Audit scope and approach 1 -6 4 -5 6 14-99 Observations 14-25 Section I — The EU institutions manage to keep the number of serious errors low in their procurement procedures but participation therein is not systematically monitored 15-17 In contrast to the situation in shared management with Member States, few serious errors or irregularities are reported in connection with the EU institutions’ procurement 18-22 The EU institutions have robust systems and capable staff to keep the risk of errors and irregularities under control 23-25 Most EU institutions do not systematically measure the level of participation in their procurement procedures 26-55 Section II — The rules to be followed and the procedural choices made at the start of the procurement process are not sufficiently geared towards increasing participation 7 -13 7 -11 12-13 Audit approach Audit scope When revising their procurement rules in 2015, the EU institutions did not facilitate access to procurement by simplifying rules and clarifying grey areas to the fullest extent possible 26 -35 36-55 Not all procedural choices fostered competition on the broadest possible basis Contents 04 56-88 58-68 69-75 76-88 89-99 89 -97 98-99 100 - 109 Section III — Unnecessary hurdles make life difficult for potential tenderers who want to identify procurement opportunities offered by the EU institutions and benefit from them The visibility of the EU institutions’ procurement activities on the internet is poor For e‐tendering and e‐submission the EU Institutions create unnecessary hurdles for economic operators by not using harmonised solutions in a swift manner For economic operators who consider that they have been unfairly treated it is difficult to obtain a rapid review of their complaints and compensation for damages Section IV — Transparency of results and mutual learning are not systematically enforced Information on the outcome of the EU institutions’ procurement activities is not accessible in a way which would allow effective monitoring by the discharge authority and the wider public Learning from best practices is not fully exploited Conclusions and recommendations Annex I — Users of TED eTendering (April 2016) Annex II — Summary of survey results Replies of the European Parliament Replies of the Council of the European Union Replies of the European Commission, including the replies of OLAF and the Publications Office of the European Union Replies of the European Central Bank Replies of the European Ombudsman 
Revisionens inriktning och omfattning samt revisionsmetod Revisionens inriktning och omfattning Revisionsmetod Iakttagelser Avdelning I Đ EU-institutionerna lyckas hlla antalet allvarliga fel i sina upphandlingsfrfaranden nere, men deltagandet i dem vervakas inte systematiskt F allvarliga fel eller oriktigheter rapporteras i samband med EU-institutionernas upphandlingar Đ till skillnad frn de omrden dr frvaltningen delas med medlemsstater EU-institutionerna har robusta system och kompetent personal som hller risken fr fel och oriktigheter nere De flesta EU-institutioner mter inte systematiskt deltagandet i sina upphandlingsfrfaranden Avdelning II Đ De regler som ska tillmpas och det val av frfarande som grs i brjan av upphandlingsfrfarandet r inte tillrckligt inriktade p att ka deltagandet Vid versynen av sina upphandlingsregler 2015 underlttade EU-institutionerna inte tilltrdet till sina offentliga upphandlingar genom att s mycket som mjligt frenkla reglerna och tydliggra grzoner Alla valda frfaranden frmjade inte ett s brett deltagande som mjligt