Annex 3: interview questionnaires

AuthorCSES, Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety (European Commission), Maastricht University, PPMI
Study suppo rti ng t he eva luat ion of t he op erat ion of t he Consu m er s, Heal th,
Agr icult ure an d Food Execu tiv e Agen cy ( 201 4-2016)
I nt er vie ws w it h EC and CHAFEA off icia ls
i. CHA FEA’s gov ern an ce s ystem a nd ope rat ion al fra me w ork
1. CH AFEA’s gov ern anc e sy ste m
Bet ween 20 13- 201 4 CHAFEA u nderw ent su bstant ial changes t o it s act ivities. Th e
agencys m andate was ext ended till 2024, and the Consum ers, Health, Ag ricult ure and
Food Execu t ive Ag en cy w as est abli shed in Decem b er 20 14. Importantly , t he AGRI
prom ot ion progr am m e w as ad ded to CHAFEAs portfolio of act iv it ies following t he
conclu sions of a CBA ex er cise con cluded in 201 3. Was th e handover of the above-
mentioned activit ies sm ooth? I f any , were t h er e an y t eething probl em s at the
beg inning of the hand over ?
CHAFEAs m andat e w as ext ended in late 20 14 while it w as m anaging t h ree ot h er
programmes and un dergoing substantial ch an ges in it s processes associated wit h MFF
2014 - 2020. What ef fect, if any, did t his have on the agency' s readiness to t ake up
new ta sks dur ing the t ransit ion period?
The new m andate t r iggered ch anges in the governance of CHAFEA: n ew parent DGs
joined t he Steering Com m itt ee. At th e end of 2 016 CHAFEA signed a new
Mem or andu m of Understanding wit h it s parent DGs. What w er e the k ey p oint s of
discussion an d how did the d eci sions made affect CHAFEAs gov er nance an d
man agem ent syst em s?
Coordination and m onitoring of CHAFEA in th e parent DGs: which types of resour ces
wer e com mit ted to t he act ivit ies? What kind of mechanisms, bot h form al and inform al,
faci litat ed t he process?
Overall, how w oul d you assess CHAFEAs governance system ? Som e of the more
specif ic issue s to be discussed inclu de:
Did CHAFEA and it s Director ef fectiv ely support t he Steering Com m ittee b y
pr oviding effect ive mon itor ing of it s operat ions a nd p erform anc e?
Did CHAFEA and it s Dir ect or effectively cooper ate w it h other organisat ions in
program m es w h er e m ore t han one i nstit ution is inv olved in the m anagement
Did CHAFEA and it s Dir ect or effectively pr ov id e direction and coor dination to
program me i mplement ation in li ne wi th th e Comm ission s pr iori ties?
Did the St eering Com m itt ee effect i vely coordinate t h e proper use of CHAFEAs
resou rces?
2. O rga nis ati ona l st ru ctu re
In the 201 6 AAR CHAFEA fo rmulat ed its st rat egic goa ls as foll ows:
Increase performance in delivering pr og ram m es expected resu lt s and thu s
contr ibute to EU pr ior it ies;
Manage chang es: be prepared for n ex t g en eration of p rogram m es r esp ecting
th e EP/Coun cil/ Com mission expect atio ns.
The object ive becam e t o fur ther develop th e Agency as a cen t re of excellen ce for
pr ogram me man agem ent , d eliv ering meanin gful resul ts a nd as a gr eat p lace to w ork .
What prompt ed th ese chan ges t o t he Agency s st rat eg ic goals and ob j ect i ves? Why
were th e cha nges d eemed necessar y?
Study suppo rti ng t he eva luat ion of t he op erat ion of t he Consu m er s, Heal th,
Agr icult ure an d Food Execu tiv e Agen cy ( 201 4-2016)
The num ber of services and pr og ram m es m anaged by CHAFEA increased in 2 014-
2016, posing new challeng es for both the int er nal or gani sat ion of CHAFEA and the
coor dination of its activi ties. The year 20 15 was d edicated to preparations for the
im plem en t at ion of t he AGRI pr om otion p rogram m e. The in creased m andate pr om pted
th e recrui tment of staf f for a new CHAFEA un it, a m ove t o new offices and a chang e in
th e or ganisa tion al stru ctu re.
In addition to the increased port f ol io of progr am mes, w ere t her e an y other
im port ant rea sons f or intr oducing the ch an ges?
Wer e alternativ e or ganisational st ructu res considered? I f y es, what w ere t heir
com par ati ve st ren gth s an d weak nesse s?
What are t he m ajor ad vant ages of t he n ew org anisati onal stru ctur e? Wou ld y ou
see any risk s and disadvant ag es (e.g. com partment alisat ion of activ ities; peak
wor kload in some units m ay coincide wit h low work load in other units how is
th is hand led i n t he Agency?)
In 2013 , t he European Parliam ent , t he Council and t he Commission ag reed t o
progressively reduce t he staff in all EU inst it utions, bodies and agencies ( including t he
Comm issions ex ecutive agenci es) by 5% from 2013 t o 20 17. CHAFEA, however, grew
in size during 2 01 4-2016 . What effect , if any , did t h e in t er inst itut ional agr eement
have on CHAFEAs gr owt h d uring th e refere nce p eriod of t he study?
3. Co her ence of CHAF EA’s a ctiv iti es
How successfull y does t he Agency combine t he dif ferent aspects of its r em it in
relati on to consumers, h ealt h , agricultur e, f ood)? I s t here any ev idence of the
Agency s mission b eing t hem at ically in coh er ent or of t h is af fecting it s
operat iona l ef fectiv eness and eff icien cy?
Wha t are t he a dvan tage s a nd p ossibl e dr awbacks of comb ining th e di ffer ent
areas of responsibilit y in t h e Agencys r em it ? To wh at extent are t h er e
syn ergies and how if at all have th ese b een m axim ised ?
How coh er ent is t he Agency s mission wit h primary legislation ( e.g. key articles
of the EC Tr eaty ) and secondary legislat ion ( checking for du plication and
in consist encies w ith requ irem ent s set out in relat ed l egisl ation)?
How well does the relationship bet ween t he Agen cy and t h e vari ous
Com m ission parent DGs wo rk in pr actice? Please comm en t separ at ely i n
relat ion t o DG Health and Food Safet y , DG Justi ce and Consum ers, and DG
Agr icul tur e an d Rur al D evel opm ent.
How coh er en t i s the Ag en cys m ission and rem it with other EU policies and
program mes th at have a bearing on issues relat ing t o consumers, health ,
agri cult ure, food ?
ii. Eff ectiven e ss
CHA FEA’s ope rati on in a ccor da nce to its le ga l fr am ew or k
The overall EU legal fr amewor k g ov ern ing t he operation of Ex ecut ive Agencies clearly
sets out the acti vities t hat can be reserved to the Executiv e Agencies and the
Com m issi on:
In accordance wi th Article 6 of Regulat ion (EC) No 58/ 2 003, t he Ex ecut ive
Agen cies m ay be ent r usted w ith the m anagem ent of som e or all of the st ages
in t he lifetim e of project s; provision of support in pr ogramm e im plem entation;
and provision of adm inistrative a nd l ogist ical support ser vices.
Pursu ant t o Ar ticl e 58 ( 7) of Regulat ion ( EU, Eur at om) No 9 66/ 2012 , t he
following tasks are reser ved t o t he Com m ission: tasks involv ing a large
measur e of discretion imply ing polit ical ch oices; decision s subm itted to
com itology; and som e ot h er t asks, in cluding inter-service consultations wit hin
th e Com mi ssion.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT