 4 – Improve reporting on the use of external 
consultants’ services  

The Commission should report regularly on its use of external consultants’ services. 
This reporting should be based on accurate and complete data and include information 
such as the volume and types of acquired services. 

Target implementation date: by December 2023 

This Report was adopted by Chamber V, headed by Mr Tony Murphy, Member of the 
Court of Auditors, in Luxembourg on 17 May 2022. 

For the Court of Auditors 

Klaus-Heiner Lehne 
President 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
44 

Annexes 

Annex I – Examples of incorrect and incoherent encoding of the 
legal commitment category 

The tables below list cases of incorrect (Table 8) or incoherent (Table 9) encodings of 
the legal commitment (LC) categories that we found in the documents we reviewed. 
During the audited period, the LC category of a framework contract would determine 
the LC category of all subsequent specific contracts, no matter the exact topic of the 
specific contract. These cases are not reported in the tables below. 

Table 8 – Incorrect encoding of the legal commitment category 

Type of service 

Encoding 

Comment 

Preparation of a report on the licensing environment for 
standard-essential patents (SEPS) in the advent of the 
internet of things 

Studies to support competitiveness and integrated 
report 2018: single market for goods after 25 years 
digitalisation 

ESP DESIS III – External Service Provision for 
Development, Studies and Support for Information 
Systems-LOT 1 – 2ND Contractor 

Consultancy 

End product is a study. 

Research 

End product is a study. 

Consultancy 

Should have been encoded 
under IT consultancy. 

Delivery of services in the areas of the development and 
operations of financial and/or accounting IT systems to 
the contracting authorities 

Consultancy 

Should have been encoded 
under IT consultancy. 

Licences and maintenance of SAP products 

Consultancy 

Should have been encoded 
under IT consultancy. 

2017/388-933-Financial Audit of Projects 2015/356-593 
‘Enabling living conditions’ 

Consultancy 

Should have been encoded 
under audit services. 

ENI/2015/365-481-organisation of conferences, 
seminars and meetings 

Consultancy 

Source: ECA, based on Commission ABAC dataset for 2017-2019. 

Should have been encoded 
under Conferences, External 
Meetings and Travel. 

 
 
 
45 

Table 9 – Similar services encoded in different legal commitment class 
categories 

Expert contract – fee paid – 30 days, no travel 

Consultancy 

Expert contract – 30 days with travel 

Evaluation of dossier FAD-2018-0 

Evaluation of dossier FAD-2018-0 

Technical  Secretariat  of  the  group  notified  bodies  under  the  construction  products 
Regulation 

Research 

Research 

Evaluation 

Evaluation 

Technical Secretariat of the ADCO (administrative cooperation) group under bodies 
under the construction products Regulation 

Consultancy 

ECODESIGN Impact Assessment Study for sustainable product measures 

Consultancy 

Impact Assessment Study on fragrance allergens labelling on cosmetic products 

Studies 

Impact Assessment Study in respect of revision of the outdoor noise 
Directive 2000/14/EC 

Service Contract – EMODNET – LOT 3 Physics 

Service Contract – EMODNET – LOT 6 Human activity 

Source: ECA, based on Commission ABAC dataset for 2017-2019. 

Research 

Consultancy 

Studies 

 
 
 
 
46 

Abbreviations 

DG AGRI: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development 

DG BUDG: Directorate-General for Budget 

DG CLIMA: Directorate-General for Climate Action 

DG EMPL: Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion 

DG ENER: Directorate-General for Energy 

DG ENV: Directorate-General for Environment 

DG GROW: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and 
SMEs 

DG DEVCO: Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development, 
renamed in 2021 to DG International Partnerships (INTPA) 

DG MOVE: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport 

DG NEAR: Directorate-General for European Neighbourhood and Enlargement 
Negotiations 

DG REFORM: Directorate-General for Structural Reform Support 

EASME: Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises24 

ENVAC: Directorate-General for Environment’s advisory committee on public 
procurement 

ESTAT/Eurostat: Statistical Office of the European Union 

FPI: Service for Foreign Policy Instruments 

IISDB: Interinstitutional database of EU studies 

JRC: Joint Research Centre 

LC: Legal commitment 

MFF: Multiannual financial framework 

SRSP: Structural Reform Support Programme 

24  Since 2021, European Innovation Council and Small and Medium-sized Enterprises 

Executive Agency (EISMEA) to reflect its new mandate and activities. 

 
 
 
                                                      
47 

Glossary 

Annual activity report: Report produced by each Commission directorate-general, EU 
institution and body, setting out how it has performed in relation to its objectives, and 
how it has used its financial and human resources. 

