LIST OF ANNEXES - European Commission · 2017. 6. 15. · SG_aar_2016_final – Annexes | 3 ANNEX...

LIST OF ANNEXES

ANNEX 1: STATEMENT OF THE RESOURCES DIRECTOR ................................................................................................ 2 ANNEX 2: REPORTING – HUMAN RESOURCES, BETTER REGULATION, INFORMATION MANAGEMENT AND EXTERNAL

COMMUNICATION................................................................................................................................. 3 ANNEX 3: DRAFT ANNUAL ACCOUNTS AND FINANCIAL REPORTS .................................................................................. 9 ANNEX 4: MATERIALITY CRITERIA ........................................................................................................................ 22 ANNEX 5: INTERNAL CONTROL TEMPLATE(S) FOR BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION (ICTS) .................................................... 23 ANNEX 6: IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH NATIONAL OR INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC-SECTOR BODIES AND BODIES GOVERNED BY

PRIVATE LAW WITH A PUBLIC SECTOR MISSION ......................................................................................... 28 ANNEX 7: EAMR OF THE UNION DELEGATIONS ..................................................................................................... 29 ANNEX 8: DECENTRALISED AGENCIES .................................................................................................................... 30 ANNEX 9: EVALUATIONS AND OTHER STUDIES FINALISED OR CANCELLED DURING THE YEAR ............................................ 31 ANNEX 10: SPECIFIC ANNEXES RELATED TO "FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT" ................................................................. 32 ANNEX 11: SPECIFIC ANNEXES RELATED TO "ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INTERNAL CONTROL SYSTEMS" ...... 33 ANNEX 12: PERFORMANCE TABLES ................................................................................................................. 34 ANNEX 13: REGULATORY SCRUTINY BOARD ............................................................................................................ 59

Ref. Ares(2017)2703688 - 30/05/2017

SG_aar_2016_final – Annexes | 2

ANNEX 1: Statement of the Resources Director

I declare that in accordance with the Commission’s communication on clarification of the

responsibilities of the key actors in the domain of internal audit and internal control in the

Commission1, I have reported my advice and recommendations to the Secretary-General on the

overall state of internal control in the Secretariat-General.

I hereby certify that the information provided in Section 2 of the present Annual Activity Report

and in its annexes is, to the best of my knowledge, accurate and complete.

Brussels, 11 May 2017

[Signed]

Tatjana Verrier

SG Resources Director

1 Communication to the Commission: Clarification of the responsibilities of the key actors in the domain of

internal audit and internal control in the Commission; SEC(2003)59 of 21.01.2003.


ANNEX 2: Reporting – Human Resources, Better

Regulation, Information Management and External Communication

2.2.1 Human resource management

Objective: The SG deploys effectively its resources in support of the delivery of

the Commission's priorities and core business, has a competent and engaged

workforce, which is driven by an effective and gender-balanced management

and which can deploy its full potential within supportive and healthy working

conditions.

Indicator 1: Percentage of female representation in middle management

Source of data: Analytic Platform

Baseline

(01/01/2016)

Target

(2019)

Latest known

results

(End 2016)

Lead

Unit

28.6% 40 % 33% SG.R1

Indicator 2: Percentage of staff who feel that the Commission cares about their

well-being

Source of data: Commission staff survey

Baseline

(2014)

(2013)

Target

(Continuous)

Latest known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit

34.6% (EC-

34.9%)

49.8% (EC-

49.3%)

To be above Commission's average score

in future staff surveys

32.9% (EC

34.9%)

SG.R1

Indicator 3: Staff engagement index

Source of data: Commission staff survey

Baseline

(2014)

(2013)

Target

(Continuous)

Latest known results

(2016)

Lead

Unit

64 (EC-65)

73 (EC-71)

To be above Commission's average

score in future staff surveys

66% (EC 64%) SG.R1

Main outputs in 2016:

Description Indicator Target Latest known results Lead

Unit

Scorecard:

periodical figures

on available

resources, vacant

posts and sick

leave rates

Delivery Each month until

end 2016

(December 2016

scorecard occurs

in January 2017)

Delivered each

month.

SG.R1

SG HR

Management

Report

Delivery End 2016 A mid-year report

has been delivered in

September 2016.

The annual report is

under preparation.

SG.R1


Further enrich SG

pages on My

IntraComm that

are the main

source of

information on SG

activities for all

Commission staff

Delivery Ongoing On average 7000

monthly unique

visitors, making SG

corporate the second

most visited My

IntraComm

corporate site

SG.F5

Gender equality Indicator Target Latest known results Lead

Unit

"So you want to

be a Head of

Unit": specific

training for

women

Organisation

1st session end

of January 2016

2nd to be

determined

First session

organised in January

2016. Second

session organised in

July 2016. Very good

evaluation and high

quality of the

individual coaching

sessions that

followed the 3 day

training course.

SG.R1

Well-being Indicator Target Latest known results Lead

Unit

Actions to

strengthen well-

being in staff and

to enhance

reconciliation

between

professional and

private life: Yoga,

singing, mindful-

ness classes,

Conferences on

topics such as

drugs and young

people, social

network: how to

surf safely, origins

and philosophy of

Yoga

Organisation End 2016 Organised. Positive

evaluation by the

participants.

SG.R1

Staff engagement Indicator Target Latest known results Lead

Unit

Development

program for SG

middle managers

Delivery End of June 2016 Delivered. Good

evaluation/feedback

sessions with

Managers showed a

will to carry on with

targeted

development actions

for Managers.

SG.R1

https://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/sg/Pages/index.aspx




2.2.2 Information management aspects

Objective: Information and knowledge in SG is shared and reusable by other

DGs. Important documents are registered, filed and retrievable.

Indicator 1: Percentage of registered documents that are not filed2 (ratio)

Source of data: Hermes-Ares-NomCom (HAN)3 statistics

Baseline

2015

Target

(Continuous)

Latest known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit

1.23% < 1% 0.27% SG.R2

Indicator 2: Percentage of HAN files readable/accessible by all units in the DG

Source of data: HAN statistics

Baseline

Target

(Continuous)

Latest known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit

77.09% > 80% 77.60% SG.R2

Indicator 3: HAN files shared with other DGs

Source of data: HAN statistics

Baseline

(2015)

Target

(Continuous)


(2016)

Lead

Unit

2.91% > 20% 46,90% SG.R2


Description Indicator Target Latest known results Lead

Unit

Awareness-raising

actions about

sharing information

with other DGs

(members of the

local DMO network

and managers)

Completion End 2016 - Awareness action

organised on sharing

information and security,

specifically dedicated to

members of the local DMO

network

- Advisory support given

in meetings related to the

integrations of ICT tools

- Preparation of an

awareness action

dedicated to middle

management (which will

occur in 2017)

SG.R2

New 100%

electronic working

practices

Completion End 2016 - In view of a

generalisation of paperless

e-signatory's use,

important preparatory

steps have been made,

notably in collaboration

SG.R2

2 Each registered document must be filed in at least one official file of the Chef de file, as required by the e-

Domec policy rules (and by ICS 11 requirements). The indicator is to be measured via reporting tools

available in Ares.

3 Suite of tools designed to implement the e-Domec policy rules.


with the team of the

Secretary-General and via

information meetings with

the Senior Managers'

assistants

- Support documents have

been drawn up

Monitoring reports

on unfiled

documents created

by SG

Completion End 2016 Reports have been sent

on a regular basis to all

SG entities

SG.R2

Transfer of the SG

files with an expired

administrative

retention period

Completion End 2016 - For 2016, action was

targeted to directorates A,

C, D and E: information

session organised to

explain procedure; lists of

Adonis files requiring

post-DUA action sent to

the 14 SG entities

concerned (reminders in

absence of reaction);

organisation of bilateral

meetings where

appropriate

- Adonis has been

completed with

information given by the

units chefs de file.

- Paper files have been

transferred to the SAH

when required by the LCC

category.

SG.R2

Further awareness-

raising actions for all

SG staff (managers

included) about

registration of

important emails via

AresLook

Completion End 2016 - Awareness-raising

message addressed to all

new SG colleagues during

the SG R1 newcomers

meetings

- Information about

AresLook during training

sessions on "Bonnes

pratiques au SG"

(compulsory for SG

newcomers)

- Several personal

coaching sessions

organised

SG.R2


2.2.3 External communication activities

Objective: Citizens perceive that the EU is working to improve their lives and

engage with the EU. They feel that their concerns are taken into consideration

in European decision making and they know about their rights in the EU.

Indicator: Percentage of EU citizens having a positive image of the EU

Definition: Eurobarometer measures the state of public opinion in the EU Member States.

This global indicator is influenced by many factors, including the work of other EU

institutions and national governments, as well as political and economic factors, not just

the communication actions of the Commission. It is relevant as a proxy for the overall

perception of the EU citizens. Positive visibility for the EU is the desirable corporate

outcome of Commission communication, even if individual DGs’ actions may only make a

small contribution.

Source of data: Standard Eurobarometer (DG COMM budget) [monitored by DG COMM

here].

Baseline

November 2014

Target

(2020)


(2016)

Lead

Unit

Total "Positive":

39%

Neutral: 37 %

Total "Negative":

22%

Positive image

of the EU ≥ 50%

Total "Positive": 35%

Neutral: 38 %

Total "Negative": 25%

SG.F5


Description Indicator Target date Latest known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead

Unit

Communicating

major SG initiatives

externally, in

particular, related

to priority 10

(Commission Work

programme, Better

Regulation Agenda,

transparency,

REFIT, ECI, CVM,

relations with NPs)

via the web

communication,

press activities,

social media and

local communication

in collaboration with

the SPP, central

social media team

and the Commission

Representations in

the Members States

Delivery of

communication

plans or actions

(e.g. brochures,

infographics, press

materials etc.)

Ongoing Delivered

E.g. following

an extensive

communication

campaign, the

public

consultation on

the

Transparency

Register got a

significantly

high number of

1758

contributions.

SG.F5

Revamp of the

whole content

Percentage of SG December 100% of all SG.F5

http://ec.europa.eu/COMMFrontOffice/PublicOpinion/index.cfm/General/index


owned by SG on

EUROPA as part of

the new

Commission web

presence/digital

transformation

programme

related content

transformed

explanatory

content

60% of

documents

migrated

(some will be

taken over by

new tools i.e.

better

regulation

portal; for the

rest technical

solutions have

not yet been

provided by

the digital

transformation

team (DG

COMM)

Maintenance of SG

pages on EUROPA

Number of monthly

unique visitors

* Calculated using

SAS tool; at the end

of 2016 SAS has

been replaced by a

new web analytics

tool – Piwik – which

collects data

differently. A new

baseline will have to

be established for

2017 using the new

tool.

Ongoing 340,000

average

monthly

visitors

SG.F5

Annual communication spending (based on estimated commitments):

Baseline (2015): Target

(2016):

Total amount spent Total of FTEs working on

external communication

Lead

Unit

219.720,10 180.000 179.984,50 6.25 SG.F5


ANNEX 3: Draft annual accounts and financial reports

Table 1 : Commitments

Table 2 : Payments

Table 3 : Commitments to be settled

Table 4: Balance Sheet

Table 5: Statement of Financial Performance

Table 5 Bis: Off Balance Sheet

Table 6 : Average Payment Times

Table 7 : Income

Table 13: Building Contracts

Table 14: Contracts declared Secret

Table 8 : Recovery of undue Payments

Table 9: Ageing Balance of Recovery Orders

Table 10 : Waivers of Recovery Orders

Table 11: Negotiated Procedures (excluding Building Contracts)

Table 12: Summary of Procedures (excluding Building Contracts)


Commitment

appropriations

authorised

Commitments

made%

1 2 3=2/1

01 01 01Administrative expenditure of the 'Economic and

f inancial affairs' policy area0,47 0,47 100 %

0,47 0,47 100 %

02 02 02Competitiveness of enterprises and small and

medium-sized enterprises (COSME)0,95 0,95 100 %

0,95 0,95 100 %

18 18 04 Fostering European citizenship 0,64 0,64 100 %

0,64 0,64 100 %

24 24 01Administrative expenditure of the 'Fight against

fraud' policy area0,02 0,02 99 %

0,02 0,02 99 %

25 25 01Administrative expenditure of the 'Commission's

policy coordination and legal advice' policy area 7,40 6,90 93 %

25 02Relations w ith civil society, openness and

information0,01 0,00 0 %

7,41 6,90 93 %

26 26 01Administrative expenditure of the 'Commission's

administration' policy area 0,75 0,75 100 %

0,75 0,75 100 %

10,24 9,73 95 %

Total Title 25

Title 26 Commission's administration

Total Title 26

Total DG SG

* Commitment appropriations authorised include, in addition to the budget voted by the

legislative authority, appropriations carried over from the previous exercise, budget

amendments as well as miscellaneous commitment appropriations for the period (e.g.

internal and external assigned revenue).

Title 18 Migration and home affairs

Total Title 18

Title 24 Fight against fraud

Total Title 24

Title 25 Commission's policy coordination and legal advice

TABLE 1: OUTTURN ON COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS IN 2016 (in Mio €)

Title 01 Economic and financial affairs

Total Title 01

Title 02 Internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs

Total Title 02


P ayment

appro priat io n

s autho rised

*

P ayments

made%

1 2 3=2/ 1

01 01 01

Administrative expenditure of the 'Economic and financial

affairs' policy area0,73 0,49 68 %

0,73 0,49 68 %

02 02 02

Competitiveness of enterprises and small and medium-sized

enterprises (COSME)1,39 0,62 45 %

1,39 0,62 45 %

18 18 04 Fostering European citizenship 0,20 0,00 0 %

0,20 0,00 0 %

24 24 01

Administrative expenditure of the 'Fight against fraud' policy

area0,04 0,04 100 %

0,04 0,04 100 %

25 25 01

Administrative expenditure of the 'Commission's policy

coordination and legal advice' policy area 9,34 5,96 64 %

25 02 Relations w ith civil society, openness and information 0,01 0,00 0 %

9,35 5,96 64 %

26 26 01

Administrative expenditure of the 'Commission's administration'

policy area 1,33 0,81 61 %

1,33 0,81 61 %

13,03 7,92 61 %

TABLE 2: OUTTURN ON PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS IN 2016 (in Mio €)

C hapter

Title 01 Economic and financial affairs

Total Title 01

Title 02 Internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs

Total Title 02

Title 18 Migration and home affairs

Total Title 18

Title 24 Fight against fraud

Total DG SG

* Payment appropriations authorised include, in addition to the budget voted by the legislative authority,

appropriations carried over from the previous exercise, budget amendments as well as miscellaneous payment

appropriations for the period (e.g. internal and external assigned revenue).

Total Title 24

Title 25 Commission's policy coordination and legal advice

Total Title 25

Title 26 Commission's administration

Total Title 26

Commitments to

be settled from

Total of commitments

to be sett led at end

Total of

commitments to

be sett led at end

Commitments

2016Payments 2016 RAL 2016 % to be settled financial years

previous to 2016

of f inancial year

2016(incl correct ions)

of f inancial year

2015 (incl.

correct ions)

1 2 3=1-2 4=1-2/1 5 6=3+5 7

01 01 01 0,47 0,40 0,07 15% 0,00 0,07 0,26

0,47 0,40 0,07 15% 0,00 0,07 0,26

02 02 02 0,95 0,17 0,78 83% 0,24 1,03 0,73

0,95 0,17 0,78 83% 0,24 1,03 0,73

18 18 04 0,64 0,00 0,64 100% 0,00 0,64 0,00

0,64 0,00 0,64 100% 0,00 0,64 0,00

24 24 01 0,02 0,02 0,00 0% 0,00 0,00 0,02

0,02 0,02 0,00 0% 0,00 0,00 0,02

25 25 01 6,90 3,89 3,01 44% 0,00 3,01 2,29

6,90 3,89 3,01 44% 0,00 3,01 2,29

26 26 01 0,75 0,22 0,52 70% 0,00 0,52 0,58

0,75 0,22 0,52 70% 0,00 0,52 0,58

9,73 4,70 5,03 52% 0,24 5,28 3,87

TABLE 3 : BREAKDOWN OF COMMITMENTS TO BE SETTLED AT 31/12/2016 (in Mio €)

2016 Commitments to be settled

Chapter

Title 01 : Economic and financial affairs

Administrative expenditure of the 'Economic

and financial affairs' policy area

Total Title 01

Title 02 : Internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs

Competitiveness of enterprises and small

and medium-sized enterprises (COSME)

Total Title 02

Title 18 : Migration and home affairs

Fostering European citizenship

Total Title 18

Title 24 : Fight against fraud

Administrative expenditure of the 'Fight

against fraud' policy area

Administrative expenditure of the

'Commission's administration' policy area

Total Title 26

Total DG SG

Total Title 24

Title 25 : Commission's policy coordination and legal advice

Administrative expenditure of the

'Commission's policy coordination and legal

advice' policy area

Total Title 25

Title 26 : Commission's administration

2016 2015

3.869.043,12 3.591.996,24

3.869.043,12 3.591.996,24

2.200.219,71 0,00

2.198.310,00 0,00

1.909,71 0,00

6.069.262,83 3.591.996,24

0,00 -1.018.890,86

0,00 0,00

0,00 -1.018.890,86

0,00 -1.018.890,86

6.069.262,83 2.573.105,38

24.537.714,35 16.727.594,34

-30.606.977,18 -19.300.699,72

0,00 0,00

BALANCE SHEET

A.I. NON CURRENT ASSETS

A.I. NON CURRENT ASSETSA.I.1. Intangible Assets

A.II. CURRENT ASSETS

A.II. CURRENT ASSETSA.II.2. Current Pre-Financing

A.II.3. Curr Exch Receiv &Non-Ex Recoverables

LIABILITIES

ASSETS

P.II. CURRENT LIABILITIES

P.II. CURRENT LIABILITIESP.II.4. Current Payables

TOTAL

TABLE 4 : BALANCE SHEET SG

The accounting situation presented in the Balance Sheet and Statement of Financial Performance does

not include the accruals and deferrals calculated centrally by the services of the Accounting Officer.

It should be noted that the balance sheet and statement of f inancial performance presented in Annex 3 to this Annual Activity

Report, represent only the assets, liabilities, expenses and revenues that are under the control of this Directorate General.

Signif icant amounts such as ow n resource revenues and cash held in Commission bank accounts are not included in this

Directorate General's accounts since they are managed centrally by DG Budget, on w hose balance sheet and statement of

f inancial performance they appear. Furthermore, since the accumulated result of the Commission is not split amongst the

various Directorates General, it can be seen that the balance sheet presented here is not in equilibrium.

Additionally, the f igures included in tables 4 and 5 are provisional since they are, at this date, still subject to audit by the Court

of Auditors. It is thus possible that amounts included in these tables may have to be adjusted follow ing this audit.

Non-allocated central (surplus)/deficit*

NET ASSETS (ASSETS less LIABILITIES)

P.III.2. Accumulated Surplus / Deficit

P.II.5. Current Accrued Charges &Defrd Income


STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE 2016 2015

II.1 REVENUES -707.335,79 -574.390,93

II.1.2. EXCHANGE REVENUES -707.335,79 -574.390,93

II.1.2.2. OTHER EXCHANGE REVENUE -707.335,79 -574.390,93

II.2. EXPENSES 3.396.326,01 8.384.510,94

II.2. EXPENSES 3.396.326,01 8.384.510,94

II.2.10.OTHER EXPENSES 2.691.694,24 7.449.385,53

II.2.2. EXP IMPLEM BY COMMISS&EX.AGENC. (DM) 704.631,77 934.842,50

II.2.8. FINANCE COSTS 282,91

STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE 2.688.990,22 7.810.120,01

TABLE 5 : STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE SG

The accounting situation presented in the Balance Sheet and Statement of Financial Performance does not

include the accruals and deferrals calculated centrally by the services of the Accounting Officer.

It should be noted that the balance sheet and statement of f inancial performance presented in Annex 3 to this Annual Activity

Report, represent only the assets, liabilities, expenses and revenues that are under the control of this Directorate General.

Signif icant amounts such as ow n resource revenues and cash held in Commission bank accounts are not included in this

Directorate General's accounts since they are managed centrally by DG Budget, on w hose balance sheet and statement of

f inancial performance they appear. Furthermore, since the accumulated result of the Commission is not split amongst the various

Directorates General, it can be seen that the balance sheet presented here is not in equilibrium.

Additionally, the f igures included in tables 4 and 5 are provisional since they are, at this date, still subject to audit by the Court of

Auditors. It is thus possible that amounts included in these tables may have to be adjusted follow ing this audit.

OFF BALANCE 2016 2015

OB.3. Other Significant Disclosures 0,00 -2.123.824,39

OB.3.2. Comm against app. not yet consumed 0,00 -2.123.824,39

OB.4. Balancing Accounts 0,00 2.123.824,39

OB.4. Balancing Accounts 0,00 2.123.824,39

OFF BALANCE 0,00 0,00

TABLE 5bis : OFF BALANCE SHEET SG


Percentage

Average

Payment

Times (Days)

Nbr of

Late

Payments

Percentage

99,47 % 8,57 3 0,53 %

100,00 % 16,57

99,48 % 3 0,52 %

8,67

9,25

Percentage

Average

Payment

Times (Days)

100,00 % 15

100,00 %

15

15

% of Total

Number

Total Number

of Payments

Amount of

Suspende

d

Payments

% of Total

Amount

4,16 % 577 69.426,61 1,06 %

TABLE 6: AVERAGE PAYMENT TIMES FOR 2016 - DG SG

Legal Times

Maximum

Payment Time

(Days)

Total Number

of Payments

Nbr of

Payments

within Time

Limit

Average

Payment

Times (Days)

30 570 567 116,33

60 7 7

Total Number

of Payments577 574

Average Net

Payment Time9,23 116,33

Average Gross

Payment Time9,80 116,33

Target Times

Target

Payment Time

(Days)

Total Number

of Payments

Nbr of

Payments

within

Target Time

20 2 2

Total Number

of Payments2 2

Average Net

Payment Time15

Average Gross

Payment Time15

Suspensions

Average

Report

Approval

Suspension

Average

Payment

Suspension

Days

Number of

Suspended

Payments

Total Paid

Amount

0 14 24 6.564.616,81

Outstanding

Chapter Current year RO Carried over RO Total Current Year RO Carried over RO Total balance

1 2 3=1+2 4 5 6=4+5 7=3-6

66 OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS AND REFUNDS 952.471,98 0,00 952.471,98 952.471,98 0,00 952.471,98 0,00

952.471,98 0,00 952.471,98 952.471,98 0,00 952.471,98 0,00

TABLE 7 : SITUATION ON REVENUE AND INCOME IN 2016

Revenue and income recognized Revenue and income cashed from

Total DG SG


Year of Origin

(commitment)Nbr RO Amount Nbr RO Amount

2016

Sub-Total

EXPENSES BUDGET

Nbr Amount Nbr Nbr Amount Nbr Amount Nbr Amount Nbr Amount

INCOME LINES IN

INVOICES

NON ELIGIBLE IN COST

CLAIMS

CREDIT NOTES 5 31.010,59 5 31.010,59 8 39.922,94 62,50% 77,68%

Sub-Total 5 31.010,59 5 31.010,59 8 39.922,94 62,50% 77,68%

GRAND TOTAL 5 31.010,59 5 31.010,59 15 901.988,94 33,33% 3,44%

Total undue payments

recovered

Total transactions in

recovery context (incl.

non-qualified)

% Qualified/Total RC

Amount

Irregularity OLAF Notified

TABLE 8 : RECOVERY OF PAYMENTS

(Number of Recovery Contexts and corresponding Transaction Amount)

7 862.066,00

7 862.066,00

Error

Total undue

payments recovered

Total transactions in

recovery context (incl. non-

qualified)

% Qualified/Total RC

Nbr RO Amount

TABLE 9: AGEING BALANCE OF RECOVERY ORDERS AT 31/12/2016 FOR SG

No data to be reported.

TABLE 10: RECOVERY ORDER WAIVERS IN 2016 >= EUR 100.000


TABLE 11: CENSUS OF NEGOTIATED PROCEDURES - DG SG - 2016


TABLE 12: SUMMARY OF PROCEDURES OF DG SG EXCLUDING BUILDING CONTRACTS


TABLE 13: BUILDING CONTRACTS


TABLE 14: CONTRACTS DECLARED SECRET



ANNEX 4: Materiality criteria

The Secretariat-General uses the guidelines provided in the Communication

COM(2003)28 of 21 January 2003. According to these guidelines, only material

reservations can be used to qualify the annual declaration.

The process of deciding whether a deficiency is material consists of the following steps:

a) Identifying a deficiency (e.g.: a significant weakness of the control systems,

insufficient audit coverage, a critical issue outlined by the European Court of Auditors,

the Internal Audit Service and European Anti-Fraud Office;

b) Determining if the deficiency falls within the scope of the Authorising Officer by

Delegation's declaration (it relates to the reasonable assurance concerning the use of

resources, sound financial management or legality and regularity of underlying

transactions);

c) Qualitative assessment: assessing if the deficiency is significant in qualitative terms

means analysing:

- the nature and scope of the deficiency,

- the duration of the deficiency,

- the existence of compensatory measures (mitigating controls which reduce

the impact of the deficiency),

- the existence of effective remedial actions to correct the deficiencies

(action plans and financial corrections) which have had a measurable

impact;

d) Quantitative assessment: a deficiency which is significant from a qualitative

perspective must be quantified in terms of "monetary value of the identified problem"/

"amount considered at risk". In line with the guidelines agreed centrally in the

Commission, the Secretariat-General applies the recommended threshold of 2% i.e.

when the value of the transactions affected by the deficiency represents more than 2% of

the budget of one Activity Based Budgeting (ABB) activity of the Directorate-General;

e) For deficiencies which are considered significant from a qualitative point of view, but

their financial impact is lower than the 2% threshold, the Secretariat-General takes into

account the potential reputational consequences they may entail. A reservation would be

made if such a reputational event were to occur and negatively impact on the image of

the Commission.

Additionally, the Secretariat-General continues to apply another materiality criterion: its

systemic responsibilities. Beyond its own operational responsibilities, the Secretariat-

General is a horizontal service operating as a service provider and thus also bears

responsibility for the development and quality of a certain number of corporate

processes. In particular, the Secretariat-General has the responsibility at Commission

level for the decision making process of the College, document management and crisis

management.


ANNEX 5: Internal Control Template(s) for budget implementation (ICTs)

PROCUREMENT DIRECT MANAGEMENT

The SG mainly concludes contracts for IT service providers based on framework contracts put available by DG DIGIT, that way the tender

procedure (framework contract) is not managed by the SG itself. For occasional needs, the SG uses negotiated procedures for low-value

contracts (not exceeding 60,000 EUR). The SG itself manages maximum 1 to 2 open or restricted procedures per year for contracts exceeding

60,000 EUR.

Stage 1 –Procurement

A - Planning

Main control objectives: Effectiveness, efficiency and economy. Compliance (legality and regularity).

Main risks It may

happen (again) that… Mitigating controls

How to determine

coverage frequency and

depth

How to estimate the

costs and benefits of

controls

Control indicators

The needs are not well

defined (operationally

and economically) and

that the decision to

procure was

inappropriate to meet

the operational

objectives

Discontinuation of the

services provided due to

a late contracting (poor

planning and

organisation of the

procurement process)

Validation by AO(S)D of

justification (economic ,

operation) for launching a

procurement process

100% of the forecast

procurements

Non-spending DG:

single global indicator

= overall cost of

control / payments

made (%) (see section

3.2.5 Ares

(2014)3702334 dated

04/11/2014

Effectiveness: Number of

projected tender cancelled,

Number of contracts

discontinued due to lack of

use (poor planning).

Efficiency: single global

indicator = overall cost of

control / payments made

(%)

Decisions discussed/taken at

management meeting

All key procurement

procedures (> amounts

and/or having significant

impact on the objectives of

the DG) are discussed at

management meeting

NB: for all controls, information in particular financial information related to inputs / outputs and follow-up should be collected


B - Needs assessment & definition of needs

Main control objectives: Effectiveness, efficiency and economy. Compliance (legality and regularity).

Main risks It may


How to determine


depth

How to estimate the


controls

Control indicators

The best offer/s are not

submitted due to the

poor definition of the

tender specifications

AOSD supervision and

approval of specifications

100% of the specifications

are scrutinised. Depth may

be determined by the

amount and/or the impact

on the objectives of the DG

if it goes wrong

Non-spending DG:


= overall cost of

control / payments


3.2.5 Ares

(2014)3702334 dated

04/11/2014

Effectiveness: N° of

procedures where only one

or no offers were received.




(%)


C – Selection of the offer & evaluation

Main control objectives: Effectiveness, efficiency and economy. Compliance (legality and regularity). Fraud prevention and detection.

Main risks It may


How to determine


depth

How to estimate the


controls

Control indicators

The most economically

advantageous offer not

being selected, due to a

biased, inaccurate or

‘unfair’

evaluation process

Formal evaluation process:

Opening committee and

Evaluation committee,

presence of SG.R.1

100% of the offers

analysed.

Depth: all documents

transmitted

Non-spending DG:


= overall cost of

control / payments


3.2.5 Ares

(2014)3702334 dated

Effectiveness: Numbers of

‘valid’ complaints or

litigation cases filed.

single global indicator =

overall cost of control /

payments made (%)


04/11/2014

Opening and Evaluation

Committees' declaration of

absence of conflict of

interests

100% of the members of

the opening committee and

the evaluation committee

Non-spending DG:


= overall cost of

control / payments


3.2.5 Ares

(2014)3702334 dated

04/11/2014

Exclusion criteria

documented

100% checked. Depth:

required documents

provided are consistent

Non-spending DG:


= overall cost of

control / payments


3.2.5 Ares

(2014)3702334 dated

04/11/2014

Standstill period,

opportunity for

unsuccessful tenderers to put

forward their concerns

on the decision.

100% when conditions are

fulfilled

Non-spending DG:


= overall cost of

control / payments


3.2.5 Ares

(2014)3702334 dated

04/11/2014


Stage 2 – Financial transactions


Main control objectives: Ensuring that the implementation of the contract is in compliance with the signed contract

Main risks It may


How to determine


depth

How to estimate the


controls

Possible control

indicators

The services foreseen

are not, totally or

partially, provided in

accordance with the

technical description

and requirements

foreseen in the contract

and/or the amounts

paid exceed that due in

accordance with the

applicable contractual

and regulatory

provisions. Business

discontinues because

contractor fails to

deliver

Operational and financial

checks in accordance with the

financial circuits (100% ex

ante verification).

Operation authorisation by

the AOSD

100% of the contracts are

controlled, including only

value adding checks.

Non-spending DG:


= overall cost of

control / payments


3.2.5 Ares

(2014)3702334 dated

04/11/2014

Effectiveness: Ex ante

control - number of 'refusal

for correction/cancellation';

- percentage of overdue

payments




(%) Management of sensitive

functions

High risk operations

identified by risk criteria.

Amount and potential

impact on the DG operations

of late or no delivery



Stage 3 – Supervisory measures

Main control objectives: Ensuring that any weakness in the procedures (tender and financial transactions) is detected and corrected

Main risks It may


How to determine


depth*

How to estimate the


controls

Possible control

indicators

An error or non-

compliance with

regulatory and

contractual provisions,

including technical

specifications, or a

fraud is not prevented,

detected or corrected by

ex-ante control, prior to

payment

Ex-post publication

(possible reaction from

tenderer / potential

tenderer such as whistle

blowing)

Potentially 100%

Non-spending DG:


= overall cost of

control / payments


3.2.5 Ares

(2014)3702334 dated

04/11/2014

Effectiveness: Amounts

associated with errors

detected (related to fraud,

irregularities and error). In

% over total checked.

single global indicator =

overall cost of control /

payments made (%)

Review of exceptions

reported and AOSD reporting

100% twice a year. Depth:

look for any weakness in the

procedures (procurement

and financial transactions)

Review of the process after

each procedure

100%. Depth: review any

significant problem that

occurred



ANNEX 6: Implementation through national or

international public-sector bodies and bodies governed by private law with a public sector mission

Not applicable for the Secretariat-General


ANNEX 7: EAMR of the Union Delegations



ANNEX 8: Decentralised agencies



ANNEX 9: Evaluations and other studies finalised or cancelled during the year

I. Evaluations finalised or cancelled in 2016

a. Evaluations finalised in 2016

None

b. Evaluations cancelled in 2016

None

II. Other studies finalised or cancelled in 2016

a. Other studies finalised in 2016

Analysis of responses to the

Open Public Consultation

on the proposal for a mandatory

Transparency Register

Preparation of a synthesis Report

presenting a quantitative and a

qualitative analysis of the large

volume of replies received to the

public consultation on a mandatory

Transparency Register.

The public consultation fed

into the preparation of the

Commission proposal for an

IIA on a mandatory

Transparency Register - an

action on the CWP 2016

under the "Democratic

Change" priority of the

Commission.

C None

40396

The Report was published on the relevant

public consultation website. The primary

target group were the respondents that

participated in the public consultation.

Specific Contract SG/B4/R1-2015/1

implementing Framework Contract

ENTR/172/PP/2012-FC Lot 3)

Study on Business Impact

Analysis (BIA) for Cabinets

Analysis of business practices of

cabinets in order to establish business

continuity measures.

I None 12000

Fitness-check consultation

support and development of

advice for the Secretariat

General

Support to the assessment of results

of an open public consultation carried

out in the context of the Natura 2000. I ENV 145.000

https://bookshop.europa.eu/en/consultation-

support-and-development-of-advice-

pbKA0217018/?CatalogCategoryID=YR4KA

BstrdkAAAEjLocY4e5K

b. Other studies cancelled in 2016

None

2 Specify what programme/regulatory measure/initiative/policy area etc. has been covered

3 FC – fitness check, E – expenditure programme/measure, R – regulatory measure (not recognised as a FC), C – communication activity, I – internal Commission activity, O – other – please specify in the Comments4 Allows to provide any comments related to the item (in particular changes compared to the planning). When relevant, the reasons for cancelling evaluations/ other studies also needs to be explained in this column.

5 For evaluations the references should be 1) number of its Evaluation Staff Working Document and number of the SWD's executive summary; 2) link to the supportive study of the SWD in EU bookshop. For other studies the references should be the link to EU bookshop or other reference

where the ‘other study’ is published via different point.

Reference5Comments4 No used in

Annex 3 MP2016

Title Associated

DGs

Costs

(EUR)Scope 2Reason 1 Type3

1 Reason why the evaluation/other study was carried out, please align with Annex 3 of the MP 2016. The individual symbols used have the following meaning: L - legal act, LMFF - legal base of MFF instrument, FR - financial regulation, REFIT, REFIT/L, CWP - 'evaluate first', O - other (please

specify in Comments)


ANNEX 10: Specific annexes related to "Financial

Management"



ANNEX 11: Specific annexes related to "Assessment of

the effectiveness of the internal control systems"



ANNEX 12: Performance tables

General objective A: A New Boost for Jobs, Growth and Investment

Impact indicator: Percentage of EU GDP invested in R&D (combined public and private

investment)

Source of the data: Eurostat4

Baseline

(2012)

Latest known value

(2014 - provisional)

Target

(2020)

Europe 2020 target

2.01% 2.03% 3%

Bookmark

Impact indicator: GDP growth

Source of the data: Eurostat

Baseline

(2014)

Latest known value

(2015)

Target

(2020)

1.6% 2.2% Increase

Bookmark

Impact indicator: Labour productivity EU-28 as compared to US (US=100)

Explanation: Gross domestic product at 2010 reference levels per hour worked

(purchasing power parity adjusted).

Source of the data:: AMECO database of the European Commission's Directorate-General

for Economic and Financial Affairs

Baseline

(2014)

Latest known value Target

(2020) (2015)

75

(US=100)

75.4 Increase

Impact indicator: Resource productivity: Gross Domestic Product (GDP, €) over Domestic

Material Consumption (DMC, kg)

Explanation: The indicator focuses on the sustainability of growth and jobs.

Source of the data: Eurostat

Baseline

(2010 – Eurostat

estimate)


(2020) (2015 – provisional, Eurostat

estimate)

1.8 €/kg (EU-28) 2 €/kg (EU-28) Increase

Bookmark

4 Please note that Eurostat periodically revises its published data to reflect new or improved information, also

for previous years. The latest published data is available by clicking on "bookmark". The "latest known value" column reflects the data that was available at the time of the preparation of the AARs 2016 and it is the reference point for the AARs of Commission services.

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?query=BOOKMARK_DS-053382_QID_-5B5460E7_UID_-3F171EB0&layout=TIME,C,X,0;GEO,L,Y,0;SECTPERF,L,Z,0;UNIT,L,Z,1;INDICATORS,C,Z,2;&zSelection=DS-053382SECTPERF,TOTAL;DS-053382INDICATORS,OBS_FLAG;DS-053382UNIT,PC_GDP;&rankName1=UNIT_1_2_-1_2&rankName2=INDICATORS_1_2_-1_2&rankName3=SECTPERF_1_2_-1_2&rankName4=TIME_1_0_0_0&rankName5=GEO_1_2_0_1&sortC=ASC_-1_FIRST&rStp=&cStp=&rDCh=&cDCh=&rDM=true&cDM=true&footnes=false&empty=false&wai=false&time_mode=ROLLING&time_most_recent=false&lang=EN&cfo=%23%23%23%2C%23%23%23.%23%23%23

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?query=BOOKMARK_DS-406763_QID_6882F39A_UID_-3F171EB0&layout=TIME,C,X,0;GEO,L,Y,0;UNIT,L,Z,0;NA_ITEM,L,Z,1;INDICATORS,C,Z,2;&zSelection=DS-406763UNIT,CLV_PCH_PRE;DS-406763INDICATORS,OBS_FLAG;DS-406763NA_ITEM,B1GQ;&rankName1=UNIT_1_2_-1_2&rankName2=INDICATORS_1_2_-1_2&rankName3=NA-ITEM_1_2_-1_2&rankName4=TIME_1_0_0_0&rankName5=GEO_1_2_0_1&sortC=ASC_-1_FIRST&rStp=&cStp=&rDCh=&cDCh=&rDM=true&cDM=true&footnes=false&empty=false&wai=false&time_mode=ROLLING&time_most_recent=false&lang=EN&cfo=%23%23%23%2C%23%23%23.%23%23%23

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/ameco/user/serie/SelectSerie.cfm

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?query=BOOKMARK_DS-402882_QID_-7799F508_UID_-3F171EB0&layout=TIME,C,X,0;GEO,L,Y,0;UNIT,L,Z,0;INDICATORS,C,Z,1;&zSelection=DS-402882UNIT,EUR_KG_CLV10;DS-402882INDICATORS,OBS_FLAG;&rankName1=UNIT_1_2_-1_2&rankName2=INDICATORS_1_2_-1_2&rankName3=TIME_1_0_0_0&rankName4=GEO_1_0_0_1&sortR=ASC_-1_FIRST&sortC=ASC_-1_FIRST&rStp=&cStp=&rDCh=&cDCh=&rDM=true&cDM=true&footnes=false&empty=false&wai=false&time_mode=ROLLING&time_most_recent=false&lang=EN&cfo=%23%23%23%2C%23%23%23.%23%23%23


Specific objective A.1: To ensure sound public finances,

prevent excessive macroeconomic imbalances, pursue

structural reforms for jobs and growth and boost

investment by providing integrated fiscal, economic,

employment and social policy guidance to the Member

States.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Rate of progress towards the implementation of the country-specific

recommendations.

Source of data: Commission services' analysis and information from Member States

(missions, bilateral meetings, national reform programmes)

Baseline

(February 2015 assessment)

Target

(2020)

Latest known

results

(year)

Lead

Unit

3% fully addressed,

9% substantial progress,

41% some progress,

35% limited progress,

12% no progress

Improved take

up of CSRs

5% substantial

progress

43% some progress

41% limited progress

11% no progress

SG.D1

Completed evaluations: N/A


Policy–related outputs


results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Country Reports:

assessment of economic

and social developments

and challenges, of the

reform agenda, of the

implementation of

country-specific

recommendations and of

the progress in the

implementation of the

Europe 2020 strategy for

each Member State

Publication by

Commission

services

End

February

2016

Published on

26 February

2016 for 26

Member

States and on

7 April 2016

for Cyprus.

SG.D1,

ECFIN (EMPL

for the

employment-

and social-

related

aspects).

Country-specific

recommendations:

operational guidance to

Member States on how to

increase growth and jobs,

including by removing

bottlenecks preventing

growth and job creation,

and to promote

sustainable public

finances.

The number and scope of

Adoption by the

Commission

May 2016 Adopted on

18 May 2016

SG.D1


country-specific

recommendations reflect

the intensity and severity

of the challenges faced by

the Member States, and

the adequacy of their

response to previous

country-specific

recommendations.

Annual Growth Survey: it

sets out the EU's

economic priorities for the

coming year and kicks off

the European Semester

every year

Adoption by the

Commission

November

2016

Adopted on

16 November

2016.

SG.D1

Specific objective A.2: Prepare options to a successor

strategy to the Europe 2020 strategy for jobs and

growth, taking into account the economic, social and

environmental angles of sustainable development.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Progress towards a successor strategy to Europe 2020

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2015)

Interim Milestone Target

(Before 2020)

Latest known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2016)

Lessons from

the Europe

2020 strategy;

current state of

play

Preparation of options

for a successor

strategy to Europe

2020

Proposals for a

successor

strategy to

Europe 2020

Communication on

the "Next steps for

a sustainable

European future",

which was adopted

on 22 November

SG.D1




Description Indicator Target

date

Latest known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Initiative on "Next

steps for a

sustainable European

future"

Adoption by the

Commission

2016 Communication

adopted on 22

November

2016

SG.D1

Specific objective A.3: The current MFF is reviewed and a

new MFF put in place for the post-2020 period.

Related to spending

programme(s) YES

Result indicator: Delivery of the mid-term review of the MFF and proposals for the post-

2020 MFF.






date

Latest known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Mid-term Review of

Multiannual Financial

Framework

Adoption by the

Commission

End 2016 Adopted

(September

2016)

SG.B1

General objective B: An Area of Justice and Fundamental Rights Based on Mutual Trust

Specific objective B.1: The rule of law is consolidated in

Bulgaria and Romania through achieving the goals of the

Cooperation and Verification Mechanisms.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Progress towards the benchmarks set in 2007 in respect of judicial

reform and anti-corruption measures (and action against organised crime in the case of

Bulgaria). This measures the extent of progress each year and the extent to which the

previous year's recommendations have been followed.

Source of data: Commission services' analysis and information from Member States

(missions, on-the-spot analysis, input from other stakeholders)

Baseline

(Commission report January 2016)

Target

(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit

0 benchmarks fulfilled so far in accordance

with the original Decisions establishing 6

benchmarks for Bulgaria and 4 for Romania

There is a political

objective that

progress in the two

Member States

would be sufficient

by the end of the

January

2017 report

identified

specific

state of

progress of

SG.E1

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2015)


(Before 2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2016)

Implementation

of current MFF

Mid-term review of the MFF Political

agreement on the

post-2020 MFF

and its constituent

programmes

Mid-term

review of the

MFF adopted

by the

Commission.

