Evaluation of the European Commission s Traineeship Programme

Transcription

1 Evaluation of the European Commission s Traineeship Programme Final Report - Annexes November

2 Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): (*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to numbers or these calls may be billed More information on the European Union is available on the Internet ( Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, European Union, 2014 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Publications office of the European Union pp 21 x 29.7cm ISBN doi: /67135 November

3 Table of Contents Table of Contents... 1 Table of Figures... 2 Table of Tables... 3 Annex 1 Terms of Reference... 4 Annex 2 Benchmarking exercise Annex 3 Interview findings Annex 4 Survey report Annex 5 SWOT analysis November

4 Table of Figures Figure 1: Reasons for applying to the Traineeship Scheme Figure 2: Proportion of respondents that were interviewed in the selection process Figure 3: Satisfaction with the Traineeship Scheme application and selection process.. 59 Figure 4: Former trainees satisfaction with the content of the traineeship Figure 5: Former trainees satisfaction with the Traineeship conditions Figure 6: Perceptions on the ideal length of the traineeship Figure 7: Former trainees satisfaction with social and professional events Figure 8: How Former trainees perceived the utility of the Traineeship for their careers 62 Figure 9: Proportion of survey respondents who were employed after Traineeship/application Figure 10: Survey respondents annual salaries after traineeship/application Figure 11: Frequency with which respondents work with EU institutions and topics related to European affairs Figure 12: Types of organisations that respondents worked for Figure 13: Satisfaction with current employment (1 being dissatisfied and 10 being highly satisfied) Figure 14: Respondents countries of current employment EU Member States Figure 15: Respondents views on their knowledge and understanding of the EU Figure 16: Proportion of respondents that were positive about their general image of the EU Figure 17: Proportion of respondents with a (very) high personal interest in the EU Figure 18: Proportion of respondents interested in a career in one of the EU institutions November

5 Table of Tables Table 1: Overview of interviews conducted Table 2: Summary of key characteristics Table 3: Interviews with EC officials and former trainees and their relevant previous experience Table 4: Variables assessed for the potential use of propensity score matching Table 5: Counterfactual surveys, summary of populations and responses Table 6: SWOT analysis November

6 Annex 1 Terms of Reference 1. Context 1.1 Background Evaluation of the European Commission Traineeship Scheme Contracting Authority: European Commission Most European institutions including the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, the Court of Justice, the Committee of the Regions, the European Economic and Social Committee, the European Ombudsman, the Court of Auditors, the European Central Bank, and the European Data Protection Supervisor have their own traineeship schemes. The present evaluation only concerns the European Commission Traineeship Programme referred to in the Commission Decision of 2 nd March , commonly known as Blue Book traineeships programme, which is by far the largest of these schemes. It does not concern the traineeships programme for scientific graduates of the Joint Research Centre 2, nor the National Experts in Professional Training (NEPT) scheme 3 run by the Directorate General for Human Resources, the Junior Professionals in Delegation (JPD) programme 4 of the European External Action Service or the so-called atypical trainees to be found in some directorates-general. The European Commission s Traineeship scheme has known a growing success since its launch in Each year, some 1,400 university graduates from all over the world spend five months in the services of the European Commission and of various EU agencies and bodies. Trainees benefit from a unique professional experience in a dynamic international environment, while providing the EU institutions with qualified help and a fresh look on their policies and procedures. Boosted by the growing reputation of the scheme and by the economic downturn, the number of applications has soared to reach more than 14,000 candidates for the October 2013 session corresponding to 20 candidates per each available traineeship. A new, dedicated unit was created at the beginning of 2013 to deal with the increased workload, and rationalisation of selection procedures and other activities is underway to streamline the workflow, improve accountability and transparency and minimise the administrative burden of the scheme. Six years after the last external evaluation, it is time to once again assess the efficiency, effectiveness, utility and relevance of the Traineeship scheme C(2005)458. See See See See November