Annual Management and Performance Report: Report produced every year by the 
Commission on its management of the EU budget and the results achieved, 
summarising the information in the annual activity reports of its directorates-general 
and executive agencies. 

Call for expressions of interest (CEI): Pre-selection of potential bidders that will be 
invited to take part in a restricted procurement procedure. 

Corporate Management Board: Central management body of the Commission, 
providing coordination, oversight, advice and strategic direction on corporate issues, 
including resource allocation and risk management. 

Exceptional procurement procedure: Public procurement procedure, used in 
emergency situations, featuring negotiation with bidders selected without a call for 
tenders.  

Framework contract: Broad agreement under which more specific contracts can be 
concluded. 

Management plan: Annual plan prepared by each department of the Commission, 
describing the department’s work in relation to the Commission’s priorities and 
strategic objectives, and enabling it to schedule, follow up and report on all its 
activities, resources and staff needs. 

Negotiated procurement procedures: Public procurement procedure, involving a 
restricted number of bidders, in which the purchaser can negotiate the contract terms. 

Open procurement procedures: Public procurement procedure in which all potential 
bidders may participate. 

Restricted procurement procedures: Public procurement procedure in which only 
selected bidders may participate. 

 
 
 
 
48 

Replies of the Commission 

https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=61461 

Timeline 

https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=61461 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
49 

Audit team 

The ECA’s special reports set out the results of its audits of EU policies and 
programmes, or of management-related topics from specific budgetary areas. The ECA 
selects and designs these audit tasks to be of maximum impact by considering the risks 
to performance or compliance, the level of income or spending involved, forthcoming 
developments and political and public interest. 

This performance audit was carried out by Audit Chamber V Financing and 
administering the Union, headed by ECA Member Tony Murphy. The audit was led by 
ECA Member François-Roger Cazala, supported by Dirk Pauwels, Head of Private Office 
and Stéphanie Girard, Private Office Attaché; Colm Friel, Principal Manager; 
Daria Bochnar, Head of Task; Marion Kilhoffer and Anzela Poliulianaite, Auditors. 
Alexandra Mazilu and Jesús Nieto Muñoz provided graphical support. Richard Moore 
provided linguistic support. 

François-Roger Cazala

Colm Friel

Daria Bochnar

Marion Kilhoffer

Anzela Poliulianaite

 
 
COPYRIGHT 
© European Union, 2022 

The reuse policy of the European Court of Auditors (ECA) is set out in ECA Decision 
No 6-2019 on the open data policy and the reuse of documents. 

Unless otherwise indicated (e.g. in individual copyright notices), ECA content owned by 
the EU is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International 
(CC BY 4.0) licence. As a general rule, therefore, reuse is authorised provided 
appropriate credit is given and any changes are indicated. Those reusing ECA content 
must not distort the original meaning or message. The ECA shall not be liable for any 
consequences of reuse. 

Additional permission must be obtained if specific content depicts identifiable private 
individuals, e.g. in pictures of ECA staff, or includes third-party works. 

Where such permission is obtained, it shall cancel and replace the above-mentioned 
general permission and shall clearly state any restrictions on use. 

To use or reproduce content that is not owned by the EU, it may be necessary to seek 
permission directly from the copyright holders. 

Software or documents covered by industrial property rights, such as patents, 
trademarks, registered designs, logos and names, are excluded from the ECA’s reuse 
policy. 

The European Union’s family of institutional websites, within the europa.eu domain, 
provides links to third-party sites. Since the ECA has no control over these, you are 
encouraged to review their privacy and copyright policies. 

Use of the ECA logo  

The ECA logo must not be used without the ECA’s prior consent. 

PDF 

ISBN 978-92-847-8215-4 

1977-5679 

doi:10.2865/805195 

QJ-AB-22-013-EN-N 

HTML 

ISBN 978-92-847-8216-1 

1977-5679 

doi:10.2865/26885 

QJ-AB-22-013-EN-Q 

 
 
51 

The Commission makes extensive use of external consultants, 
committing almost €1 billion for this purpose each year between 
2017 and 2020. We analysed whether the Commission manages 
external consultants’ services in a way which safeguards its 
interests and ensures value for money. External consultants 
contribute to the development of the Commission’s objectives. 
However, there are significant gaps in the Commission’s 
framework governing the use of these services, bringing risks of 
overdependence and potential conflicts of interest. The 
Commission did not manage these risks sufficiently, and its 
reporting on the use of consultants was weak. We make various 
recommendations to improve these issues. 

ECA special report pursuant to Article 287(4), second 
subparagraph, TFEU.