Meta-study on decentralised agencies : cross-cutting analysis of evaluation findings ; Final Report.September 2008. Evaluation for the European Commission. Contract ABAC-101930
| Alternative title: | Metastudie zu dezentralisierten Ämtern und Agenturen: Querschnittsanalyse der Bewertungsergebnisse. Abschlußbericht September 2008 |
|---|---|
| Year of publication: |
2008-09-01
|
| Institutions: | Euréval ; Centre for European Evaluation Expertise ; Europäische Kommission / Generaldirektion Haushalt (contributor) |
| Subject: | Bewertung | evaluation | europäische Institution | European institution | Transparenz | transparency |
- Summary
- 1 Introduction
- 1.1 Purpose of the study
- 1.2 Background
- 1.3 Scope of the analysis
- 1.4 Objective and structure of this report
- 2 Agencies: a first overall picture
- 3 Study methods
- 3.1 Main lines of the study method
- 3.2 Challenges and potential limitations
- 4 Agencies: the answered questions
- 4.1 Relevance
- 4.1.1 What are the tasks typically entrusted to the agencies?
- 4.1.2 Who are the final beneficiaries or addressees of the agencies’ outputs?
- 4.1.3 What have been the rationales of setting-up decentralised agencies and are the rationales still valid?
- 4.1.4 To what extent have the needs of the various clients / stakeholders been prioritised and matched?
- 4.1.5 Answering the overall relevance question
- 4.2 Coherence
- 4.2.1 To what extent are the agencies' objectives coherent with those of the EU policy served?
- 4.2.2 To what extent are the agencies' objectives coherent with those of other EU policies?
- 4.2.3 To what extent are the agencies' objectives coherent with EU cross-cutting priorities?
- 4.2.4 To what extent are the tasks of the different agencies coherent with one another?
- 4.2.5 To what extent are the agencies' activities coherent with other European and international institutions?
- 4.2.6 Answering the overall coherence question
- 4.3 Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness
- 4.3.1 What are the actual and expected results and impacts of the agencies’ tasks?
- 4.3.2 What are the added values that the agencies have provided (or are expected to provide) in fulfilling the Community tasks?
- 4.3.3 What were the costs of achieving the results and impacts of the agencies?
- 4.3.4 What are the effects of the different financing arrangements in place?
- 4.3.5 Have the agencies had any impact in term of proximity to and visibility by EU citizens? If so, which one/ones?
- 4.3.6 Overall answer to the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness question
- 4.4 Internal efficiency
- 4.4.1 What are the common characteristics of
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010527721