7 It should also be noted that the Commission has recently launched a broad consultation with social partners on a quality framework for traineeships. The evaluation should take into account the main principles presented in the Commission Communication Towards a Quality Framework on Traineeships Second stage consultation of the social partners at European level under Article 154 TFEU 5 and in the accompanying Commission staff working document, 6 such as the conclusion of a traineeship agreement, transparency of information on the trainee s rights and obligations, duration and remuneration, welldefined objectives, mentoring and high-quality learning content. 1.2 Description of the programme Twice a year, in March and in October, approximately 700 trainees join the services of the European Commission and of the various bodies with which it has signed Service Level Agreements: CLEANSKY (CSJU), EACEA, EACI, EAHC, EDPS, EEAS (both in Brussels and in Delegations), ERCEA, REA, SESAR and TENEA. The vast majority of trainees come from the Member States of the European Union and from candidate countries benefiting from a pre-accession strategy. In addition, a small number of nationals of non-member States are also accepted, within the limits of available resources. There are no age limits for candidates wishing to do a traineeship at the Commission. Candidates must have completed the first cycle of a higher education course and obtained a full degree or its equivalent by the closing date for applications. EU candidates must have a very good knowledge of at least two official languages of the European Union 7, including at least one of the three working languages of the European Commission (English, French or German). Candidates from outside the EU must have a very good knowledge of at least one of the latter three languages. Applications are not accepted from candidates who benefit or have already benefited from any kind of in-service training (formal or informal, paid or unpaid) within a European institution or body, or who have or have had any kind of employment within a European institution or body, for more than six weeks. After a general introductory conference on European matters, trainees are attached to their Directorates General or Services, and are placed under the responsibility of an adviser. The adviser must establish a job description, provide guidance and closely follow the trainee during his/her traineeship, acting as his/her mentor. Trainees are given tasks similar to those of junior administrators at the beginning of their career. In each Directorate General and Service, an official is designated to co-ordinate the management of the trainees attached to that department. This coordinator assists the 5 (COM/2012/0728 final) The Study on a comprehensive overview on traineeship arrangements in Member States (2012) can also provide a useful background on the best traineeship programmes in the EU. See 7 Bulgarian, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Irish, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak, Slovene, Spanish and Swedish November

8 trainees in administrative procedures and acts as contact point/interface between the Directorate General or Service and the Traineeships Office Unit (TOU). Trainees who have completed a period of at least three months receive a certificate specifying the dates of their training period and the department in which they were employed. Internal evaluation procedures, including nominative reports and an online questionnaire, are in place to collect feedback from trainees and advisers. 1.3 Objectives of the programme 8 The main aims of the Commission s traineeships scheme are to improve the trainees employability perspectives by providing them with a unique, hands-on experience of policy making and internal procedures and to help them better understand the objectives and goals of the EU integration processes and policies. The opportunity to put into practice the competences acquired in formal education in a dynamic, multilingual and multicultural environment provides trainees with an advantage in pursuing better professional opportunities. The European Commission, in turn, benefits from the continuously renewed academic knowledge, dynamism and enthusiasm of each successive intake of trainees. These bring their insight and understanding of EU practices and procedures into the businesses and organisations where they are hired, thus improving their ability to operate on an EU level. Trainees finally act as goodwill ambassadors for European ideas and values both within and outside the European Union. 1.4 Description of the selection process The traineeship process The Traineeship Programme is managed by a dedicated unit of the European Commission s Directorate-General for Education and Culture (DG EAC), which is responsible for the overall co-ordination of the programme in all its phases application, pre-selection, final selection, recruitment, welcome to the Commission, evaluation and farewell conference as well as for providing administrative support to the trainees during the stage (assistance with visa, provision of certificates, relations with the DGs in case of problems etc.). The traineeships coordinators in each Directorate General and Service facilitate communications between the TOU, trainees and advisers, providing on-the-spot assistance and explaining procedures. Submission Applications for traineeships are opened 7-8 months before the start of the traineeship period. The online application forms have recently been modernised, in an attempt to streamline the pre-selection procedure. Submission of paper documents has been limited to pre-selected candidates (approximately 20% of initial applications). Rules, eligibility criteria and appropriate instructions are published on the website 9. 8 For a detailed description of the aims of the programme, see Commission Decision C(2005)458 of , November

9 Pre-selection procedure The European Commission Traineeship scheme to be evaluated includes 2 types of traineeships: administrative traineeships and traineeships in the Directorate-General for Translation (DGT, approximately 8% of the total), each of which follows different procedures. For administrative traineeships, committees of officials, organised by nationalities, are convened to examine the online applications and give notes based on three categories: education, motivation and additional merits. Under Education (45% of final marks), the level and quality of diplomas are examined, many candidates having today qualifications that go beyond the minimum, which is a Bachelor degree Masters, PhDs and even post-doctoral studies. Points attributed for Motivation (10% of final marks) refer to the quality of reasoning in the free text accompanying the application, while Additional points (45% of final marks) are attributed for the international profile, relevance and level of language competences, working experiences and particularly interesting specialisations. The main objective of the pre-selection procedure is to offer to all Commission departments the best possible choice of candidates in each field of activity, with a wide range of academic disciplines. The pre-selection procedure also aims to ensure equal opportunities by maintaining, insofar as possible, the same gender balance as the one observed in applications and some proportionality between candidates from the different countries. Based on the points attributed in the pre-selection, a list of candidates containing four times as many applicants as there are training places available is compiled. All candidates are informed of the results of the pre-selection procedure and the database containing the names and curricula of the pre-selected candidates (still known as the Blue Book from its original paper format) is made available to all Commission departments for the final selection process. For translation traineeships, knowledge of source and target languages and the ability to use computer-assisted translation tools are the main criteria. A first selection is done by linguists from the language department of the target language chosen by candidates, producing a shortlist from which the Heads of Unit and Heads of Language Departments make the final choice. Pre-selected candidates are invited to provide paper copies of the documents referred to in their online applications, and a check of eligibility criteria is done by the Traineeships Office Unit and the traineeships correspondents of DGT. Final selection procedure Taking into consideration the size and absorption capacity of each service, the results of the evaluations carried out and the budget availability, the TOU determines the number of trainees to be attributed to each Directorate General, Service, agency or other body for each period. The Commission services search the Blue Book according to specific criteria and an established profile, reserve their trainees from the list of suitable candidates through the online system and prepare a detailed job description for each trainee. Offers are sent by the TOU approximately four months before the start of the traineeship period. November

10 1.4.2 Eligible countries The programme is open to university graduates from all over the world, provided the security and visa procedures are complied with. 1.5 Budget of the programme The budget of the programme amounts to approximately 6,500, per year, for the most part reserved for the monthly allowances, insurance and reimbursement of travel expenses of trainees. Each trainee receives a grant of 1, per month in 2013, corresponding to ¼ of the basic salary of a junior administrator (Grade AD5) working for the EU institutions. Between 10% and 15% of trainees go to agencies and other bodies, which cover the monthly allowances from their own budget. 1.6 Implementation of the Programme Below is a table of the number of applications received and the number of trainees in the last two years: March 2011 October 2011 March 2012 October 2012 March 2013 October 2013 Applications Trainees Evaluation and Monitoring Provisions Monitoring Provisions An online reporting and monitoring system is in place to evaluate the satisfaction of trainees and of the services to which they were assigned. The system consists of a 2- phase evaluation during each traineeships period: Towards the end of the first month, trainees are invited to fill in an online questionnaire focusing on the first phases of the traineeships programme (application, pre-selection, final selection, recruitment) and on practical issues relating to the induction phase (welcome days and conferences, introduction in the Directorates General/services, logistics, infrastructure etc.). This enables the TOU to improve its operations and, if needed, to immediately intervene with the Directorates General and services in order to assist in solving problems or difficulties. Towards the end of the traineeships period both trainee and adviser are asked to fill in an on-line questionnaire. This allows collecting feedback on relations between trainees, advisors, coordinators, the Stage Committee, TOU and all other actors. In addition, the TOU sends separate invitations to write an end-of-stage report. Trainees are invited to present their achievements and to comment on the work content and relevance of their academic background for the activities performed. Advisers are invited to describe the tasks performed and write an appraisal of the trainees contribution. November

11 1.7.2 Previous evaluations An external evaluation was carried out in This resulted in a final report including a list of 12 recommendations. 10 An Action Plan was established in October 2008 for the implementation of these suggestions. Three progress reports followed in February 2009, December 2009 and February 2010, detailing the main changes introduced as a result of the evaluation. Such changes mainly concerned the suggested restructuring of the internal monitoring system and better exploitation of its findings, the introduction of preliminary contacts with candidates through phone interviews and the reconsideration of the system of national quotas. The documents concerning this evaluation will be at the disposal of the contractors. 2. Task specification for the assignment This contract will contribute to the following overall objectives: - a thorough assessment of the Traineeship Programme of the European Commission according to the evaluation questions specified in section 2.1; - the provision of useful recommendations aimed at improving the effectiveness, efficiency, utility and relevance of the Traineeship Scheme. The specific objective of this contract is to procure an external, independent interim evaluation of the Traineeship Scheme covering the period The outputs to be delivered by the contractor are as follows: an evaluation report according to the provisions of section 3 below; in particular, the report must answer to all the evaluation questions specified in section here below. Furthermore, the report must provide viable recommendations grouped under the different evaluation criteria specified in section 2.1. a presentation of the evaluation results to the Steering Group, to the unit concerned and other interested parties (Directorate-general for translation, invited coordinators), to be delivered at the premises of DG Education and Culture when submitting the Draft Final Report. 2.1 Evaluation questions Relevance, consistency, added value 1. To what extent have the programme s aims and objectives proved relevant to the needs of the European Commission and the university graduates interested in pursuing a career in European affairs? 10 November

12 2. To what extent the experience gained during the traineeship is useful to access the labour market? 3. Are the eligibility criteria (academic qualifications, language competence, absence of prior employment in EU institutions or bodies) relevant to the purpose of selecting the best candidates while offering the opportunity of a traineeship to a large number of applicants? 4. To what extent has the programme proved complementary to other EU initiatives aimed at offering university graduates insider knowledge of EU institutions, such as those mentioned in section 1.1? 5. Does participation in the programme appear satisfactory in terms of geographical coverage, the subject areas represented and the types of participants? 6. To what extent does the current programme satisfy the criteria presented in the documents referred to at the end of section 1.1? 7. What are the main added values of the programme? Effectiveness 8. To what extent has the programme been effective in achieving the aims and objectives mentioned in section 1.3? 9. Does participation in the programme appear satisfactory in terms of equality between men and women? To what extent do the programme design and implementation mechanisms promote equal participation of men and women? Could any particular points of improvement be identified? Efficiency 10. Are the size of budget, human and technical resources for the programme appropriate and proportional to what the programme is set out to achieve? Are they sufficient for reaching a critical mass of impact? Could the same results have been achieved with fewer resources? Could the use of other instruments or mechanisms have provided better cost-effectiveness? 11. Could procedures be put in place to improve the benefits of the programme for the trainees, in terms of employability and learning outcomes, and for the host services and departments, in terms of improving the trainees contribution to their activities? 12. Could further synergies with other institutions, agencies and bodies, such as those mentioned in Section 1.1, increase the efficiency of the programme? 13. To what extent are the monitoring mechanisms effective and efficient? What are the areas for improvement? Sustainability 14. Which of the current activities or elements of the programme would be likely to continue and in which form if EU support was withdrawn or substantially decreased? November

13 2.1.5 Utility 15. To what extent have the activities of the programme resulted in any unintended results and impacts (both desirable and undesirable)? 16. To what extent do the results and impacts of the programme correspond to the professional needs of the trainees and the European Commission? 2.2 Other tasks under the assignment The Contractor should: Provide a one-page statement about the validity of the evaluation results, i.e. to what extent it has been possible to provide reliable statements on all essential aspects of the EU intervention examined. Issues to be referred to may include scoping of the evaluation exercise, availability of data, unexpected problems encountered in the evaluation process, proportionality between budget and objectives of the assignment, etc. Make a proposal for the dissemination of the evaluation results, on the basis of the draft Dissemination Plan annexed to these Terms of Reference. 3. Reporting and deliverables General reporting requirements Each report (except the final version of the Final Report) should have an introductory page providing an overview and orientation of the report. It should describe what parts of the document, on the one hand, have been carried over from previous reports or been recycled from other documents, and on the other hand, represent progress of the evaluation work with reference to the work plan. All reports must be drafted in English and submitted according to the timetable below to the responsible body. Electronic files must be provided in Microsoft Word for Windows format. Additionally, besides Word, the Final Report must be delivered in Adobe Acrobat pdf format and in 5 hard copies. The Commission will comment on all reports within maximum 30 calendar days. In the absence of observations from the Commission within the deadline the report will be considered as being approved. Within maximum 14 calendar days of receiving the Commission s observations the Contractor will submit the report in definitive form, taking full account of these observations, either by following them precisely or by explaining clearly why they could not be followed. Should the Commission still not consider the report acceptable, the Contractor will be invited to amend the report insofar as such amendments do not interfere with the independence of the evaluator in respect of their findings, conclusions or recommendations. Inception Report The inception report must describe in detail how the methodology proposed by the Contractor is going to be implemented in the light of an examination of the quality and appropriateness of existing data. It should include the Contractor's understanding of the November

14 intervention logic, as well as the quantitative and qualitative indicators that he/she will use in addressing each of the evaluation questions. A detailed work plan including the allocation of experts per task per number of working-days should also be provided. It shall not exceed 20 pages, annexes excluded. Interim Report The report is to be produced after the desk and field research has been completed, and should, to the extent possible, include some preliminary conclusions. The report must as a minimum provide: An overview of the status of the evaluation project; A description of problems encountered and solutions found; A summary of initial findings and results of the data gathering; An assessment of the data, whether it meets expectations and will provide a sound basis for responding to the evaluation questions; A conclusion whether any changes are required to the work plan, or any other solutions should be sought in order to ensure that the required results of the evaluation are achieved. If any such issues are to be identified, they must be discussed in the meeting with the Steering Group dedicated to this report; A proposal for the final structure of the Final Report, as well as a structure of the Executive Summary. It shall not exceed 30 pages, annexes excluded. Draft Final Report This document should deliver the results of all tasks covered by these Terms of Reference, and must be clear enough for any potential reader to understand. It should contain: Executive summary: It sets out, in no more than 7 pages, a summary of the evaluation s main conclusions, the main evidence supporting them and the recommendations arising from them. Main report: The main report must be limited to 75 pages and present, in full, the results of the analyses, conclusions and recommendations arising from the evaluation. It must also contain a description of the subject evaluated, the context of the evaluation, and the methodology used (including an analysis of its strengths and weaknesses). Annexes: These must collate the technical details of the evaluation, and must include the Terms of Reference, questionnaire templates, interview guides, any additional tables or graphics, and references and sources. November

15 Final Report The Final Report follows in principle the same format as the draft Final Report. In addition to the contents described above (main report and annexes), it should contain a ½ page summary statement of the main evaluation conclusions and recommendations. The Executive Summary should be translated into French and German by a professional translation agency, once it has been approved by the responsible body. The Final Report must take into account the results of the quality assessment of the draft Final Report, and the relevant discussions with the Steering Group insofar as these do not interfere with the independence of the Contractor in respect of the conclusions they have reached and the recommendations made. The contracting authority will publish the Final Report, the Executive Summary and the annexes on the World-Wide Web Organisation, timetable and budget 4.1 Organisation The contract will be managed by Unit D4 of the European Commission Directorate- General for Education and Culture. A Steering Group will be involved in the management of the evaluation. The responsibilities of the Steering Group will include: - providing the external evaluator with access to information; - supporting and monitoring the work of the external evaluator; - assessing the quality of the reports submitted by the external evaluator, while ensuring that the Contractor's independence is not compromised. 4.2 Meetings It is expected that the contractor participate in four meetings in Brussels with the evaluation Steering Group. The evaluation team leader and other relevant experts must participate in these meetings. For these meetings, minutes should be drafted by the contractor within 5 working days, to be agreed among the participants and approved and signed by the chair person, who will be appointed from Unit EAC/R Timetable The indicative starting date is 15 November The implementation of the contract will start after both parties have signed it. The period of execution of the contract is 8 months. The following outline work plan and indicative timetable are foreseen: 11 On the site November

16 Deadline (from starting date) Kick-off [T0)] Inception Report [T0 + 1month] Interim Report [T0 + 4 months] Draft Final Report [T0 + 6 months] Final Report [T0 + 8 months] Task The project is kicked off at a meeting between the Contractor and the Steering Group in Brussels Contractor prepares inception report and presents to Steering Group in Brussels Desk and field research completed. Contractor presents interim report to Steering Group in Brussels. Contractor presents a draft final report, including an executive summary, to Steering Group in Brussels Taking account of the Commission s comments contractor sends final report and summary to Steering Group in Brussels 4.4 Budget The estimated maximum budget for the evaluation of the action, covering all the results to be achieved by the contractor as listed in sections 2 and 3 above, is EUR 80, References 5.1 Basic documents the website of the Traineeships programme: Rules governing the official traineeships scheme of the European Commission (Commission Decision of C(2005)458) 12 the official website of the Stage Committee: Statistics on applications and selected trainees the 2007 external evaluation (executive summary, final report, annexes, quality assessment: Action Plan following the 2007 external evaluation Final Progress Report on the implementation of the 2007 evaluation Action Plan 5.2 Documents and information to be provided after contract signature (not exhaustive) Business Process Management documentation on the pre-selection and selection process 12 November

17 Interim and end-of-stage reports based on the questionnaires filled in by trainees and advisers 6. Requirements 6.1 Methodology The contractor will have a free choice as to the methods used to gather and analyse information and for making the assessment, but must take account of the following: The evaluation must be based on recognised evaluation techniques. The choice and a detailed description of the methodology must form part of the offer submitted. There should be a clear link between the evaluation questions addressed and the corresponding methodology proposed. The evaluation questions can be further elaborated, e.g. by providing operational sub-questions under each question. Considerable emphasis should be placed on the analysis phase of the evaluation. In addressing the evaluation questions, quantitative indicators should be sought and used as far as possible. The contractor must support findings and recommendations by explaining the degree to which these are based on opinion, analysis and objectively verifiable evidence. Where opinion is the main source, the degree of consensus and the steps taken to test the opinion should be given. For the design of the cost-effectiveness assessment, the tenderer should use the results of the "Study on Cost-Effectiveness of Education and Culture Spending Programmes" (Ecorys, 2013) 13 as a basis for their proposal. The tenderer should specify which of the approaches described in the mentioned study they will use or, alternatively, what design they propose for such an assessment. 6.2 Quality assurance The Contractor shall, as a minimum, apply the quality assurance procedures described in the Quality Plan included in their bid for Framework Contract EAC/50/2009. The offer should describe how the Quality Plan will be applied during the implementation of this specific contract. 6.3 Resources The Contractor shall ensure that experts are adequately supported and equipped. In particular, sufficient administrative, secretarial and interpreting resources, as well as junior experts, must be available to enable senior experts to concentrate on their core evaluation tasks November

18 Annex 2 Benchmarking exercise Summary The benchmarking exercise compared the traineeship programme with similar programmes to identify any potential synergies. Desk based research on five traineeship schemes (including three EU schemes) was supplemented by interviews with four of the five institutions and organisations. Key characteristics As a result of an inter-institutional agreement, all paid trainees in the EU s institutions receive compensation amounting to almost 1,100 per month. Arrangements concerning inter alia eligibility and exclusion criteria, working conditions and the duration of traineeships are also aligned across the institutions. Diverging from the Blue Book Traineeship, under the EP and EESC traineeships there is no pre-selection phase or other attempt to ensure the shortlisted candidates are representative of the EU s Member States. Harmonisation between the traineeship schemes The main suggestions interviewees did have for closer alignment centred on the idea of establishing a central portal or single window whereby applicants for traineeships with all EU institutions could apply. Interviewees also highlighted the need for improved job descriptions for trainees across the EU s institutions, with an emphasis of learning and training objectives, coupled with effective monitoring to ensure these objectives are achieved. It was also suggested that regular meetings to share best practice and ways to solve similar challenges could be a way forward to increase harmonisation. Monitoring mechanisms Monitoring and evaluation activities take place to some degree across the EU institutions traineeship schemes. Developing a common approach to monitoring and/ or a common strategy for the dissemination of the feedback collected could help the institutions develop a common strategy to combat shared problems. The benchmarking exercise aimed to compare and assess the complementarity of the traineeship programme with similar programmes and identify any potential synergies. Desk based research into publically available information on five traineeship schemes (three EU traineeships and one each from the Council of Europe and United Nations) was supplemented by semi-structured telephone interviews with representatives of four of the five institutions and organisations The United Nations Internship Programme office did not respond to our requests for information November

19 Interviews conducted Table 1: Overview of interviews conducted European Commission Belen Bernaldo De Quiros Interviewed February, 2014 Head of Unit, DG EAC D4 (Traineeships Office) Luca Tomasi February, 2014 Programme manager, Traineeship Office, DG EAC, Unit D4 Silvia Varela February, 2014 Stage coordinator, DG Translations, Unit R1 Magdalena Blaszkowska February, 2014 Stage coordinator, DG SANCO A5 (Human Resources) Antonio Silva Mendes Director February, 2014 DG EAC Directorate B (Education and vocational training: Coordination of Erasmus +) Maddy Tihon February, 2014 Stage coordinator, DG DEVCO R4 (Human Resources) Silvia Varela February, 2014 Stage coordinator, DG Translation R1 (Traineeships, inter-institutional exchanges, SNEs) Other EU institutions European Parliament (EP) European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) Pierre-Antoine Barthélémy Head of unit for recruitment, DG Personnel Gerardus Nijborg Head of unit for personnel Interviewed July, 2014 July, 2014 Council of the European Tamás Záhony August, 2014 November

20 Union (CoEU) Head of Office, Traineeship Office Other international organisations Council of Europe (CoE) Irena Kazenaite Recruitment and employment management division July, 2014 United Nations (UN) no reply no reply Important observations and analysis from the desk research and interviews are presented below, including a table summarising the key characteristics of the five traineeships we examined. Key characteristics of the traineeship schemes Costs of the traineeship schemes Limited information was available on the budget for the training schemes. The European Parliament (EP) estimated it spends approximately 3,000,000 on an annual basis, amounting to approximately 7,500 for each of its 400 trainees who complete a fivemonth traineeship. The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) spends a total of 295,000 annually (approximately 5,900 per trainee). While the Council of the European Union spends 583,000 annually (approximately 5,830 per trainee). While exact figures were unavailable, the interviewees from these institutions explained that the vast majority of the budget provided financial compensation to the trainees during their traineeships. As a result of an inter-institutional agreement, all paid trainees in the EU s institutions receive compensation amounting to almost 1,100 per month. Arrangements concerning inter alia eligibility and exclusion criteria, working conditions and the duration of traineeships are also aligned across the institutions. Looking beyond the EU schemes, the Council of Europe s (CoE) scheme appears to be considerably less costly to run. The main reason for this is the lack of financial compensation provided to the vast majority of CoE trainees. While the CoE official we interviewed was unable to provide an exact or even estimated figure, she explained that the main cost of running the scheme would be that of two full time equivalent (FTE) staff who support the recruitment of trainees across the CoE s multiple offices. Application and selection process of the traineeship schemes While the application processes for the other EU institutions traineeship schemes broadly mirror that of the Blue Book traineeship (applicants complete an online application form giving details inter alia of their educational achievements, professional experience and motivation), the main divergence is the absence of a pre-selection procedure in all cases but the Council of the EU. The EP official we interviewed explained that the absence of a pre-selection stage was the result of a lack of financial resources rather than a positive decision against pre-screening candidates to produce a representative sample in the same vein as the EC s Blue Book. November

21 The EESC, on the other hand, felt their services were able to cope with the smaller number of applications (approximately 5,000) they receive. Applications for the EESC scheme are made available to all the institution s units via a digital database which can be searched using specific fields. Criteria for the allocation of trainees to different departments / units In the case of the EP, EESC and the CoE, once the applications received are made available to the respective institutions, the interviewees were unable to explain the basis on which advisors within these units select candidates. It was broadly assumed that the candidates chosen are the best fit for a particular unit s current priorities (perhaps because of specific educational or professional experience or language skills). This approach was not felt to betray a lack of transparency, and rather reflected the way employers select staff to meet their own needs (including the means by which the institutions select their own permanent staff) in the real world. The process at the Council of the EU At the Council of the EU, the online application process is outsourced and managed by EPSO. Once the deadline has passed, the Council is given access to the database of candidates and the Council services work through the applications to find suitable candidates (they are able to search using specific fields). They make a pre-selection of around four times the quantity which will eventually be taken. The traineeship office conducts the final selection. The CoEU official we interviewed emphasised that this process is being reviewed. The idea being that it could be more efficient and effective if the traineeship office undertook the pre-selection and the services carried out the final selection. November

22 Table 2: Summary of key characteristics Council of the European Union (CoEU) European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) European Parliament (EP) Council of Europe (CoE) United Nations (UN) Secretariat Concerns Paid Traineeship not traineeships undertaken as a compulsory part of studies/ traineeships for national officials Concerns Long-term traineeship not short-term traineeship or traineeships for holders of grants awarded by outside public bodies Concerns graduate traineeships which are known as Robert Schuman traineeships. Note that there are 2 options, the general option and the journalism option not training placements/conference interpretations and translation traineeships/ad hoc traineeships Concerns unpaid traineeship, minimum of three and maximum of five months. Concerns unpaid traineeship, minimum of three and maximum of six months. Aims of the schemes to give a general idea of the objectives and problems of European integration to provide them with practical knowledge of the working of the departments of the General Secretariat of the Council to offer them personal experience thanks to the contacts made in the course of their everyday work to enable them to further and put into practice the knowledge they have acquired during acquire practical knowledge about how the EESC s various departments operate supplement and apply knowledge and skills acquired during their studies To enable trainees to supplement the knowledge which they acquired during their studies and to familiarize themselves with the activities of the European Union and, in particular, the European Parliament learn about EESC s role and activities at interinstitutional level, as well as relations with EU Member and non-member states to enable trainees to gain valuable experience in a complex multicultural and stimulating work environment for the CoE benefit from the enthusiasm, motivation and skills that new graduates bring to give interns a first-hand impression of the day-to-day working environment of the United Nations To offer interns a real chance to work with our people. As part of our team, working directly with outstanding and inspiring career professionals and senior management, you will be exposed to high-profile November

23 Council of the European Union (CoEU) European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) European Parliament (EP) Council of Europe (CoE) United Nations (UN) Secretariat their studies or professional careers and/or work gain experience in a multicultural, multilingual and multi-ethnic professional environment conferences, participate in meetings, and contribute to analytical work as well as organizational policy of the United Nations To offer interns an increasing level of responsibility: Initially interns take on the amount of responsibility they can shoulder; the potential for growth, however, is yours to develop Size of trainee intake/number of applicants Approx. 100 pa / 5,000 applicants Approx. 50 pa / 5,000 applicants (the number of trainees is set by the PER unit in line with both the budgetary resources available and the office space available) Approx. 400 pa / 10,000 applicants Approx. 500 pa (across all CoE offices) / approx. 1,000 applicants centrally (no information available on number of applicants who apply directly to CoE services) No information available Trainee profiles and representativen ess Nationals of Member States of the European Union who have completed at least the first cycle of a course of university studies attested by a degree certificate. Aimed at young university graduates who, in the course of their studies or in some other connection, have already acquired either Trainees must: (a) be nationals of a Member State of the European Union or of an applicant country; (up to 10% of the total Nationality of one of the Council of Europe member states; Have a bachelor's degree or equivalent (a diploma for the first Enrolled in a Master's or in a Ph.D. programme, or in the final year of a Bachelor s programme; or within one year after graduation from a November