Preparation

of the post-

2020 MFF

on-going

SG.B1


mandate in October

2019 to justify the

conclusion of the

mechanisms

remaining

actions





date

Latest known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Cooperation and

Verification

Mechanism reports

Adoption by the

Commission

January

2016

Adopted on

27 January

2016

SG.E1

General objective C: A Union of Democratic Change

Impact indicator: Voter turnout at European Elections

Source of the data: European Parliament

Baseline

(2014)


(2019)

42.61% No new value Increase

Impact indicator: Number of opinions received from national Parliaments

Explanation: The number of opinions to a certain degree depends on the number of

legislative proposals and policy communications put forward by the Commission.

Source of the data: European Commission Annual report on relations between the

European Commission and national parliaments

Baseline

(2014)


(2020) (2015) (2016)

506 350 613 Increase

Specific objective C.1: Regulatory policy and related tools

are fully developed and applied throughout the legislative

cycle (planning to impact assessment to evaluation) in

order to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of EU

regulation. The acquis is 'fit for purpose' delivering its

benefits by least cost.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Proportion of REFIT legislative initiatives with quantified burden

reduction estimated.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2016)

Interim Milestones Target

(2020)

Latest known

results

(2016)

Number of 2016

Lead

Unit (2017) (2018) (2019)





results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Commission Work

Programme

Adoption by the

Commission

October

2016

Adopted on

25/10/2016

SG.C4

Communication on

the Application of EU

Law

Adoption by the

Commission

October

2016

Adopted on

13/12/2016

SG.C3

Proposal for an EP

and Council

Adoption by the

Commission

December

2016

Proposals

adopted in

SG.B2

REFIT impact

assessments with

quantified burden

reduction estimated

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 75% SG.C1

Result indicator: Proportion of impact assessments passing the Regulatory Scrutiny

Board (RSB) at the first submission.

Source of data: RSB

Baseline

(2015)


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2018)

52% 60% 70% 58% SG.C2

Result indicator: Major legislative amendments to existing legislation preceded by

evaluations

Source of data: CWP initiatives adopted

Baseline

(2015)

Interim

Milestone

Target

(2020)

Latest known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit

(2018)

16% 40% 60%

68% SG.C1

Result indicator: Percentage of (proposed) directives accompanied by Implementation

Plans

Source of data: VISTA

Baseline

(2015)

Interim

Milestone

Target

(2020)


(2016)

Lead

Unit

Lead

Unit

(2018)

21% 30% 50% 7%

Instead of formal Implementation

Plans, many services used informal

tools to help Member States in

their transposition efforts, such as

bilateral and multilateral meetings,

workshops, conferences, etc.

SG.C3


Regulation adapting

to Article 290 and

291 TFEU a number

of legal acts

providing for the use

of the regulatory

procedure with

scrutiny

December 2016

Report on the

implementation of

Regulation 182/2011

Adoption by the

Commission

End February

2016

Report adopted in

February 2016

SG.B2

Updated Guidelines

to Commission

services on

Delegated and

Implementing Acts

Publication Q2 2016 Guidelines have

been finalised at

unit level, while

publication was

postponed to

Q1/2017,

following the

President's

announcements

on comitology in

September and

pending the

finalisation of the

ongoing update

of the Better

Regulation

Guidelines

SG.B2

Inter-institutional

Register of Delegated

Acts:

Setting up internal

and inter-institutional

work structures;

definition of needs

and deliverables

Completion of

preparatory work

December

2016

Business needs

and governance

model agreed

between the

three institutions

by December

2016. The project

is on track in

view of becoming

operational by

December 2017.

SG.B2

Specific objective C.2: A more democratic and

accountable European Union opening up policy-making

and enhancing its dialogue with citizens, stakeholders

and national Parliaments.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Better Regulation Portal number of visitors

The Better Regulation portal is regularly visited: the related web pages receive a

substantial number of unique visitors per month and a sizeable number of searches are

performed.

Source of data: SAS Web Analytics for website; BR Portal

Baseline Interim Milestone Target Latest known Lead


(2015) (2018) (Before 2020) results

(2016)

Unit

30,000 20% increase compared

to 2015 baseline of visits

to existing relevant

Europa website following

the launch of the Better

Regulation Portal

80,000 (similar

to

Transparency

portal)

10,0005

SG.A1/

SG.F5

Result indicator: Better Regulation Portal user satisfaction (number of users who declare

that the site met their expectations).

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(n/a)

Target

(2020)

Latest known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit

n/a 70% Postponed

The user

satisfaction

survey has been

postponed for

2017; therefore

no known result

for 2016.

SG.A1/

SG.F5

Result indicator Number of citizens' initiatives registered

Source of data:

Baseline

(2015)


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2018)

6 8 15 3 SG.C4

Result indicator percentage of roadmaps, inception IAs, Commission proposals covered

by feedback

Source of data: DG COMM

Baseline

(2015)


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2018)

n/a 100% 100% 100% SG.C4


5 The web analytics tool changed, from SAS to Piwik. It entails a change in the way analytics are collected.

The new system provides better accuracy in tracking human activity. For example the new tool can now filter out entries from machines, knows not to double count when the IP address changes and has different other improvements. The natural consequence of this technology upgrade is that the values retrieved by Piwik are relatively lower. The change in technology will require adaptation of target and milestone. According to the previous counting system for example, the feedback section "Share your views" records on average around 3,000 visitors every month. Until end of December, this feedback section has been visited more than 40,000 times.




date

Latest known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead

unit

Delivery of the two

first phases of the

new web portal on

Europa implementing

the Better Regulation

commitments from

the May

Communication.

Delivery of 1st phase:

brand new web

presence with user-

friendly and streamlined

contents, access to

draft delegated and

implementing acts with

an efficient feedback

mechanism, also easing

the handling of results

by DGs.

June 2016 Completed

1st phase

delivered on 30

June 2016

SG.A1

Delivery of 2nd phase:

automatic publication of

other types of

documents, extension of

the feedback

mechanism to these

documents, information

on the planning of

delegated and

implementing acts,

timeline presentation

and integration of

functionalities foreseen

in the context of REFIT.

December

2016

Completed (with

a small delay)67

SG.A1

Follow-up to national

Parliaments (NP)

opinions

Quality and timeliness

of follow-up to opinions

and reasoned opinions

Ongoing 56% SG.F3

Follow-up to the

European

Ombudsman's

requests

Quality and timeliness

of follow-up

Ongoing 100% SG.F3

Specific objective C.3: The public has easy access to Related to spending

6 Delivery of 2nd phase planned for end February 2017 including the automatic publication of roadmaps,

inception impact assessments, Commission proposals and adopted acts, the integration of REFIT "Lighten the load", the handling of all contributions with the new feedback tool, improvements of the level of service for DGs and external stakeholders (e.g. notifications, attachments in feedback).

7 Some delays prevented the planned delivery on 15 December 2016: the automatic sending of documents

from Decide/e-Greffe to Europa proved more difficult than foreseen. In particular, the transmission of information and documents via the integration with Hermes required additional efforts in order to develop a sustainable solution in line with the changes to be done to the architecture of Decide. Furthermore, the complexity of information and the high number of documents (in all linguistic versions) handled at the adoption stage of the decision-making process calls for a sufficient testing period to cater for different scenarios.


information on the EU's work and contacts with

stakeholders – from the preparation stage to the final

documents.

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Number of entities registered in the Commission Transparency Register

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2013)


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit

(2018)

8200 9500 11000 10845 SG.B4

Completed evaluations: Analysis of the responses to the open public consultation on the

proposal for a mandatory Transparency Register; Report delivered by external consultancy

(RPA) in July 2016; Specific Contract SG/B4/R1-2015/1 implementing Framework Contract

ENTR/172/PP/2012-FC Lot 3.



Description Indicator Target date Latest

known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Proposal for tripartite

Interinstitutional

Agreement on a

mandatory

Transparency Register

Adoption by the

Commission

End of 2016 Proposal

adopted in

September

2016

SG.B4

Revised Horizontal

Rules on Commission

Expert Groups

Adoption and

publication by the

Commission

March 2016 Adopted on

30 May

2016

SG.B2

New version of

Register of

Commission Expert

Groups

Successful roll-out

of new version of

the Register

March 2016 Completed

on 30 May

2016

SG.B2

General objective D: To help achieve its overall political objectives, the Commission will effectively and efficiently manage and

safeguard its assets and resources, and attract and develop the best talents

Impact indicator: Trust in the European Commission

Source of the data: Standard Eurobarometer on Public Opinion in the European Union

Baseline

(EB 83 – Spring

2015)

Latest known value

( EB 85 – Spring 2016)

Target

(2020)

40% tend to

trust

37% tend to trust Increase


Impact indicator: Staff engagement index in the Commission

Source of the data: European Commission

Baseline

(2014)

Latest known value

(2016)

Target

(2020)

65.3% 64.3% Increase

Specific objective D.1.: The policy-making process is

efficiently steered and coordinated in order to ensure

that the ten political priorities of the Commission are

delivered on time and in a collegial way.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Implementation rate of CWP Annex I initiatives

The translation of the President's political priorities into concrete deliverables in the CWP

(and the subsequent realisation of the CWP) indicates the effectiveness of the link between

the objectives and the delivery of policy initiatives

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2015)


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2017)

16 out of 23

initiatives

delivered in

calendar year

100% 100%

Target defined by

the priorities set out

by the President.

The aim is to

deliver on all

initiatives

programmed in

each year leading

up to the end of the

President's

mandate.

91%8 SG.C4





known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Timely and high

quality support for the

delivery of all CWP

items by co-drafting

of communications

Completion End of 2016 Ongoing All relevant

SG units.

8 Some initiatives are being delivered in 2017


with lead DGs, replies

to ISCs, managing

inter-service groups,

fast track meetings

Specific objective D.2: The Commission's prerogatives

and positions in inter-institutional negotiations are

defended.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Number of proposals for which the co-legislators substantially deviate

from the initial Commission proposition and for which therefore unanimous agreement in

the Council is required

This indicator is relevant to the specific objective as it shows the number of instances

where the Commission did not agree with the compromise presented by the Presidency in

the Council and where the unanimous agreement of the Member States against the

Commission's position is required.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2015)


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2018)

0 0 0 0 SG.F2




results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Modern and efficient

framework for

Commission inter-

institutional position-

taking ensured (GRI

procedures)

Quality of service GRI cycle

every week

Weekly GRI

meetings held

throughout

the year in

preparation of

each

Commission

meeting.

SG.F1

Replies to

Parliamentary

Questions

Quality and

timeliness of replies

to EP questions,

including respect of

the EP's deadlines

(3 weeks for priority

questions and 5

weeks for ordinary

questions)

Ongoing Delays in

replies to

9543 EP

questions

remain

roughly at

2015 levels

(30% replied

to in time,

however with

a positive

trend in the

second half of

SG.F1


2016. About

90% of replies

are delivered

within 8

weeks.

Alignment, on a case-

by-case basis, of the

EU decentralised

agencies' founding

acts with the

principles of the

Common Approach

agreed by the EP,

Council and the

Commission in 2012

Preservation of the

Commission's role

in the agencies'

management boards

and in the selection

process of the

agencies' directors

in order to ensure

better coherence

and supervision of

EU decentralised

agencies in

accordance with the

principles of the

Common Approach

Ongoing Ongoing.

In 2016, the

Commission

adopted 6

legislative

proposals

aiming at fully

or partially

aligning the

founding act

of certain

agencies with

the Common

Approach

SG.B2

together

with policy

co-

ordination

units

Specific objective D.3: The President and the Vice-

Presidents are provided on time with high quality, fit-

for-purpose briefings as well as flash reports on

major institutional and international issues.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Number of instances generating negative reactions from briefing users -

and reasons for dissatisfaction- in relation to overall number of briefings/flashes.

The SG produces a very large number of briefings and flash reports: instances where the

user of these documents goes back to the services having produced them with critical

remarks is a very relevant indicator to measure the quality of briefings and flash notes and

to be able to improve it.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2015)

Interim

Milestone

Target

(2020)


(2016)

Lead

Unit

(2018)

0 0 0 <5 instances of negative

feedback. Majority of cases

concerned specific points of

reporting a Com position in

CRP/Council. One issue

concerned briefing

formatting (not content).

SG.F1

/SG.F2/

SG.F3/

SG.F4/

SG.E3




date


(situation on

Lead unit


31/12/2016)

Quality, fit-for-

purpose and timely

briefings materials for

Commission

representatives at

institutional and

external events

Quality of

briefing

Ongoing Dir. F: 190 briefings

prepared for Coreper I

& II meetings; GAC;

European Councils;

meetings and events

of the President, VPs,

SG and DSGs. Also,

868 briefings on –

requests for meetings

and events of the

President-Vice

Presidents; 7

developed &

maintained ready-to-

use briefings; 28 MS

fiches. In 2016 the

relevant unit

coordinated and

delivered 184 briefings

of which 167 for

President and Vice-

Presidents relating to

national Parliaments

and Committees.

Dir. E: International

briefings: 246 in 2016.

Made up of 96

briefings for the

President and 150 for

Vice-Presidents.

SG.F4,

SG.F2,

SG.F1,

SG.F3

SG.E3

Relevant and timely

flash reports for the

preparatory phase

Quality of flash

reporting and

respect of same

day reporting

deadlines

Ongoing Same as output below

on Coreper/Council

flash reports

SG F2

Early warning

messages on

sensitive issues for

the other institutions

and better

anticipation of major

issues of relevance

for the European

Council

Quality and

timeliness of

anticipation /

early warnings

Ongoing - Strategic outlook

notes prepared for

European Councils

(June-Oct-Dec): new

product to inform

targeted briefing

request and

preparation.

- Early warning

messages passed

throughout the year as

part of regular work,

by email and/or

informal contacts with

SG.F2


hierarchy and

concerned

stakeholders

Same day flash

reports on outcome of

Coreper and Council

meetings

Quality and

timeliness of

flash reporting,

including respect

of same day

reporting

deadlines

Ongoing 112 same day flash

reports (CRPI+II, GAC

Councils)

SG.F2,

Directorates

D and E

Preparation and

circulation of SI notes

(information notes on

the works of the

Council) for Coreper

and Council meetings

Quality and

timeliness of

reporting

Ongoing 220 SI notes SG.F2,

Directorates

D and E

Establishment and

maintenance of close

working relationship

with the Presidency,

the Council General

Secretariat and

Member States'

Representations.

Effectiveness of

working

relationship

Ongoing Effective working

relationships

developed and

maintained by regular

formal & informal

meetings:

Antici/Mertens (71);

Presidency briefings +

meetings with CSG

(85); meetings with

Member States (60)

and with Presidency

(30)

SG.F2

Early contacts with

upcoming

Presidencies on

priorities and

calendar of meetings

Establishment of

contacts

Before

start of

every

semester

4 meetings held

(each) with NL + SK

Presidencies on

priorities, calendar and

other preparation

SG.F2

Participation in

training seminars for

future Presidencies

Quality of

seminars

Ongoing SG.F2 participated at

6 such training

sessions

SG.F2

Specific objective D.4: A strong performance

management framework is implemented and resources

are adequately allocated in all Commission services in

order to deliver efficiently on the political priorities of the

Commission.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Percentage (%) of SG recommendations addressed to Commission

services implemented by Commission services

The indicator will measure recommendations made by SG, and addressed to all

Commission services, on draft versions of Strategic Plans, Managements Plans and Annual

Activity Reports.

Source of data: SG

Baseline Interim Milestone Target Latest known Lead





known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

New instructions for

the preparation of the

2017 Management

Plans implementing

the Strategic Plans

2016-2020

Instructions issued October 2016 Instructions

were

circulated

on 17

October

2016

SG.B1

Implementation of

the Action Plan

following-up on IAS

audit on Objective

setting process (in

the context of

preparation of the

Management Plans)

100% of actions of

the Action Plan

completed

December

2016

All actions

have been

completed

and are

"ready for

review" by

IAS in Issue

Track.

SG.B1

New instructions for

2016 Annual Activity

Reports more focused

on reporting on

performance issues

Instructions issued November/

December

2016

New

instructions

issued on 21

November

2016

SG.B1

Merger of Synthesis Adoption of the new June 2016 Adopted on SG.B1

SG.C1

n/a (2017) (2018) (2020) results

(2016)

Unit

n/a 65% 70% 80% of

recommendations

implemented

For the SP/MPs:

76% of SG

recommendation

s were fully

implemented and

an additional 6%

were

implemented

partially.

For the AARs:

59% of SG

recommendation

s were fully

implemented and

an additional 5%

were

implemented

partially.

SG.B1



Report on the

Commission's

management

achievements and

Article 318 Evaluation

Report on the results

of EU finances into a

single Report

Report by the

Commission

5 July 2016

Specific objective D.5: Corporate IT investments and

strategy are aligned with the business priorities of the

Commission.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Number of projects implemented despite a negative recommendation by

IT Board regarding re-use and rationalisation

Source of data: SG Records and minutes of the Information Security Steering Board

(ISSB)

Baseline

n/a

IT Board was

created in

2015

Interim

Milestone

Target

(2020)

Latest known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit

(2017) (2018)

n/a 3 2 0

(The IT portfolio of

the European

Commission is fully

optimised and all

proposed IT

investments are fully

justified)

0

Since its creation the

IT Board reviewed

130 IT investments

representing a

combined Total Cost

of Ownership of

around 612 M€. The

IT Board promotes

optimal re-use of IT

investments via the

creation of Corporate

Building Blocks.

SG.B1





known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Assistance to the IT

Governance bodies in

the priority setting

for budget allocation

for 2016 and 2017

for the common IT

Adoption of the

budget proposal by

the Group of

Resources Directors

March 2016 GDR

adopted

budget

proposal in

its meeting

of

SG.B1


Budget on Heading 5 15/3/2016

Specific objective D.6: The corporate information

security is implemented by an appropriate governance

structure, strategy and framework in cooperation with

DG DIGIT and DG HR.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Actions successfully completed from the Action Plan on Information

Security Governance following the IAS audit

Source of data: SG Records and minutes of the Information Security Steering Board

(ISSB)

Baseline

n/a

Audit

established in

December

2015


(2018)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2016)

n/a 60% 100%

Completion of

the IAS Action

Plan on

Information

Security

Governance

60% by

end 2016

(14

individual

actions

completed

over 23)

SG.B1





results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

A mandate and

terms of reference

for the Information

Security Steering

Board

Adoption by the

Activity Based

Management

Steering Group

(ABM-SG)

May 2016 The role and

responsibilities of

the ISSB are

documented in

the Commission

Decision C(2016)

8998.

Terms of

references are

not yet approved

by the CMB

(pending a global

approach

encompassing all

thematic

corporate

steering boards)

SG.B1

A new risk Completion of pilot September Final completion SG.B1


assessment method

for information

security risks (pilot

phase with new

reporting formats

with a limited set of

Directorate

Generals)

phase 2016 delayed to mid-

2017. The

reporting format

is available but

the risk

assessment

method is still

being developed

by DG DIGIT,

which prevented

actual large scale

piloting.

Specific objective D.7: The highest ethical standards of

service are promoted in order to encourage ethical

conduct, accountability and an anti-fraud culture at all

levels in the Commission.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Level of satisfaction of members of the Clearing House and of Cabinets'

members with SG support (satisfaction survey will be organised to verify the level of

satisfaction)

Source of data: SG

Baseline

n/a

Target

(2020)


(2016)

Lead

Unit

n/a > 90% The satisfaction survey was not launched in

2016. However, no negative feedback

received in 2016 from the Cabinets and

services recipients of opinions, draft letters

and parliamentary questions' draft answers.

SG.B3





results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Swift and adequate

reply to any

consultation from

the cabinets in order

to achieve full and

coherent

implementation of

the Code of Conduct

for Commissioners

Quality and

timeliness of

responses to

consultations

Completion Completion

Unit B3 provided

accurate, clear and

timely answer to all

requests

concerning the

Code

SG.B3

Preparation of

Commission

Completion Mid-2016 Completed in April SG.B3


decisions on former

Commissioners' post

mandate activities

2016

Update of list of FAQ

on issues related to

ethical matters,

especially as

concerns the

implementation of

the Code of Conduct

for Commissioners

Completion Ongoing This is an ongoing

process. New

questions are

progressively

integrated

SG.B3

Management and

accurate monitoring

of the information

communicated to

OLAF by the

Commission in the

framework of OLAF

Regulations

883/2013 and the

Administrative

Arrangements

between OLAF and

the Commission

Quality of

management and

monitoring

Ongoing This is an ongoing

process. OLAF

notifications are

always treated in a

swift and accurate

manner in order to

ensure appropriate

follow-up and

enable

Commission's

services to take

appropriate

actions, if needed

SG.B3

Full analysis of the

departments'

requests for

participation in

private-law bodies

and of changes to

the existing

participations and

consequently

updated inventory

Quality of service Ongoing Completed

The analysis has

been completed

and the inventory

duly updated and

published including

revised procedural

rules. On 28

participations

analysed: 4

regularisation

decisions adopted

et 2 participations

withdrawn

SG.B3

Specific objective D.8: The Commission is sufficiently

resilient to face unexpected events in an effective and

coordinated manner and, in case of a major business

interruption, continues operating its critical and

essential functions and returns to normal activities

within business relevant deadlines.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Number of hours needed for the President, Vice-Presidents and

Commissioners to relocate to alternative premises in case the headquarters (BERL) are not

operational due to unexpected events and business continuity is activated.

The SG provides framework, guidance, training and support to hosting DGs and central

services in order to establish the Relocation Plans (RP) for all Commission Members. It also


checks the compliance with the SG's guidance and organise alternative premises' tests and

exercises.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2015)


(2020 and

beyond)

Latest known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2016)

n/a 2 2 2 (assumed)

There was no

business

continuity

activation in

2016

SG.A4

Result indicator: Capacity of the Duty Officers in all Commission DGs and EAs to take, in

the event of major disruptions, timely decisions by fast response (within maximum 60

minutes).

