Study supporting the evaluation of EU agencies :Eurofound, Cedefop, ETF and EU-OSHA. Annex 1, Eurofound report

Table of Contents

• Study supporting the evaluation of EU Agencies Eurofound Cedefop 1
• ETF and EU-OSHA 1
• VT2022015 1
• Annex 1 Eurofound report 1
• Study supporting the evaluation of EU Agencies Eurofound Cedefop 3
• ETF and EU-OSHA 3
• VT2022015 3
• Contents 5
• Figures 6
• Tables 8
• Acronyms 9
• 1. Introduction 13
• 1.1. Background and mission 13
• 2. Baseline 17
• 3. Current state of play 18
• 3.1. Budget and human resources 18
• 3.1.1. Budget 18
• 3.1.2. Human resources 20
• 3.2. Activities outputs and results 22
• 3.2.1. Activities and outputs 22
• 3.2.2. Results 26
• 3.2.3. Key challenges and external factors affecting 31
• Eurofounds work 31
• 4. Effectiveness 32
• 4.1. Activities outputs and results 32
• 4.1.1. RQ1 To what extent did the Agency achieve its 32
• 4.1.2. RQ4 Were there other broader 50
• 4.1.3. RQ5 Which factors facilitated or hindered the 53
• 4.2. How the Agencys services were used 57
• 4.2.1. RQ2 To what extent were the services of the Agency 58
• 4.2.2. RQ3 To what extent did the Agency focus its work 75
• 4.3. Adaptation to recent challenges and priorities 78
• 4.3.1. RQ6 To what degree has the Agency adapted to 78
• 4.3.2. RQ7 To what degree has the Agency provided 82
• 5. Efficiency 85
• 5.1. Agency operations 85
• 5.1.1. RQ8 To what extent were the operations of the 85
• Agency cost-effective 85
• 5.1.2. RQ10 To what extent were the internal mechanisms 95
• 5.1.3. RQ13 Were there any potential areas andor 99
• 5.2. Staffing and structure 102
• 5.2.1. RQ9 To what extent were staff resources and 102
• 5.2.2. RQ11 How efficient was the Agencys governance 108
• 5.3. Efficiency in a broader context 113
• 5.3.1. RQ12 How well was the Agency embedded in the 113
• 5.3.2. RQ14 To what extent do new elements e.g. ELA 113
• 5.4. Conclusions as to efficiency 114
• 6. Coherence 115
• 6.1. Intra -and inter-Agency coherence 115
• 6.1.1. RQ15 To what extent were the mandates and 115
• 6.1.2. RQ16 To what extent do the four agencies work 116
• 6.2. External coherence 120
• 6.2.1. RQ17 To what extent are the Agencys mandate and 120
• 6.2.2. RQ18 To what extent are the mandate and activities 126
• 6.2.3. R19 To what extent are the mandate and activities of 131
• 6.3. Conclusions as to coherence 135
• 7. EU added value 136
• 7.1. Beneficiaries of the Agencys work 136
• 7.1.1. RQ20 What was the EU added value of the Agency 136
• 7.1.2. RQ21 To which groups of stakeholders concretely 141
• 7.2. Conclusions as to EU added value 147
• 8. Relevance 148
• 8.1. Fulfilment of policy needs 148
• 8.1.1. RQ22 To what extent did the Agencys mandate 148
• 8.1.2. RQ23 To what extent are the Agencys mandate and 152
• 8.1.3. RQ24 To what extent is there a need to amend the 156
• 8.1.4. RQ25 In terms of foresight are there any future 158
• 8.1.5. RQ26 To what extent have recent audit 160
• 8.2. Conclusions as to relevance 163
• 9. Conclusions 164
• 9.1. Effectiveness 164
• 9.2. Efficiency 165
• 9.3. Coherence 166
• 9.4. EU added value 167
• 9.5. Relevance 168
• 10. Lessons learned 169