24 Council of the European Union (CoEU) European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) European Parliament (EP) Council of Europe (CoE) United Nations (UN) Secretariat Thorough knowledge of EN/FR (no application shall be accepted from any person who has already received >8 weeks' in-service training in any department of a European institution or body or an agency or an office of the European Communities, whether paid or otherwise. The same shall apply to any application from a person who is or has been an adviser's assistant or assistant to a Member of the European Parliament, or a consultant, a researcher, a temporary staff member, a seconded national expert, a contract, auxiliary or interim staff member of any institution, agency or representative office of the European Communities. Article 6 (4) of Decision No 118/07) Aim to cover as wide a geographical coverage as possible; as well as a the best possible balance between men and women Preference will be given to a qualification in the areas where the EECS works or a good knowledge of the socio-occupational organisation 15 operating in the EU. University graduates who have completed at least three years of studies Open to candidates who are nationals of Member States and to a certain number of university graduates from non-eu countries Exclusion criteria apply (no application shall be accepted from any person who has already completed >6 weeks' paid traineeship with any European institution, agency or body. The same applies to applications from people who a) are number of traineeships may be offered to third nationals) (b) be aged 18 or over on the traineeship starting date; (c) have a thorough knowledge of one of the official languages of the European Union; (d) not have been awarded any other traineeship or have been in paid employment for more than four consecutive weeks at the expense of the European Union budget; (e) for trainees in the field of childcare, a declaration proving no criminal record, issued in the last year at their most recent place of residence. A declaration specifically issued to individuals having contact with children is required if such a document exists in the cycle of higher education as defined in the Bologna Declaration). Have a desire to acquire practical experience and knowledge of the functioning and activities of the Council of Europe; Have a very good knowledge of one of the two Council of Europe official languages (EN/FR) together with good drafting ability. Good knowledge of the other official language is appreciated Exclusion criteria: no individual may undertake more than one traineeship in the organisation Bachelor s, Master s or Ph.D. programme; Excellent command of English or French; Exclusion criteria: Neither a child or a sibling of a United Nations Secretariat staff member 15 Socio-occupational organisation is a term referred to in the Decision No 115/14 A, governing the EESC traineeship. URL: November

25 Council of the European Union (CoEU) European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) European Parliament (EP) Council of Europe (CoE) United Nations (UN) Secretariat those who: have completed or started an academic study of European integration in the framework of a university dissertation or research work or a scientific publication hold or have held a post in the private or public sector dealing with the activities of the European Union. Article 7 (1) serving or have served as an assistant to a member of the EP or b) are working or have worked as a consultant on a research assignment, or as a temporary, contract or agency staff member at an EU institution, agency or representative office) country in question. Exclusion criteria: applicants must not have been awarded any other traineeship or have been in paid employment for more than four consecutive weeks at the expense of the European Union budget Length of the traineeship 5 months (in exceptional circumstance this may be reduced to 3 months; and may be extendable to 6 months although any extension above 5 months will be unpaid) 5 months (can be extendable by a maximum of 1 month subject to budgetary resources and office space) 5 months (no extension possible) 8 weeks to 5 months From 2 to 6 months Remuneration The salary is equal to 25% of the basic salary of an official at grade AD5, step 1 (it is currently set at EUR 1,087 monthly but is reviewed regularly) 25% of the basic salary of an official at grade AD5, step 1 (applying on day 1 of the internship) i.e. EUR monthly A scholarship which is the equivalent of ¼ of the basic salary of an official in grade AD5, step 4 16 which was EUR in For 2013 trainees may receive an allowance of 300 EUR pcm Not remunerated (with the exception of approximately 10% of trainees who receive ad hoc remuneration at the discretion of their unit) Not remunerated 16 Under article 24 in the, Internal Rules Governing Traineeships And Study Visits In The Secretariat Of The European Parliament, it states that remuneration is based on ¼ of the basic salary of an official in grade AD5, step 4. This differs from comparable institutions that provide remuneration in line with ¼ of the basic salary of an official at grade AD5, step 1. Url: November