The SG, in its corporate role, provides training, tools, guidance and tests in order to

support and measure the readiness of the Commission stand-by services to resume the

critical functions as soon as possible. The Duty Officers in each DG and EA play a key role

and their availability (24/7) is crucial. Every year the SG tests their reactiveness in an

unanticipated exercise.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

2011


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (20169)

62% of all

DGs (the EAs

were not in

the scope)

More than 85% of all DGs

More than 67% of 6 EAs

More than 90% of

all DGs

More than 90% of

6 EAs

98% of

the DGs

83% of

the EAs

SG.A4

Completed evaluations: Results of Corporate Duty officer Test conducted on 19 July

2016 via NOAH.




date

Latest known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Functioning GSM-

based and

Functional Mail

Boxes (FMB)-based

Duty Officer system,

fully integrated in

NOAH and ARGUS,

Completion Mid-2016 Completed SG.A4

9 86% in 2014 was an exceptional result above target and expectations.


for all Commission

entities

Improved

possibilities of

remote access to

network in case of a

Business Continuity

event

Completion Mid-2016 Partially

completed.

The capacity of

remote

connection has

been

considerably

increased at the

target date.

SG.A4

Implementation of

the Multiannual

Action Plan for the

integration of

Commissioners and

their Cabinets in

Business Continuity

Management

(Ares(2015)1590013

of 14.04.2015

100% of actions

completed

End of

2016

Largely

completed.

Some actions

remaining to be

finalised in the

first half of 2017

due to

management

request for

further

simplification

and

streamlining.

SG.A4

Adequate offer of

tailor-made training

courses for all

Commission's

entities Duty Officers

Completion End 2016 Completed SG.A4

Streamlined and

rationalised stand-by

arrangements across

the SG with the new

procedures in place

for the summer

permanence 2016

Completion Q1 2016 Partially

completed

The stand-by

arrangements

were

adjusted for the

summer

permanence

2016.

Further

rationalisation

measures may

be introduced in

the course of

2017.

SG.A4

http://www.cc.cec/Ares/ext/documentInfoDetails.do?documentId=080166e59dce07d4

http://www.cc.cec/Ares/ext/documentInfoDetails.do?documentId=080166e59dce07d4


Specific objective D.9: Correct and timely

transmission/consultation of classified information by its

intended recipients, in full compliance with Commission's

Security is ensured.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Ensuring a fully functional and compliant Registry.

Within service constraints and limitations, all documents are received, registered, consulted

and transmitted in accordance with Security Rules (Commission Decision 2015/444 and

Security Notices) and CENTER procedures handled by staff having followed a clearance

procedure. Following the adoption of the new Security Framework in the Commission the

procedures of the Central EUCI Registry have been updated. Operational modalities of

exchanges between institutions have been adapted and agreed as well.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2014)


(2020 and beyond)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2015) (2016)

Inspection by

the Security

Directorate

showed "full

compliance" of

CENTER and its

network with

Security Rules,

and in

particular, that

all Confidential

and Secret

documents are

registered and

traceable.

As in the

baseline

As in the

baseline

Keep the same level

of compliance to

security rules.

Keep same level of

good document

management (all

Confidential and

Secret documents

are registered,

distributed and

traceable.

Completed

The level of

traceability

and

security

were

maintained

; no

security

incidents/

breaches

registered

in 2016.

SG.A4

Result indicator: Stakeholder satisfaction.

Stakeholders of CENTER include: end users (Commissioners, Cabinet members, SG

officials), peer entities (other Commission Registries and DGs with no registry) and other

Institutions (Council, EEAS, Parliament).

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2013)


(2020 and

beyond)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2015) (2016)

User

satisfaction

survey

(December

2013) showed

a very positive

opinion on the

reduction of

use of paper

(> 90%) and a

positive opinion

As in the

baseline

As in the

baseline

Same or improved

levels of

satisfaction on the

basis of a new

user satisfaction

survey that will be

launched in 2016

Completed

User

satisfaction

maintained;

all requests

satisfied and

no

complaints

received.

SG.A4


on the user

support /

consultations

(>75% very

satisfied /

satisfied)





known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

CENTER procedures

regularly inspected by

HR.DS

Full accreditation of

CENTER by HR.DS

End of 2016 Completed

Positive

inspections

up to date

SG.A4

Meetings of networks

of EUCI Single Points

of Contact (SPOC) in

Cabinets

Completion End of 2016 Completed

in November

2016

SG.A4

Modernisation of

transmission by

reducing paper for the

benefit of electronic

means

Completion End of 2016 Completed

December

2016– the

first

agreement

on the use

of RUE

reached

with the EP

SG.A4

Specific objective D.10: The Commission's policy on

information management, including document

management and archiving, is developed and

implemented to ensure appropriate access to

information for Commission officials in the framework

of their duties and the institution's memory.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Percentage (%) of records created10 by IT systems integrated with

Hermes through the Hermes web services (HRS – Hermes Repository Services) compared

to the total number of records stored in Hermes11

10 Annually.

11 Annually.


This indicator measures the degree of integration of IT tools in the Commission producing

documents, with the central Hermes repository.12 Hermes, due to the high number of

records it contains, represents an important lever for the successful implementation of the

information management policy

Source of data: DIGIT statistics

Baseline

(2015)


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2018)

57% 65% 70% 79,75% SG.B1




Description Indicator Target date Latest known results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Roll out of a major

release of HAN

(Hermes-Ares-

NomCom)

Roll-out End 2016 Two major releases

deployed successfully

(HAN 2.8 on

26/02/2016 and HAN

2.9 on 25/11/2016)

SG.B1

Implementation of

the budget and work

programme for the

EU Historical Archives

Quality of

implementation

Ongoing A new and improved

version of the budget

and work programme

were introduced in

2016

SG.B1

Communication on

information

management

Adoption End 2016 Adopted on

18/10/2016

SG.B1

Implementation of

the amended

Archives Regulation

Completion End 2016 Common internal

rules for the

application of the

Archives Regulation

were developed and

distributed to all EU

institutions and other

bodies to use for

their own internal

rules. However, the

internal rules lack

provisions on data

protection which can

only be added after

SG.B1

12 The number of records registered in once calendar year rose from, 6.6 million in 2015 to 8.2 million in 2016

(+24%). Such an increase in the records created by HRS applications is not due to a reduction of manual Ares registration (which remains stable), but rather to the increase in the number of integrated applications (+7).


the adoption of the

Commission proposal

for a new Data

Protection Regulation

Further customisation

of software for

Hermes Preservation

Services (HPS) and

Historical Archives

Management

Information System:

customised archival

repository model,

needs analysed

regarding the

archives

management module,

approach defined and

possible pilots

executed

Delivery End 2016 The Archival

Repository (a-REP) is

ready for roll-out but

not in production yet

because of cloud

infrastructure issues.

The Archives

Management module

is on the work

programme for 2017

SG.B1

Specific objective D.11: Commission services respect the

right to protection of personal data.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Percentage of compliance with the data protection regulation for the

inventory entries, within the deadline set by the EDPS.

This indicator consists of a permanent comparison between (a) the amount of processing

operations on personal data identified in the services and inventoried and (b) the amount

of processing operations duly notified to the DPO by the responsible service and appearing

in the DPO register; this indicator has been consistently used since 8 years and has been

adopted by the EDPS as the key monitoring tool for the performance of EU institutions and

bodies.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2014)


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2016)

97 % > 97 > 97 %13 98% DPO

Result indicator: Number of complaints to the DPO

The indicator reveals the number of problematic situations brought to the knowledge of the

DPO by data subjects (staff and citizens alike); this figure has consistently been very low

(less than 10 per year). This reveals the absence of serious problems perceived or

encountered by data subjects, or the lack of awareness of their rights. However, the fact

13 The compliance rate of the Commission increased from 96 % to 98 % between 2014 and 2015, however a

rate above 97 % will remain the target for the future as this rate guarantees that all "living" processing operations have been duly notified, the remaining 3% margin corresponds to normal evolution of the systems and procedures in a dynamic administration.

Caveat: The 2020 target is subject to the development of other compliance criteria resulting from the

alignment of Regulation (EC) N° 45/2001 within the context of the new general data protection regulation

(GDPR) which is foreseen to enter into force in 2018.


that the figure has remained extremely low since the regulation has been in force, in spite

of constant efforts of the DPO to increase awareness, suggests that the situation is globally

satisfactory.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2014)


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2016)

5 < 10 < 1014 5 DPO

Result indicator: Number of complaints to the EDPS

This is the same as for the previous indicator, except that the complaints addressed

directly to the EDPS are generally more serious (or the situation is perceived as more

serious by the complainant) than complaints addressed to the DPO.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2014)


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2016)

7 < 10 < 1015 8 DPO





known

results

(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Further contribution to

the reform of the data

protection legal

framework initiated by

DG JUST; launch a

reflection on how to

anticipate entry into

force of reform in the

Commission's services

Completion End 2016 Completed DPO

Data Protection

Awareness campaign:

Completion End 2016 Completed DPO

14 The 2020 target aims at confirming that the situation remains under control; naturally the DPO is not directly

capable of influencing the amount of complaints. Caveat: The target for 2020 is based on the current indicator with the assumption that the regime of complaints to the DPO will not be modified by the alignment of Regulation (EC) N° 45/2001 within the context of the new general data protection regulation (GDPR) which is foreseen to enter into force in 2018.

15 There again the amount of complaints addressed to the EDPS has always been extremely low; the 2020 target aims at confirming that the situation remains under control. A sudden increase of the complaints to the EDPS could reveal a lack of confidence of the data subjects in the redress mechanisms in place at the Commission. The target for 2020 is based on the current indicator with the assumption that the regime of complaints to the EDPS will not be modified by the alignment of Regulation (EC) N° 45/2001 within the context of the new general data protection regulation (GDPR) which is foreseen to enter into force in 2018.


surveys, information

sessions, training,

communications,

brochures, articles

Specific objective D.12: The Commission's decision-

making process runs smoothly, works continuously and

is effectively managed and monitored.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Timely and regular adoption, and post-adoption handling, of

Commission decisions according to the highest quality standards and in line with legal and

political requirements.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2015)

Target

(Continuous)


(2016)

Lead

Unit

100% 100% Completed

The Secretariat-General managed a large

volume of files (all procedures

combined). Upstream coordination,

anticipation of complex decision

packages with full cooperation between

the concerned Registry teams, and strict

quality control were applied in an

effective mix ensuring timely and

efficient decision-making in line with

legal, procedural and political

requirements.

SG.A2/

SG.A3





(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Adoption and post

adoption handling

in line with legal

and political

requirements

Quality of

adoption and

post-adoption

handling

Ongoing Completed

The Commission

adopted more than

9,500 acts as a result of

a decision making

process managed

smoothly and efficiently

in conformity with legal,

procedural and political

requirements.

The Secretariat-General

ensured a quality and

appropriate post-

SG.A2

SG.A3


adoption handling.

Concretely, the timely

transmission of around

7,000 acts to other EU

institutions, the

notification to more

than 11,600 addressees

and the publication of

3,700 acts in the Official

Journal.

Reinforced

monitoring and

evaluation system

in place:

identification of

sensitive files,

innovative

solutions

proposed, ex-post

assessments on

the handling of

complex cases

Ongoing

delivery

Ongoing Completed

As part of the upstream

planning and

coordination of the

decision making-

process, the

Secretariat-General

identified, monitored

and flagged politically

sensitive files.

To continuously enhance

these tasks, the

Secretariat-General

overhauled part of its

early warning and

information system.

SG.A2

SG.A3

Specific objective D.13: Commission corporate

procedures handled by the SG are rationalised

and streamlined. Relevant and up-to-date

information and guidance to users of

procedures is provided.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Contribution to the rationalisation and streamlining of SG corporate

procedures

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2012)

Interim

Milestone

Target

(Continuous)


(2016)

Lead

Unit

(Continuous)

Setting up

within the

Registry of a

centre of

expertise

(pôle de

procédures)

on SG

corporate

procedures.

The pôle de

procédures

analyses existing

and/or new

procedures and

makes proposals

for rationalising

and streamlining

them.

This provides also

Measures

streamlining

the decision-

making process

are

implemented

by the Registry

and developed

in Decide

Completed

Proposals were made to

streamline political

validation across successive

steps of the decision-making

process. These proposals

were implemented when

delivering the new Planning

part of Decide in September

2016 and will be

complemented by changes

SG.A1


the basis for the

conceptual

development of

the corporate

decision-making IT

tool, Decide.

to the validation workflow

before the launch of ISC in

Decide Consultation in

January 2017.

Result indicator: Rate of completion of the drafting and updates of GoPro.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2012 –

2013)


(From

2018)


(2016)

Lead

Unit (2016) (2016-2017)

Transfer to

SG.A of the

responsibility

regarding

the manual

of operating

procedures

of the

Commission.

First

chapters of

GoPro are on

line.

All chapters

of GoPro,

revised

according to

the Better

Regulation

package and

the new

Commission

working

methods,

are on line

in EN and FR

All

procedures

handled by

the SG are

integrated in

GoPro.

Updates

are

integrated

in GoPro

each time a

change on

the

procedures

or working

methods

intervenes.

Completed

All procedures handled

by SG are now

integrated in GoPro.

The revision of the

chapters related to

Better Regulation is

waiting for the revision

of the toolbox.

SG.A1

Result indicator: Increased procedural knowledge in DGs and services

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2012-2013)


(From

2017 and

beyond)


(2016)

Lead

Unit (2016) (2016-2020)

Setting up

within the

Registry of a

centre of

expertise

(pôle de

procedures)

on SG

corporate

procedures.

A training

module is

developed to

give

information

sessions in

the services

on

procedures

and Decide.

Information

sessions are

regularly

given in

DGs.

SG

Procedural

Helpdesk

provides

upstream

guidance to

services on

files

submitted to

the

Commission.

It gives

efficient and

clear advice

to users.

Services

have a

better

Knowledge

of the

procedures

and GoPro

is a key

tool for

them. They

need less

"basic"

advice and

the

helpdesk

intervenes

more on

addressing

more

difficult

issues,

Completed

- A training module has

been developed on

decision-making for

new incomers and 4

induction courses with

25 participants per

session were

successfully delivered in

2016.

- 103 training sessions

on Decide were

organised with 789

participants.

- 6 information sessions

provided guidance to

services on how to

publish draft

delegated/implementing

SG.A1


from the

preparation

to the

adoption.

acts on the Better

Regulation Portal (147

participants)





(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Scrutiny and

subsequent revision

of existing delegated

powers:

Revamped register

of delegated powers

on line in GoPro and

number of obsolete

Decisions granting

empowerments

repealed

Completion End 2016 Completed

- Revamped register

of delegated powers

is on line in FR on

GoPro and the EN

version is on

preparation.

- The revision and

repeal of existing

empowerment

decisions is on-going.

- To improve

transparency and the

quality of the

legislation all the

revised decisions will

need to be drafted on

the basis of the new

templates and in

close cooperation

with the concerned

departments.

Due the number of

existing old decisions

this revision process

will take at least two

more years.

SG.A1

Guidance and

information on

procedures via

GoPro and

assistance via the

procedural Helpdesk

Delivery of

quality advice

Ongoing Completed

Guidance and

assistance on

procedures

SG.A1

Drafting of main

procedures in GoPro

Completion End 2016 Completed

Main procedures on

line in GoPro

SG.A1


Specific objective D.14: The IT tools related to the

decision-making process are streamlined and

rationalised.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: New releases of Decide.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(February

2015)


(From 2019-

2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2016) (2017-2018)

First release

of Decide

New decision

module

(rewriting of

the first part

of e-Greffe

focusing on

DGs).

New planning

module

replacing

Agenda

Planning.

Improvement

of the

transparency

of delegated

and

implementing

acts.

Rewriting of the

second

(Cabinets) and

third (SG) parts

of e-Greffe.

Progressive

integration of

other types of

documents and

absorption of

related IT tools

(Basil, ASAP,

Petition).

Integration of

infringements

by linking with

Themis.

Link with

existing

Registers.

Extension to the

interinstitutiona

l part of the

decision-making

process.

Integration with

Legisweb.

Decide is a

fully

integrated

system,

covering all

phases of the

process and all

types of

documents,

either by full

absorption of

concerned IT

tools, or

integration via

adequate

links. The

process is

streamlined,

users are

guided by a

user-friendly

tool, and

synergy and

efficiency

gains have

been

harvested

Partially

completed

- The

rewriting of

the first part

of e-Greffe is

ongoing with

close

involvement

of DG users.

They

acknowledged

real efficiency

gains with the

new Decision

module.

- The new

planning

module

replacing

Agenda

Planning is

operational

since 19

September

2016.

- The

transparency

of delegated

and

implementing

acts has been

improved by

the

publication as

of 30 June

2016 of draft

acts on the

Better

Regulation

SG.A1


Portal for

feedback.

Result indicator: Extension of the use of e-TrustEx.

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2011)

Target

(September 2016)

Latest known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit

Launch of a pilot phase for using

e-Trustex for transmission from

Decide (e-Greffe)

Exclusive use of e-

TrustEx replacing e-

mail transmission to

all partner

administrations

Partially completed

Exclusive use of the

e-Trustex platform

for the electronic

transmission of

documents from

Decide (e-Greffe) to

8 EU institutions and

bodies, 18 National

Parliaments, 2

Permanent

Representations and

3 Missions.

SG.A1

Result indicator: Implementation of an XML successor to LegisWrite

Source of data: SG

Baseline

(2011)


(2020)

Latest

known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2017) (2018)

LEOS

(Legislation

Editing Open

Software)

study launched

under the ISA

program to

analyse the

tools currently

used by EU

and MS public

administrations

to create and

edit their legal

texts

First pilot of

LegisWeb, an

XML editor

Integration

between Decide

and LegisWeb

The drafting of

legislation is

done within

the

Commission

with an XML

editor, fully

integrated in

Decide, easing

the work of

the different

actors

involved,

improving the

efficiency and

quality of the

decision-

making

process and

allowing for

optimal

interoperability

with the other

institutions

Completed

- LEOS

prototype

funded by

ISA is

available to

all in open

source.

- Several

workshops

were

organised in

2016 with DG

drafters, LS,

DGT + OP.

Most features

requested by

Commission

users are

available or

being

developed.

SG.A1


and the

Publications'

office

- The Council

expressed

interest in

developing a

common XML

drafting tool.





date


(situation on

31/12/2016)

Lead unit

Third iteration of

Decide: new

planning module

replacing Agenda

Planning

Completion June 2016 Completed

New planning module

operational since 19

September 2016.

SG.A1

New decision module

(rewriting of the first

part of e-Greffe

focusing on DGs)

Completion October

2016

Postponed

To be delivered in

June 2017.

The delay is a

consequence of:

- the necessity to

migrate the current e-

Greffe to a new

version of the server

software application

Weblogic and the

impact of technical

issues on the

availability of

resources;

- The lack of

development

resources in DIGIT's

teams due to

difficulties in

recruiting relevant

profiles.

SG.A1

Features in Decide

enabling the export

of draft delegated

and implementing

acts after ISC in

order to allow for

their publication on

Completion June 2016 Completed

Features delivered in

May 2016

SG.A1


the Better Regulation

portal

Exclusive use of the

e-Trustex platform

for the electronic

transmission of

documents from

Decide (e-Greffe) to

EU institutions,

National Parliaments

and Permanent

Representations

Completion September

2016

Partially completed

- Important progress

done since November

2015 for the use of e-

TrustEx (transmission

platform) by the 93

external partners.

- The parallel e-mail

has stopped for 32

partners. 44 have

implemented e-

TrustEx but keep

parallel e-mails until

internal business

processes and existing

information system

are adapted

- Only 17 partners

have not started the

process at all despite

close and intensive

follow-up due to

missing resources to

implement the change

or to on-going

rationalisation process

(e.g. European

Ombudsman).

SG.A1


ANNEX 13: Regulatory Scrutiny Board

After having replaced the Impact Assessment Board in mid-2015, the Regulatory Scrutiny

Board (RSB) has taken shape and become operational in 2016. This coincides with the

peak of the political cycle, when the Commission is proposing specific measures to make

progress on its 10 priorities. In its first year, the Board has shouldered a large workload

while integrating new members and shaping its tools.

The Board issued opinions on 60 impact assessments in 2016. About two in five were

negative the first time around, a steady rate compared to previous years. The Board also

formally considered seven evaluations and read 15 more that were annexed to impact

assessments. The Board did not issue positive or negative summary ratings on

evaluations, but will do so starting in 2017.

One of the main goals of the Board in 2016 was to help Commission services improve the

quality of their impact assessments and evaluations while maintaining its independence.

The Board proactively made available its expertise and advice at the initial stage of the

preparation of legislative initiatives. To make its opinions useful at the downstream

stages of the interinstitutional policymaking process, the RSB has held technical level

exchanges of views with EU institutions.

The Board worked in close cooperation with the Secretariat General of the Commission

providing input on how to advance the Better Regulation policy. It helped to improve the

Better Regulation guidelines and toolbox.

In the course of its first full year the RSB established contacts with external organisations

involved in oversight of regulatory impact analysis and evaluations, as well as with other

constituencies for Better Regulation. External interactions support the RSB's operations

and impact on the quality of EU policies and laws.

Specific objective C.1: Regulatory policy and related tools

are fully developed and applied throughout the legislative

cycle (planning to impact assessment to evaluation) in

order to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of EU

regulation. The acquis is 'fit for purpose' delivering its

benefits by least cost.

Related to spending

programme(s) NO

Result indicator: Proportion of impact assessments passing the Regulatory Scrutiny

Board (RSB) at the first submission. Source of data: RSB

Baseline

(2015)


(2020)

Latest known

results

(2016)

Lead

Unit (2018)

52% 60% 70% 58% RSB

LIST OF ANNEXES - European Commission · 2017. 6. 15. · SG_aar_2016_final – Annexes | 3 ANNEX...

Documents

Transcript of LIST OF ANNEXES - European Commission · 2017. 6. 15. · SG_aar_2016_final – Annexes | 3 ANNEX...