title: Commission Recommendation of 11 March 2005 on the European Charter for Researchers and on a Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers (Text with EEA relevance)

text:
               22.3.2005

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 75/67

      COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION

   of 11 March 2005
   on the European Charter for Researchers and on a Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   (2005/251/EC)
   THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 165 thereof,
   Whereas

               (1)

               The Commission considered it necessary in January 2000 (1) to establish the European Research Area as the linchpin of the Community’s future action in this field with a view to consolidating and giving structure to a European research policy.

               (2)

               The Lisbon European Council set the Community the objective of becoming the most competitive and dynamic knowledge economy in the world by 2010.

               (3)

               The Council has addressed issues related to the profession and the career of researchers within the European Research Area in its Resolution of 10 November 2003 (2) and welcomed in particular the Commission’s intention to work towards the development of a European Researcher’s Charter and a Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers.

               (4)

               The identified potential shortage of researchers (3), particularly in certain key disciplines, will pose a serious threat to EU’s innovative strength, knowledge capacity and productivity growth in the near future and may hamper the attainment of the Lisbon and Barcelona objectives. Consequently, Europe must dramatically improve its attractiveness to researchers and strengthen the participation of women researchers by helping to create the necessary conditions for more sustainable and appealing careers for them in R&D (4).

               (5)

               Sufficient and well-developed human resources in R&D are the cornerstone of advancement in scientific knowledge, technological progress, enhancing the quality of life, ensuring the welfare of European citizens and contributing to Europe’s competitiveness.

               (6)

               New instruments for the career development of researchers should be introduced and implemented, thus contributing to the improvement of career prospects for researchers in Europe.

               (7)

               Enhanced and more visible career prospects also contribute to the building of a positive public attitude towards the researchers’ profession, and thereby encourage more young people to embark on careers in research.

               (8)

               The ultimate political goal of this recommendation is to contribute to the development of an attractive, open and sustainable European labour market for researchers, where the framework conditions allow for recruiting and retaining high quality researchers in environments conducive to effective performance and productivity.

               (9)

               Member States should endeavour to offer researchers sustainable career development systems at all career stages, regardless of their contractual situation and of the chosen R&D career path, and they should endeavour to ensure that researchers are treated as professionals and as an integral part of the institutions in which they work.

               (10)

               Even though Member States have made considerable efforts to overcome administrative and legal obstacles to geographical and intersectoral mobility, many of these obstacles still remain.

               (11)

               All forms of mobility should be encouraged as part of a comprehensive human resource policy in R&D at national, regional and institutional level.

               (12)

               The value of all forms of mobility needs to be fully recognised in the career appraisal and career advancement systems for researchers, thus guaranteeing that such an experience is conducive to their professional development.

               (13)

               The development of a consistent career and mobility policy for researchers to (5) and from the European Union should be considered with regard to the situation in developing countries and regions within and outside Europe, so that building research capacities within the European Union does not occur at the expense of less developed countries or regions.

               (14)

               Funders or employers of researchers in their role as recruiters should be responsible for providing researchers with open, transparent and internationally comparable selection and recruitment procedures.

               (15)

               Society should appreciate more fully the responsibilities and the professionalism that researchers demonstrate in executing their work at different stages of their careers and in their multi-faceted role as knowledge workers, leaders, project coordinators, managers, supervisors, mentors, career advisors or science communicators.

               (16)

               This recommendation takes as its premise that employers or funders of researchers have an overriding obligation to ensure that they meet respective national, regional or sectoral legislation requirements.

               (17)

               This recommendation provides Member States, employers, funders and researchers with a valuable instrument to undertake, on a voluntary basis, further initiatives for the improvement and consolidation of researchers’ career prospects in the European Union and for the creation of an open labour market for researchers.

               (18)

               The general principles and requirements outlined in this recommendation are the fruits of a public consultation process to which the members of the Steering Group on Human Resources and Mobility have been fully associated,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS:

               1.

               That Member States endeavour to undertake the necessary steps to ensure that employers or funders of researchers develop and maintain a supportive research environment and working culture, where individuals and research groups are valued, encouraged and supported, and provided with the necessary material and intangible support to enable them to fulfil their objectives and tasks. Within this context, particular priority should be given to the organisation of working and training conditions in the early stage of the researchers’ careers, as it contributes to the future choices and attractiveness of a career in R&D.

               2.

               That Member States endeavour to take, wherever necessary, the crucial steps to ensure that employers or funders of researchers improve the recruitment methods and career evaluation/appraisal systems in order to create a more transparent, open, equal and internationally accepted system of recruitment and career development as a prerequisite for a genuine European labour market for researchers.

               3.

               That Member States — as they formulate and adopt their strategies and systems for developing sustainable careers for researchers — take duly into account and are guided by the general principles and requirements, referred to as The European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers outlined in the Annex.

               4.

               That Member States endeavour to transpose these general principles and requirements within their area of responsibility into national regulatory frameworks or sectoral and/or institutional standards and guidelines (charters and/or codes for researchers). In so doing they should take into account the great diversity of the laws, regulations and practices which, in different countries and in different sectors, determine the path, organisation and working conditions of a career in R&D.

               5.

               That Member States consider such general principles and requirements as an integral part of institutional quality assurance mechanisms by regarding them as a means for establishing funding criteria for national/regional funding schemes, as well as adopting them for the auditing, monitoring and evaluation processes of public bodies.

               6.

               That Member States continue their efforts to overcome the persisting legal and administrative obstacles to mobility, including those related to intersectoral mobility and mobility between and within different functions, taking into account an enlarged European Union.

               7.

               That Member States endeavour to ensure that researchers enjoy adequate social security coverage according to their legal status. Within this context, particular attention should be paid to the portability of pension rights, either statutory or supplementary, for researchers moving within the public and private sectors in the same country and also for those moving across borders within the European Union. Such regimes should guarantee that researchers who, in the course of their lives, change jobs or interrupt their careers do not unduly suffer a loss of social security rights.

               8.

               That Member States put in place the necessary monitoring structures to review this recommendation regularly, as well as to measure the extent to which employers, funders and researchers have applied the European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers.

               9.

               That the criteria for measuring this will be established and agreed with the Member States within the context of the work undertaken by the Steering Group on Human Resources and Mobility.

               10.

               That Member States in their role as representatives in the international organisations established at intergovernmental level take due account of this recommendation when proposing strategies and taking decisions concerning the activities of those organisations.

               11.

               This recommendation is addressed to the Member States but it is also intended as an instrument to encourage social dialogue, as well as dialogue among researchers, stakeholders and society at large.

               12.

               The Member States are invited to inform the Commission, as far as possible, by 15 December 2005 and annually thereafter of any measures they have taken further to this recommendation, and to inform it of the first results of its application as well as to provide examples of good practice.

               13.

               This recommendation will be reviewed periodically by the Commission in the context of the open method of coordination.

      Done at Brussels, 11 March 2005

            For the Commission

         Janez POTOČNIK

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  COM(2000) 6 final of 18.1.2000.

      (2)  OJ C 282, 25.11.2003, p. 1. Council Resolution of 10 November 2003 (2003/C 282/01 on the profession and the career of researchers within the European Research Area).

      (3)  COM(2003) 226 final and SEC(2003) 489 of 30.4.2003.

      (4)  SEC(2005) 260.

      (5)  COM(2004) 178 final of 16.3.2004.

      ANNEX
      SECTION 1
      The European Charter for Researchers
      The European Charter for Researchers is a set of general principles and requirements which specifies the roles, responsibilities and entitlements of researchers as well as of employers and/or funders of researchers (1). The aim of the Charter is to ensure that the nature of the relationship between researchers and employers or funders is conducive to successful performance in generating, transferring, sharing and disseminating knowledge and technological development, and to the career development of researchers. The Charter also recognises the value of all forms of mobility as a means for enhancing the professional development of researchers.
      In this sense, the Charter constitutes a framework for researchers, employers and funders which invites them to act responsibly and as professionals within their working environment, and to recognise each other as such.
      The Charter addresses all researchers in the European Union at all stages of their career and covers all fields of research in the public and private sectors, irrespective of the nature of the appointment or employment (2), the legal status of their employer or the type of organisation or establishment in which the work is carried out. It takes into account the multiple roles of researchers, who are appointed not only to conduct research and/or to carry out development activities but are also involved in supervision, mentoring, management or administrative tasks.
      This Charter takes as its premise that researchers as well as employers and/or funders of researchers have an overriding obligation to ensure that they meet the requirements of the respective national or regional legislation. Where researchers enjoy a status and rights which are, in certain respects, more favourable than those provided for in this Charter, its terms should not be invoked to diminish the status and rights already acquired.
      Researchers, as well as employers and funders, who adhere to this Charter will also be respecting the fundamental rights and observe the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (3).
      GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO RESEARCHERS
      Research freedom
      Researchers should focus their research for the good of mankind and for expanding the frontiers of scientific knowledge, while enjoying the freedom of thought and expression, and the freedom to identify methods by which problems are solved, according to recognised ethical principles and practices.
      Researchers should, however, recognise the limitations to this freedom that could arise as a result of particular research circumstances (including supervision/guidance/management) or operational constraints, e.g. for budgetary or infrastructural reasons or, especially in the industrial sector, for reasons of intellectual property protection. Such limitations should not, however, contravene recognised ethical principles and practices, to which researchers have to adhere.
      Ethical principles
      Researchers should adhere to the recognised ethical practices and fundamental ethical principles appropriate to their discipline(s) as well as to ethical standards as documented in the different national, sectoral or institutional codes of ethics.
      Professional responsibility
      Researchers should make every effort to ensure that their research is relevant to society and does not duplicate research previously carried out elsewhere.
      They must avoid plagiarism of any kind and abide by the principle of intellectual property and joint data ownership in the case of research carried out in collaboration with a supervisor(s) and/or other researchers. The need to validate new observations by showing that experiments are reproducible should not be interpreted as plagiarism, provided that the data to be confirmed are explicitly quoted.
      Researchers should ensure, if any aspect of their work is delegated, that the person to whom it is delegated has the competence to carry it out.
      Professional attitude
      Researchers should be familiar with the strategic goals governing their research environment and funding mechanisms, and should seek all necessary approvals before starting their research or accessing the resources provided.
      They should inform their employers, funders or supervisor when their research project is delayed, redefined or completed, or give notice if it is to be terminated earlier or suspended for whatever reason.
      Contractual and legal obligations
      Researchers at all levels must be familiar with the national, sectoral or institutional regulations governing training and/or working conditions. This includes intellectual property rights regulations, and the requirements and conditions of any sponsor or funders, independently of the nature of their contract. Researchers should adhere to such regulations by delivering the required results (e.g. thesis, publications, patents, reports, new products development, etc.) as set out in the terms and conditions of the contract or equivalent document.
      Accountability
      Researchers need to be aware that they are accountable towards their employers, funders or other related public or private bodies as well as, on more ethical grounds, towards society as a whole. In particular, researchers funded by public funds are also accountable for the efficient use of taxpayers’ money. Consequently, they should adhere to the principles of sound, transparent and efficient financial management and cooperate with any authorised audits of their research, whether undertaken by their employers/funders or by ethics committees.
      Methods of collection and analysis, the outputs and, where applicable, details of the data should be open to internal and external scrutiny, whenever necessary and as requested by the appropriate authorities.
      Good practice in research
      Researchers should at all times adopt safe working practices, in line with national legislation, including taking the necessary precautions for health and safety and for recovery from information technology disasters, e.g. by preparing proper back-up strategies. They should also be familiar with the current national legal requirements regarding data protection and confidentiality protection requirements, and undertake the necessary steps to fulfil them at all times.
      Dissemination, exploitation of results
      All researchers should ensure, in compliance with their contractual arrangements, that the results of their research are disseminated and exploited, e.g. communicated, transferred into other research settings or, if appropriate, commercialised. Senior researchers, in particular, are expected to take a lead in ensuring that research is fruitful and that results are either exploited commercially or made accessible to the public (or both) whenever the opportunity arises.
      Public engagement
      Researchers should ensure that their research activities are made known to society at large in such a way that they can be understood by non-specialists, thereby improving the public’s understanding of science. Direct engagement with the public will help researchers to better understand public interest in priorities for science and technology and also the public’s concerns.
      Relation with supervisors
      Researchers in their training phase should establish a structured and regular relationship with their supervisor(s) and faculty/departmental representative(s) so as to take full advantage of their relationship with them.
      This includes keeping records of all work progress and research findings, obtaining feedback by means of reports and seminars, applying such feedback and working in accordance with agreed schedules, milestones, deliverables and/or research outputs.
      Supervision and managerial duties
      Senior researchers should devote particular attention to their multi-faceted role as supervisors, mentors, career advisors, leaders, project coordinators, managers or science communicators. They should perform these tasks to the highest professional standards. With regard to their role as supervisors or mentors of researchers, senior researchers should build up a constructive and positive relationship with the early-stage researchers, in order to set the conditions for efficient transfer of knowledge and for the further successful development of the researchers’ careers.
      Continuing professional development
      Researchers at all career stages should seek to continually improve themselves by regularly updating and expanding their skills and competencies. This may be achieved by a variety of means including, but not restricted to, formal training, workshops, conferences and e-learning.
      GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO EMPLOYERS AND FUNDERS
      Recognition of the profession
      All researchers engaged in a research career should be recognised as professionals and be treated accordingly. This should commence at the beginning of their careers, namely at postgraduate level, and should include all levels, regardless of their classification at national level (e.g. employee, postgraduate student, doctoral candidate, postdoctoral fellow, civil servants).
      Non-discrimination
      Employers and/or funders of researchers will not discriminate against researchers in any way on the basis of gender, age, ethnic, national or social origin, religion or belief, sexual orientation, language, disability, political opinion, social or economic condition.
      Research environment
      Employers and/or funders of researchers should ensure that the most stimulating research or research training environment is created which offers appropriate equipment, facilities and opportunities, including for remote collaboration over research networks, and that the national or sectoral regulations concerning health and safety in research are observed. Funders should ensure that adequate resources are provided in support of the agreed work programme.
      Working conditions
      Employers and/or funders should ensure that the working conditions for researchers, including for disabled researchers, provide where appropriate the flexibility deemed essential for successful research performance in accordance with existing national legislation and with national or sectoral collective-bargaining agreements. They should aim to provide working conditions which allow both women and men researchers to combine family and work, children and career (4). Particular attention should be paid, inter alia, to flexible working hours, part-time working, tele-working and sabbatical leave, as well as to the necessary financial and administrative provisions governing such arrangements.
      Stability and permanence of employment
      Employers and/or funders should ensure that the performance of researchers is not undermined by instability of employment contracts, and should therefore commit themselves as far as possible to improving the stability of employment conditions for researchers, thus implementing and abiding by the principles and terms laid down in Council Directive 1999/70/EC (5).
      Funding and salaries
      Employers and/or funders of researchers should ensure that researchers enjoy fair and attractive conditions of funding and/or salaries with adequate and equitable social security provisions (including sickness and parental benefits, pension rights and unemployment benefits) in accordance with existing national legislation and with national or sectoral collective bargaining agreements. This must include researchers at all career stages including early-stage researchers, commensurate with their legal status, performance and level of qualifications and/or responsibilities.
      Gender balance (6)

      Employers and/or funders should aim for a representative gender balance at all levels of staff, including at supervisory and managerial level. This should be achieved on the basis of an equal opportunity policy at recruitment and at the subsequent career stages without, however, taking precedence over quality and competence criteria. To ensure equal treatment, selection and evaluation committees should have an adequate gender balance.
      Career development
      Employers and/or funders of researchers should draw up, preferably within the framework of their human resources management, a specific career development strategy for researchers at all stages of their career, regardless of their contractual situation, including for researchers on fixed-term contracts. It should include the availability of mentors involved in providing support and guidance for the personal and professional development of researchers, thus motivating them and contributing to reducing any insecurity in their professional future. All researchers should be made familiar with such provisions and arrangements.
      Value of mobility
      Employers and/or funders must recognise the value of geographical, intersectoral, inter- and trans-disciplinary and virtual (7) mobility as well as mobility between the public and private sector as an important means of enhancing scientific knowledge and professional development at any stage of a researcher’s career. Consequently, they should build such options into the specific career development strategy and fully value and acknowledge any mobility experience within their career progression/appraisal system.
      This also requires that the necessary administrative instruments be put in place to allow the portability of both grants and social security provisions, in accordance with national legislation.
      Access to research training and continuous development
      Employers and/or funders should ensure that all researchers at any stage of their career, regardless of their contractual situation, are given the opportunity for professional development and for improving their employability through access to measures for the continuing development of skills and competencies.
      Such measures should be regularly assessed for their accessibility, take-up and effectiveness in improving competencies, skills and employability.
      Access to career advice
      Employers and/or funders should ensure that career advice and job placement assistance, either in the institutions concerned, or through collaboration with other structures, is offered to researchers at all stages of their careers, regardless of their contractual situation.
      Intellectual property rights
      Employers and/or funders should ensure that researchers at all career stages reap the benefits of the exploitation (if any) of their R&D results through legal protection and, in particular, through appropriate protection of intellectual property rights, including copyrights.
      Policies and practices should specify what rights belong to researchers and/or, where applicable, to their employers or other parties, including external commercial or industrial organisations, as possibly provided for under specific collaboration agreements or other types of agreement.
      Co-authorship
      Co-authorship should be viewed positively by institutions when evaluating staff, as evidence of a constructive approach to the conduct of research. Employers and/or funders should therefore develop strategies, practices and procedures to provide researchers, including those at the beginning of their research careers, with the necessary framework conditions so that they can enjoy the right to be recognised and listed and/or quoted, in the context of their actual contributions, as co-authors of papers, patents, etc., or to publish their own research results independently from their supervisor(s).
      Supervision
      Employers and/or funders should ensure that a person is clearly identified to whom early-stage researchers can refer for the performance of their professional duties, and should inform the researchers accordingly.
      Such arrangements should clearly define that the proposed supervisors are sufficiently expert in supervising research, have the time, knowledge, experience, expertise and commitment to be able to offer the research trainee appropriate support and provide for the necessary progress and review procedures, as well as the necessary feedback mechanisms.
      Teaching
      Teaching is an essential means for the structuring and dissemination of knowledge and should therefore be considered a valuable option within the researchers’ career paths. However, teaching responsibilities should not be excessive and should not prevent researchers, particularly at the beginning of their careers, from carrying out their research activities.
      Employers and/or funders should ensure that teaching duties are adequately remunerated and taken into account in the evaluation/appraisal systems, and that time devoted by senior members of staff to the training of early stage researchers should be counted as part of their teaching commitment. Suitable training should be provided for teaching and coaching activities as part of the professional development of researchers.
      Evaluation/appraisal systems
      Employers and/or funders should introduce for all researchers, including senior researchers, evaluation/appraisal systems for assessing their professional performance on a regular basis and in a transparent manner by an independent (and, in the case of senior researchers, preferably international) committee.
      Such evaluation and appraisal procedures should take due account of their overall research creativity and research results, e.g. publications, patents, management of research, teaching/lecturing, supervision, mentoring, national or international collaboration, administrative duties, public awareness activities and mobility, and should be taken into consideration in the context of career progression.
      Complaints/appeals
      Employers and/or funders of researchers should establish, in compliance with national rules and regulations, appropriate procedures, possibly in the form of an impartial (ombudsman-type) person to deal with complaints/appeals of researchers, including those concerning conflicts between supervisor(s) and early-stage researchers. Such procedures should provide all research staff with confidential and informal assistance in resolving work-related conflicts, disputes and grievances, with the aim of promoting fair and equitable treatment within the institution and improving the overall quality of the working environment.
      Participation in decision-making bodies
      Employers and/or funders of researchers should recognise it as wholly legitimate, and indeed desirable, that researchers be represented in the relevant information, consultation and decision-making bodies of the institutions for which they work, so as to protect and promote their individual and collective interests as professionals and to actively contribute to the workings of the institution (8).
      Recruitment
      Employers and/or funders should ensure that the entry and admission standards for researchers, particularly at the beginning at their careers, are clearly specified and should also facilitate access for disadvantaged groups or for researchers returning to a research career, including teachers (of any level) returning to a research career.
      Employers and/or funders of researchers should adhere to the principles set out in the Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers when appointing or recruiting researchers.
      SECTION 2
      The Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers
      The Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers consists of a set of general principles and requirements that should be followed by employers and/or funders when appointing or recruiting researchers. These principles and requirements should ensure observance of values such as transparency of the recruitment process and equal treatment of all applicants, in particular with regard to the development of an attractive, open and sustainable European labour market for researchers, and are complementary to those outlined in the European Charter for Researchers. Institutions and employers adhering to the Code of Conduct will openly demonstrate their commitment to act in a responsible and respectable way and to provide fair framework conditions to researchers, with a clear intention to contribute to the advancement of the European Research Area.
      GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CODE OF CONDUCT
      Recruitment
      Employers and/or funders should establish recruitment procedures which are open (9), efficient, transparent, supportive and internationally comparable, as well as tailored to the type of positions advertised.
      Advertisements should give a broad description of knowledge and competencies required, and should not be so specialised as to discourage suitable applicants. Employers should include a description of the working conditions and entitlements, including career development prospects. Moreover, the time allowed between the advertisement of the vacancy or the call for applications and the deadline for reply should be realistic.
      Selection
      Selection committees should bring together diverse expertise and competences and should have an adequate gender balance and, where appropriate and feasible, include members from different sectors (public and private) and disciplines, including from other countries and with relevant experience to assess the candidate. Whenever possible, a wide range of selection practices should be used, such as external expert assessment and face-to-face interviews. Members of selection panels should be adequately trained.
      Transparency
      Candidates should be informed, prior to the selection, about the recruitment process and the selection criteria, the number of available positions and the career development prospects. They should also be informed after the selection process about the strengths and weaknesses of their applications.
      Judging merit
      The selection process should take into consideration the whole range of experience (10) of the candidates. While focusing on their overall potential as researchers, their creativity and level of independence should also be considered.
      This means that merit should be judged qualitatively as well as quantitatively, focusing on outstanding results within a diversified career path and not only on the number of publications. Consequently, the importance of bibliometric indices should be properly balanced within a wider range of evaluation criteria, such as teaching, supervision, teamwork, knowledge transfer, management of research and innovation and public awareness activities. For candidates from an industrial background, particular attention should be paid to any contributions to patents, development or inventions.
      Variations in the chronological order of CVs
      Career breaks or variations in the chronological order of CVs should not be penalised, but regarded as an evolution of a career, and consequently, as a potentially valuable contribution to the professional development of researchers towards a multidimensional career track. Candidates should therefore be allowed to submit evidence-based CVs, reflecting a representative array of achievements and qualifications appropriate to the post for which application is being made.
      Recognition of mobility experience
      Any mobility experience, e.g. a stay in another country/region or in another research setting (public or private) or a change from one discipline or sector to another, whether as part of the initial research training or at a later stage of the research career, or virtual mobility experience, should be considered as a valuable contribution to the professional development of a researcher.
      Recognition of qualifications
      Employers and/or funders should provide for appropriate assessment and evaluation of the academic and professional qualifications, including non-formal qualifications, of all researchers, in particular within the context of international and professional mobility. They should inform themselves and gain a full understanding of rules, procedures and standards governing the recognition of such qualifications and, consequently, explore existing national law, conventions and specific rules on the recognition of these qualifications through all available channels (11).
      Seniority
      The levels of qualifications required should be in line with the needs of the position and not be set as a barrier to entry. Recognition and evaluation of qualifications should focus on judging the achievements of the person rather than his/her circumstances or the reputation of the institution where the qualifications were gained. As professional qualifications may be gained at an early stage of a long career, the pattern of lifelong professional development should also be recognised.
      Postdoctoral appointments
      Clear rules and explicit guidelines for the recruitment and appointment of postdoctoral researchers, including the maximum duration and the objectives of such appointments, should be established by the institutions appointing postdoctoral researchers. Such guidelines should take into account time spent in prior postdoctoral appointments at other institutions and take into consideration that the postdoctoral status should be transitional, with the primary purpose of providing additional professional development opportunities for a research career in the context of long-term career prospects.
      SECTION 3
      Definitions
      Researchers
      For the purpose of this recommendation the internationally recognised Frascati definition of research (12) will be used. Consequently, researchers are described as:
      ‘Professionals engaged in the conception or creation of new knowledge, products, processes, methods and systems, and in the management of the projects concerned.’
      More specifically, this recommendation relates to all persons professionally engaged in R&D at any career stage (13), regardless of their classification. This includes any activities related to ‘basic research’, ‘strategic research’, ‘applied research’, experimental development and ‘transfer of knowledge’ including innovation and advisory, supervisory and teaching capacities, the management of knowledge and intellectual property rights, the exploitation of research results or scientific journalism.
      A distinction is made between Early-Stage Researcher and Experienced Researchers:

                  —

                  the term Early-Stage Researcher (14) refers to researchers in the first four years (full-time equivalent) of their research activity, including the period of research training,

                  —

                  Experienced Researchers (15) are defined as researchers having at least four years of research experience (full-time equivalent) since gaining a university diploma giving them access to doctoral studies, in the country in which the degree/diploma was obtained or researchers already in possession of a doctoral degree, regardless of the time taken to acquire it.

            Employers
      In the context of this recommendation ‘employers’ refers to all those public or private institutions which employ researchers on a contractual basis or which host them under other types of contracts or arrangements, including those without a direct financial relationship. The latter refers particularly to institutions of higher education, faculty departments, laboratories, foundations or private bodies where researchers either undergo their research training or carry out their research activities on the basis of funding provided by a third party.
      Funders
      ‘Funders’ refers to all those bodies (16) which provide funding, (including stipends, awards, grants and fellowships) to public and private research institutions, including institutions for higher education. In this role they might stipulate as a key condition for providing funding that the funded institutions should have in place and apply effective strategies, practices and mechanisms according to the general principles and requirements presented in this recommendation.
      Appointment or employment
      This refers to any type of contract or stipend or to a fellowship, grant or awards financed by a third party including funding within the context of the framework programme(s) (17).

         (1)  See definition in Section 3.

         (2)  See definition in Section 3.

         (3)  OJ C 364, 18.12.2000, p. 1.

         (4)  See SEC(2005) 260, Women and Science: Excellence and Innovation – Gender Equality in Science.

         (5)  Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (OJ L 175, 10.7.1999, p. 43), which aims to prevent fixed-term employees from being treated less favourably than similar permanent employees, to prevent abuse arising from the use of successive fixed-term contracts, to improve access to training for fixed-term employees and to ensure that fixed-term employees are informed about available permanent jobs.

         (6)  See SEC(2005) 260, Women and Science: Excellence and Innovation – Gender Equality in Science.

         (7)  i.e. remote collaboration over electronic networks.

         (8)  In this context see also Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 80, 23.3.2002, p. 29).

         (9)  All available instruments should be used, in particular international or globally accessible web-based resources such as the pan-European Researcher’s Mobility Portal: http://europa.eu.int/eracareers

         (10)  See also The European Charter for Researchers: Evaluation/Appraisal systems in Section 1 of this document.

         (11)  Look at http://www.enic-naric.net/ to find more detailed information about the NARIC Network (National Academic Recognition Information Centres) and the ENIC Network (European Network of Information Centres).

         (12)  In: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development, Frascati Manual, OECD, 2002.

         (13)  COM(2003) 436 of 18.7.2003: Researchers in the ERA: One profession, multiple careers.

         (14)  See Work Programme Structuring the European Research Area Human Resources and Mobility Marie Curie Actions, edition September 2004, p. 41.

         (15)  Idem, p. 42.

         (16)  The Community will endeavour to apply the commitments laid down in this Recommendation to the receiver of funding in the context of the Framework Programme(s) for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities.

         (17)  The Framework Programme(s) for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities.


Important legal notice

|

52005SC0935

Recommendation from the Commission to the Council to authorise the Commission to negotiate with the Government of Canada an agreement renewing the co-operation programme in the field of higher education, training and youth  /* SEC/2005/0935 final */

	[pic] | COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES |Brussels, 12.07.2005SEC(2005) 935 finalRECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCILto authorise the Commission to negotiate with the Government of Canada an agreement renewing the co-operation programme in the field of higher education, training and youth1. EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUMCONTEXT OF THE PROPOSALThe present proposal is set against the dual background of the European Union higher education agenda and EU/Canada relations which call, respectively, for higher education to become a world reference for relevance and excellence and for broader education cooperation.Education has become an essential component of the Lisbon strategy, which calls for European Union education to become a world reference by 2010. Such an objective can only be achieved by keeping European education tuned to world developments and in particular by collaborating and testing approaches and standards against those in the world’s most developed countries like Canada.The relations with Canada are characterised by a steady expansion of which the most recent expression is the adoption in 2004 of a “Partnership Agenda” which mentions the upgrade of the existing Agreement by improving access for all higher education and training institutions, and by increasing exchanges in number and scope. A specific reference is made to the inclusion of activities in the youth area not linked to formal education structures.The current agreement (2000-2005) was concluded in 2000. The present recommendation concerns the authorisation for the conclusion to conclude a new agreement for the period 2006-2013.OBJECTIVES OF THE PROPOSALGeneral objectiveThe general objectives of the EU/Canada programme are:-  to enhance mutual understanding among the peoples of the European Union and Canada,-  to better prepare citizens for the knowledge society.The EU/Canada programme will therefore seek to mutually enhance the quality of higher education, training and non-formal education for young people.Specific ObjectivesThe specific objectives are as follows:-  to enhance collaboration between the European Union and Canada in the domains of higher education, training and youth;-  to contribute to the development of higher education and training institutions, as well as youth structures and organisations,-  to develop opportunities for dialogue and exchanges on youth policy and youth work,-  to contribute to individual participants’ personal development for their personal sake and as a way to achieve the general objective of the programme.Operational objectivesThe operational objectives are as follows:1.  To support collaboration between higher education and vocational training institutions with a view to promoting joint study programmes and mobility;2.  To support collaboration between public and private organisations active in the field of higher education and vocational training with a view to encouraging discussion and exchange of experience on policy issues;3.  To support transatlantic mobility of professionals with a view to improving mutual understanding of issues relevant to EU/Canada relations;4.  To support collaboration between youth structures, organisations and youth workers with a view to promoting exchanges of good practices and networks.CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER POLICIESThe EU/Canada programme in higher education, training, and youth would be fully consistent with, and complementary to other EU instruments in these areas, giving the possibility of pursuing objectives of quality education though collaboration between the EU and Canada and bringing in a transatlantic people-to-people cooperation. The programme would also complement the activities of EU Centres in that it offers additional possibilities for exchanges and encourages structural cooperation between institutions and organisations from both sides of the Atlantic.CONSULTATIONS WITH STAKEHOLDERS-  2001 Study on modalities for cooperation in vocational education and trainingThe study contracted by the Commission confirmed the value of EC/Canada cooperation in vocational training. Vocational training institutions are not necessarily well prepared for transatlantic cooperation yet there is great potential for mutual enrichment though this type of collaboration, which offers new opportunities for transatlantic mobility to students, trainees and staff who otherwise would not have access to them. The study noted that for a vocational training strand to coexist with higher education, a significant budget increase would be necessary.-  Interim external evaluationAn external evaluation was concluded in early 2005. The evaluation confirmed the effectiveness and relevance of the programme and that the programme is beneficial for the institutions, faculties and students involved. The programme is, however, considered too small to have had an impact on the mutual understanding between the people of the European Union and Canada. The evaluators suggest in particular introducing a system of additional mobility grants for successful projects.-  Canada-EU Youth SeminarA pilot seminar for youth organisations and youth workers from the European Union and from Canada was held in November 2004. The seminar confirmed the interest and the demand on both sides to share experiences in areas of concern for young people, such as citizenship and cultural diversity, volunteering, recognition and promotion of non-formal learning. The main recommendations of the seminar are to continue dialogue among policy makers and to facilitate the exchange of best practices and the sharing of resources among youth work practitioners.OPTIONS EXAMINEDApproaches and instruments : Policy dialogue and co-ordinationPolicy dialogue between the European Union and Canada can certainly contribute to a better understanding of education, training and youth strategies, generate exchanges of best practices and ultimately lead to measures that have a direct impact on citizens.However, policy dialogue alone may not induce bottom-up, people-to-people innovative collaboration, or the enhancement of high quality mobility of young people and better access for young people and organisations to transatlantic exchange experience. A programme of specific actions is needed to encourage and support such activity.Possible alternative designs for an expenditure programmeIntegration into existing or proposed frameworksThe existing education and training programmes such as “ Socrates” and “ Leonardo da Vinci” are designed for and exclusively target the public of the Member States. The decision-making process, typology of actions and implementation mechanisms are not well suited for EU/Canada bilateral cooperation in the fields of higher education and training. The same applies to the future Lifelong learning programme.“Erasmus Mundus” seeks to enhance the quality of higher education in the European Union and promote it world-wide through a scholarship scheme for third country students and scholars. Erasmus Mundus has not been designed for bilateral exchanges, international curriculum development and institutional cooperation. It does not concern vocational training or youth and it focuses on graduate level while the proposed cooperation programme with Canada focuses primarily on activities at undergraduate level.Other external programmes are also unsuitable for achieving the objectives of the EU/Canada bilateral cooperation proposed here.Although the current Youth programme (and, if adopted, the future Youth in Action programme) does allow, in principle, for cooperation with third countries, this cooperation is limited in scope and mainly focussed on the neighbouring countries. It is also not designed for bilateral cooperation. The proposed bilateral EU/Canada agreement would therefore complement this programme.Renewing the Agreement and expanding the scope of the present programmeThe proposed agreement and the programme it would set up does not represent a radical departure from the present cooperation. However it would enhance possibilities for exchange, give better access to all potential beneficiaries and provide a new framework for cooperation in the youth field.The programme would take into account the lessons drawn from past experience by differentiating between higher education and vocational training, building on excellence and enhancing exchanges of students and young people.The evaluation found that the small budget of the present programme has limited the programme’s potential impact on higher education and prevented the development of significant cooperation in the field of vocational training. The programme to be created by the proposed agreement entails a budget increase from 0,8m€ to an average of 2m€ per annum.Assessment of positive and negative impacts of the options consideredIn achieving its objectives, the programme would have a positive short term and long term impact on young people as well as on institutions and organisations dealing with higher education, training and youth issues.Transatlantic mobility would give participants valuable experience that will help them to better integrate in today’s society and knowledge economy. Collaboration between institutions would help them to improve their curricula and teaching methods by learning from each other’s best practices and by jointly developing new approaches. In the long term, collaboration would help to maintain the very good level of people-to-people understanding that exists between the European Union and Canada.There are no conflicts between impacts at social, economic or environmental level.Reasons for choosing the present optionThere is a widespread consensus that higher education should remain a central component of the programme. At the same time, the programme would also give access to transatlantic cooperation for vocational education and training organisations that would not otherwise engage in such co-operation. The programme would also be widened in scope so as to cover youth actions, seeking to develop new cooperation in the field of non-formal education for young people between the European Union and Canada.In the framework of lifelong training, and to reinforce the people-to-people dimension of the EU/Canada relations, the programme would be open also to young professionals, mainly outside academia and the public administration world, who want to follow studies, or undertake training, in areas of specific relevance to the EU/Canada relationship, which will be identified in consultation with the Canadian authorities.The impact of the programme would be enhanced with the introduction of policy-oriented projects with systemic impact and of youth actions. These projects would be aimed at increasing knowledge about, and exchanging best practices regarding lifelong learning that are of common interest for the European Union and partner countries and that can have an impact beyond those directly involved in their implementation .LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSALLegal BasisThe proposal is based on articles 149, 150 and 300 of the Treaty.Subsidiarity and proportionalityThe programme would complement bilateral cooperation schemes between Member States and Canada by proposing a multilateral framework for cooperation. It would fully respect Member States’ competence leaving the initiative to target institutions and organisations. The proposed programme does not contemplate any regulatory approach which would conflict with Member States exclusive competence in this area.The programme would be a low cost operation with potentially significant impacts. Proportionality is ensured.DESCRIPTION OF THE INTERVENTIONThe programme would pursue its objectives through the following actions:Higher education and vocational education and training programme actionsConsortia projectsThe target public of this action would be higher education and vocational training institutions and organisations, and their staff, students and trainees. The action will respond to two specific objectives, namely, contributing to the development of higher education and vocational training institutions and organisations as well as increasing the mobility of staff, students and trainees.This type of projects would largely consist of a continuation of the type of joint projects currently funded. Consortia projects would focus on priority fields which are key to EU/Canada cooperation, to be identified in consultation with the Canadian authorities.Excellence (follow-up) mobility projectsUnder this action, consortia projects that prove to be of outstanding quality could receive further financial support at the end of the initial 3 or 4-year period, granted exclusively to fund additional opportunities for student mobility. This measure would enhance the profile of the programme, placing the emphasis on excellence. This would increase the motivation of funded projects to deliver and contribute to sustainability of good quality mobility projects.Policy-oriented measuresThe target public of this action would be organisations dealing with higher education and vocational training. This action would pursue the specific objective of enhancing collaboration between the EU and Canada as regards the development of higher education and vocational training, focusing on priority themes. In the longer term, this action would have an impact on policy and system development.Activities under this category could include studies, conferences, seminars, working groups, benchmarking exercises.“Schuman-Canada” Individual Mobility grantsThe target group of this action would be individual young professionals, mainly from outside the academia and public administration (decision makers, social partner representatives, journalists, etc.) who want to undertake studies or training, in areas of specific relevance to the EU/Canada relationship, which would be identified in consultation with the Canadian authorities.Youth actionsThe target public for this measure would be youth structures, organisations and youth workers and the focus on activities aimed at:a) facilitating a dialogue and an exchange of best practices as well as the sharing of tools on youth work methodology among policy makers, youth work practitioners, youth organisations, and other structures responsible for youth matters including youth mobility. These activities would include seminars, training courses, job shadowing and study visits on targeted themes, e.g. cultural diversity, volunteering and recognition of non-formal learning.b) building sustainable new multilateral partnerships and networks with a view to further cooperation and youth mobility among the participating organisations, through meetings, internet platforms, sharing of information etc.BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONThe proposed programme would cost a maximum of 17.4m€ (of which 1m€ for youth actions) over an eight year period (2006-2013), provided that matching funds are made available by Canada.The Commission will seek to introduce a mid-term revision clause to the body of the agreement allowing a reorientation of activities and the reassessment of the budget allocated to the programme within the limits of the financial perspective.The rationale for a budget increaseAs indicated under 5.2, the small budget of the present programme has limited its potential impact on higher education and prevented the development of significant cooperation in the field of vocational training.CostingReference amounts for calculation purposesHigher education and vocational education trainingConsortia: 138.000 € resulting from 120.000 € for mobility grants (1000 € per month + 1000 € for travel per student for average study periods of 4 months for a total of 24 students) and 18.000 € in lump sumps for consortia partners. Where projects do not involve mobility the average grant would be 100.000 €.Excellence: 100.000 € for additional mobility opportunities (1000 € per month + 1000 € for travel per student for average study periods of 4 months for a total of 20 students).Policy-Oriented Measures: 100.000 €“Schuman –Canada” Individual mobility: 32.000 € (5.000 € per month + 2.000 € for travel per grantee for average grant duration of 6 months)YouthExchange of best practices, multilateral partnerships and networks: the calculation is based on an average cost of 20.000 € per project. The EU contribution will mainly cover travel costs for EU participants as well as costs related to the hosting of the activity in the EU (mainly accommodation and daily allowances).Target outputsThe programme will support some 210 projects over an eight year period (see details under point 8 of the Financial Statement). 4.430 EU and Canadian people will participate in mobility activities over the duration of the programme.2. RECOMMANDATIONThe Commission therefore recommends to the Council that:-  the Commission be authorised to negotiate, on behalf of the European Community, an agreement renewing the co-operation programme in higher education, training and youth with the Government of Canada to cover the period 2006-2013;-  the Commission, in accordance with Article 300 (1) of the Treaty, conduct the negotiations in consultation with the special Committee appointed by the Council and within the framework of the attached Negotiating Directives.ANNEX NEGOTIATING DIRECTIVES(1) The objective of the negotiation is to conclude an agreement between the European Community and the government of Canada in the fields of higher education, training and youth action. The agreement will set-up a cooperation programme in these fields;(2) The programme would be jointly managed by the Commission and by the competent Canadian authorities; they would jointly determine the implementation, monitoring and evaluation modalities;(3) There would be five main actions: Consortia projects, Excellence mobility projects, Policy-oriented Measures, “Schuman-Canada” Individual Mobility Grants, and Youth actions;(4) Consortia projects would normally involve a minimum of three higher education or training institutions from the European Union and three such from Canada and would focus mainly on curriculum development and student exchanges. Projects would focus on priority fields which are key to EU-Canada cooperation, to be identified in consultation with the Canadian authorities;(5) Excellence mobility projects would be consortia projects that proved to be of outstanding quality and would receive additional financial support to be exclusively allocated to student mobility;(6) Policy-oriented measures would include studies, conferences, seminars, working groups, benchmarking exercises and address horizontal higher education and vocational training issues;(7) “Schuman-Canada” Individual Mobility Grants would target professionals mainly from outside the academia and public administration such as decision makers, social partner representatives, journalists etc. who want to follow studies, or undertake training, in areas of specific relevance to the EU-Canada relationship.;(8) Youth actions would include exchange of best practices, multilateral partnerships and networks;(9) The actions would be implemented via call for proposals;(10) Equivalent co-funding would be provided by the parties for the projects selected;(11) Each party would contribute to the programme with an overall budget of some 17m€;(12) A joint committee would be established in order to review the cooperative activities implemented under the agreement.(13) The agreement would include a revision clause allowing a reorientation of activities and the reassessment of the budget allocated to the programme within the limits of the financial perspective.LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENTNAME OF THE PROPOSAL:Recommendation for a COUNCIL DECISION authorising the Commission to negotiate with the Government of Canada an agreement renewing the co-operation programme in the field of higher education , training and youthABM / ABB FRAMEWORKPolicy area: EDUCATION AND CULTUREObjective: "Mutually improve the quality of education through cooperation with third countries".Activity: EDUCATIONBUDGET LINESBudget lines (operational lines and related technical and administ rative assistance lines (ex- B.A lines) including headings :15.02.03 Co-operation with non-member countries on education and vocational training15.01.04.21 Co-operation with non-member countries on education and vocational training – Expenditure on administrative managementDuration of the action and of the financial impact: 2006-2013The final duration of the action will be determined in the course of the negotiation and will be subject to a mid-term review clause.Budgetary characteristics ( add rows if necessary ) :Budget line | Type of expenditure | New | EFTA contribution | Contributions from applicant countries | Heading in financial perspective |15.02.03 | Non-comp | Diff | NO | NO | NO | No 4 |15.01.04.21 | Non-comp | Diff | NO | NO | NO | No 4 |SUMMARY OF RESOURCESFinancial ResourcesSummary of commitment appropriations (CA) and payment appropriations (PA)EUR million (to 3 decimal places)Annual requirements | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 and later |Total number of human resources | 1,5 | 2,5 | 2,5 | 2,5 | 2,5 | 2,5 |CHARACTERISTICS AND OBJECTIVESNEED TO BE MET IN THE SHORT OR LONG TERMThe bilateral cooperation agreement in the field of higher education, vocational training and youth will seek to enhance mutual understanding among the peoples of the EU and Canada, to better prepare citizens for the knowledge society and to mutually enhance the quality of higher education, training and non-formal education for young people in the EU and in Canada.The bilateral cooperation agreement responds to a political desire by the parties at the highest level.Value-added of Community involvement and coherence of the proposal with other financial instruments and possible synergyThe relations to Canada are among the oldest and closest of the European Union. They are characterised by a steady expansion whose most recent expression is the adoption of a “Partnership Agenda” in 2004. It stipulates the will to reinforce and broaden the scope of the education cooperation explicitly in relation to the renewal of the Agreement on Higher Education and Training. It mentions also the upgrade of the existing Agreement as a possibility to be explored by improving access for all higher education and training institutions, and by increasing the exchanges in number and scope. A specific reference is made towards the inclusion of activities in the youth area not linked to formal education structures.The EU-Canada programme would provide added value at a number of levels: building institutional Transatlantic bridges, provide individuals, academic and administrative staff and students with their own transatlantic networks, develop specific subjects and disciplines. Also the renewal of EU-Canada cooperation programme in higher education, vocational training and youth would preserve and develop the multilateral approach involving in each action institutions and people from different Member States. This multilateral approach has so far proved to be effective to purse the objective of the programme in terms of increasing mutual understanding and improving the quality of education and training in the EU in Canada. It has also proved to bear certain economies of scope, scale and quality enhancement with respect to bilateral programmes.The objectives of the EU/Canada programme in higher education, training, and youth would be fully consistent with those of other EU instruments in these areas. The agreement would set up a framework that would complement other programmes giving the possibility of pursuing objectives of quality education though collaboration between the EU and Canada. In addition, the programme would bring in a transatlantic people-to-people cooperation which is absent in other EU education and training and youth programmes.In particular, the bilateral cooperation programme will complement Erasmus Mundus programme in that it will focus on undergraduate mobility and include transatlantic exchanges in the field of vocational training and youth.The programme would also complement the activities of EU Centers supported by the European Union in that it offers additional possibilities for exchanges and encourages structural cooperation between institutions and organisations from both sides of the Atlantic.Objectives, expected results and related indicators of the proposal in the context of the ABM frameworkObjective | Non exhaustive list of indicators |General objectives |To enhance mutual understanding among the peoples of the European Union and Canada; To better prepare citizens for the knowledge society; To mutually enhance the quality of education. | Quantitative data on perception among programme users and stakeholders obtained through surveys carried out during interim and ex-post evaluation |Specific objectives |to enhance collaboration between the European Union and Canada in the domains of higher education, training and youth; to contribute to the development of higher education and training institutions, as well as youth structures and organisations, to develop opportunities for dialogue and exchanges on youth policy and youth work, to contribute to individual participants’ personal development for their personal sake and as a way to achieve the general objective of the programme. | Quantitative data on perception of officials and administrators obtained through direct interviews; Quantitative data on perception of individuals responsible for institutions and organisations involved in the programme obtained through surveys; Quantitative data on perception among individuals responsible for youth policy and youth work obtained through surveys; Quantitative data on participants’ perceptions obtained through surveys. |Results can be defined as an advantage or disadvantage which direct addressees obtain at the end of their participation in a public intervention. They should therefore be identified in relation with the operational objectives of the intervention.Operational objectives | Results obtained by participants |To support collaboration between higher education and vocational training institutions with a view to promoting joint study programmes and mobility; | Institutions: improved curricula and teaching methodologies; greater transparency and understanding of respective credit system; improved preparedness for transatlantic cooperation; Students: enriching transatlantic experience; better education and cultural understanding. |To support collaboration between public and private organisations active in the field of higher education and vocational training with a view to encouraging discussion and exchange of experience on policy issues; | Organisations, institutions: better understating of policy issues; |To support transatlantic mobility of professionals with a view to improving mutual understanding of issues relevant to EU/Canada relations; | Individuals: better understanding of key issues in EU/Canada relations. |To support collaboration between youth structures, organisations and youth workers and with a view to promoting exchanges of good practices and networks | Policy makers, youth work practitioners, youth organisations: mutually enriched through exchanges of good practices. Organisations: new multilateral partnerships and networks. |Method of Implementation (indicative)Show below the method(s)[5] chosen for the implementation of the action.X Centralised ManagementX Directly by the CommissionX Indirectly by delegation to:X Executive Agencyٱ Bodies set up by the Communities as referred to in art. 185 of the Financial Regulationٱ National public-sector bodies/bodies with public-service missionٱ Shared or decentralised managementٱ With Member statesٱ With Third countriesٱ Joint management with international organisations (please specify)The proposed programme is based on the principle of joint funding from the European Union and from Canada. Call for proposals are administered by the European Commission on the basis of joint guidelines agreed beforehand with Canadian authorities.The legal basis will include the possibility of having recourse to an Executive Agency. The financial envelope of the EU/Canada programme may not in itself justify the recourse to an Executive Agency. However, it is likely that a very similar agreement programme be concluded with the United States of America increasing economies of scale and providing a rationale for implementation of some actions through an Executive Agency.MONITORING AND EVALUATIONMonitoring systemMonitoring of the joint EU/Canada projects will be implemented through a combination of desk monitoring (based on regular reporting from grant holders), and on site monitoring carried out by the Commission and by the appropriate structure designated by the Government of Canada.EvaluationEx-ante evaluationThe ex-ante evaluation is based on experience acquired implementing the current phase of the programme, direct feedback from programme users, a study on the vocational training strand within the programme, expert consultations and an interim evaluation of the current phase of the programme.The explanatory memorandum covers the main aspects of ex-ante evaluation and impact assessment.The main findings of the ex-ante evaluation as regards higher education and vocational training are the following:-  the programme is beneficial for the institutions, faculties and students involved. In particular the programme is effective in improving students and staff cross-cultural understanding.-  the programme also contributed to curriculum development and especially to consolidating transatlantic networks of universities and vocational training institutions.-  the programme is, however, considered too small to have had an impact on the mutual understanding between the people of the European Union and Canada.-  sustainability of mobility projects was put into question due to lack of follow-up funding.-  for a vocational training strand to coexist with higher education, a significant budget increase is necessary;-  a specific approach was necessary for vocational education and training adapting certain implementation criteria to the specific reality of this field;-  the interim evaluation suggest some operational changes: a) increase the duration of consortia projects; b) put emphasis on identification and exchange of best practices; c) introduce a system of additional mobility grants for successful projects;-  as far as youth is concerned, the main recommendations emerging from the EU/Canada seminar on cooperation on this field are to continue dialogue among policy makers and to facilitate the exchange of best practices and the sharing of resources among youth work practitioners.Measures taken following an intermediate/ex-post evaluation (lessons learned from similar experiences in the past)The proposed programme will be designed taking into account the conclusions from the ex-ante evaluation, namely, it would-  maintain the well tested and proven components of the programme;-  develop a specific approach for vocational training;-  build on projects of proven excellence;-  reinforce mobility;-  introduce a new youth component in the programme;-  increase the financial envelope of the programme.Terms and frequency of future evaluationIn principle, an interim evaluation will be undertaken after the first three years of implementation and an ex-post final evaluation will be launched at the end of the intervention.Anti-fraud measuresFunding decisions and contracts between the Commission and the beneficiaries provide for in situ checks to be carried out on the premises of beneficiaries of a European Community grant by the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and bestow the power to require evidence of any expenditure made under such contracts, agreements and legal undertakings within five years following the end of the contractual period.Beneficiaries are subject to reporting and financial accounting obligations, and these are analysed from the point of view of content and eligibility of expenditure, bearing in mind the purpose of the European Community funding, and taking account of contractual obligations and of the principles of economy and sound financial management.Appended to the financial agreements is information of an administrative and financial nature, designed to specify the kind of expenditure which is eligible under such agreements. Where appropriate, European Community coverage of certain cost elements will be limited to items which are real, identifiable and verifiable in the beneficiary's book-keeping arrangements, so as to facilitate checking and auditing (and evaluation for selection purposes) of projects in receipt of funding.DETAILS OF RESOURCESObjectives of the proposal in terms of their financial costCommitment appropriations in EUR million (to 3 decimal places)Description of tasks deriving from the action1 A*/AD: Policy development and programme manager1,25 B*/AST Financial assistant1 / 4 C*/AST Secretarial and financial supportSources of human resources (statutory)(When more than one source is stated, please indicate the number of posts originating from each of the sources)1,5 Posts currently allocated to the management of the programme to be replaced or extended.( Posts pre-allocated within the APS/PDB exercise for year n( Posts to be requested in the next APS/PDB procedure( Posts to be redeployed using existing resources within the managing service (internal redeployment)( Posts required for year n although not foreseen in the APS/PDB exercise of the year in questionOther Administrative expenditure included in reference amount (XX 01 04/05 – Expenditure on administrative management)EUR million (to 3 decimal places)Budget line (number and heading) | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011-2013 | TOTAL |1 Technical and administrative assistance (including related staff costs) |Executive agencies[9] | 0,060 | 0,060 | 0,060 | 0,060 | 0,180 | 0,420 |Other technical and administrative assistance |- intra muros | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,600 | 1,400 |- extra muros |Total Technical and administrative assistance | 0,260 | 0,260 | 0,260 | 0,260 | 0,780 | 1,820 |The APB 2006 does not include specific budget line for administrative assistance. Expenditure such as that generated by experts for the assessment of proposals is funded under the DG’s global envelope. As from 2007, a budget line for administrative support will be created. This is justified by the potentially higher budget allocated to not only to the EU/Canada agreement but also to the future EU/US agreement (both programmes combined would total 10M€ per annum, up from 3M€ per annum at present). The budget line for administrative assistance is justified also by the possibility of implementing the programme through the existing Executive Agency Education, Audiovisual and Culture. As indicated under 5.4, the legal basis will include such possibility. If a similar agreement is concluded with the United States of America there would be economies of scale and a strong rationale for implementing some actions of the programmes through the existing Executive Agency Education Education, Audiovisual and Culture. For this reason, the table above includes the amount equivalent to 1 contractual agent for the Executive Agency.Financial cost of human resources and associated costs not included in the reference amountEUR million (to 3 decimal places)Type of human resources | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011-2013 |Officials and temporary staff (XX 01 01) | 0,162 | 0,162 | 0,162 | 0,162 | 0,162 | 0,486 |Staff financed by Art XX 01 02 (auxiliary, END, contract staff, etc.) (specify budget line) |Total cost of Human Resources and associated costs (NOT in reference amount) | 0,162 | 0,162 | 0,162 | 0,162 | 0,162 | 0,486 |Calculation– Officials and Temporary agents1,5 staff x 108.000 EUR x 8 years = EUR 1.296.000This calculation is based on the assumption that the Executive Agency Education, Audiovisual and Culture will be involved in the implementation of the programme. If this is not the case, 1 additional Commission staff would be required.Calculation– Staff financed under art. XX 01 02N.A.Other administrative expenditure not included in reference amountEUR million (to 3 decimal places)2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011- 2013 | TOTAL |XX 01 02 11 01 – Missions | 0,004 | 0,004 | 0,004 | 0,004 | 0,004 | 0,012 | 0,032 |XX 01 02 11 02 – Meetings & Conferences |XX 01 02 11 03 – Committees[10] Joint EU/Canada committee set up by the agreement | 0,018 | 0,018 | 0,035 | 0,070 |XX 01 02 11 04 – Studies & consultations |XX 01 02 11 05 - Information systems |2 Total Other Management Expenditure (XX 01 02 11) |3 Other expenditure of an administrative nature (specify including reference to budget line) |Total Administrative expenditure, other than human resources and associated costs (NOT included in reference amount) | 0,004 | 0,022 | 0,004 | 0,022 | 0,004 | 0,047 | 0,102 |Calculation - Other administrative expenditure not included in reference amountMissions: 1 x 3000 (to Canada) + 2 x 700 (to Member States) = EUR 4.400Joint Committee meeting with Member States every other year: 25 x 700 x 4 = EUR 70.000 [1] Expenditure that does not fall under Chapter xx 01 of the Title xx concerned[2] Expenditure within article xx 01 04 of Title xx[3] Expenditure within chapter xx 01 other than articles xx 01 04 or xx 01 05[4] See points 19 and 24 of the Interinstitutional agreement.[5] If more than one method is indicated please provide additional details in the "Relevant comments" section of this point[6] Cost of which is NOT covered by the reference amount[7] Cost of which is NOT covered by the reference amount[8] Cost of which is included within the reference amount[9] The possibility of having recourse to the existing Executive Agency Education, Audiovisual and Culture will be examined in the context of the evaluation of the Agency. The evaluation will be carried out in 2006 in view of the implementation of the new education programmes 2007-2013.[10] Specify the type of committee and the group to which it belongs.