Changes from adopted text to adopted text

Removed109. Highlights that geographical balance is still a challenge for several agencies for which considerable percentages of their overall staff are nationals of the Member State where the agencies are located;

Removed110. Acknowledges that attracting talent and ensuring a geographically diverse work force are linked to agencies’ individual specificities (e.g. location, infrastructure, schooling, policy area), as well as to external limiting factors (e.g. competition with the private sector, job uncertainty due to short term contracts, low correction coefficients); notes with appreciation from the EUAN’s follow-up report to the discharge for 2021, the actions taken by the EUAN to remedy the lack of attractiveness and improve the representativeness of the agencies’ staff in terms of age, gender and geographical origin;

Removed111. Recalls that the agencies located in countries with relatively low correction coefficient are facing continuous challenges in attracting skilled and geographically diverse staff; calls on the Commission to analyse together with the respective Member State this matter and consider the use of economic incentives to help mitigate the problem; recalls, moreover, that the correction coefficient puts the general principle of equal treatment into practice;

Removed112. Highlights that some Agencies make extensive use of external consultants, mainly in the ICT area but also in the areas of their core business, which make up significant parts of their operational budget (e.g. ACER, ETF, ELA, etc.); calls on all the agencies to prioritise permanent staff over external consultants and contractual staff in order to guarantee high quality working conditions and to prevent the loss of knowledge and experience; calls, moreover, on the agencies to prevent job uncertainty due to short term contracts and prioritise long-term employment; appeals, in this regard, for flexibility for agencies to convert seconded national expert (SNE) posts into temporary agent posts, ensuring expertise retention, operational functionality and business continuity; further insists on avoiding the externalisation of tasks to consultancies when know-how is available in-house;

Removed113. Recognises the progress made within the agencies towards gender balance among their staff; calls for intensified efforts to ensure gender balance at the senior management level and to integrate gender equality systematically into all agency policies, procedures and activities;

Removed114. Calls on Agencies to set clear targets and timetables to achieve gender balance and geographical diversity in senior management and decision-making bodies, and to systematically report on progress;

Removed115. Notes that gender distribution has improved in 2023 compared to 2022 at the level of senior and middle management and amongst the management board members ; notes that the gender balance reported for staff overall did not change; encourages ACER, BEREC Office, Cedefop, ECDC, ECHA, EFSA, EIOPA, EMCDDA, EMSA, ENISA, ERA, eu-LISA, ELA, Europol, EUAA, EUSPA and Frontex to support women in applying for management positions; reiterates its calls on the Commission and Member States to observe gender balance when nominating and appointing members of the management or administrative boards; recalls the ambition of the agencies to align with the Commission to reach a gender balance of 50 % at all levels of its management by the end of 2025; calls on the agencies to keep taking these aspects into consideration with regard to all future recruitment of staff and to work towards the further improvement of gender balance at senior management level;

Removed116. Urges decentralised agencies to strengthen gender equality policies at all levels, ensuring equal opportunities in recruitment, career progression and working conditions for all staff; encourages all agencies to adopt and implement robust diversity and inclusion strategies that promote fairness and balance, ensuring equal opportunities and representation of women and minorities in leadership positions; calls on agencies to develop comprehensive strategies to assess progress and identify areas for improvement; recalls that the Parliament will assess compliance with these principles in the annual discharge process;

Removed117. Notes that all agencies have put in place measures to improve staff’s well-being at work and work-life balance; notes that the number and impact of such measures varies significantly from one agency to another and that no common framework of reference across agencies appears to exist; calls on the EUAN to coordinate efforts for the development of a common framework of reference in this this regard; notes with satisfaction that a large majority of agencies have put measures for integration of persons with disabilities in place; encourages the agencies to maintain good practices of staff well-being, inclusion and integration of persons with disabilities and to continue to address work-life balance, as well as lifelong learning and career development; stresses the importance of intensifying efforts to achieve gender and geographical balance among institutional staff and in senior management positions; underlines the useful role that exchanges of best practice can play in the field of staff management; invites the agencies to provide relevant and regular training to their staff;

Removed118. Encourages all agencies to implement a policy for safeguarding personal dignity and preventing psychological and sexual harassment and to participate in the interagency task force of confidential counsellors; calls, in this regard, for the introduction of compulsory preventive anti-harassment training to be followed by employees of EU agencies; notes, with concern that, according to the replies to the standard questionnaire, ENISA communicated to the discharge authority that two administrative inquiries related to alleged harassment were open in 2023; it informed, moreover, that one of them was closed in 2024 after receiving a final report from OLAF; expects the Agency to thoroughly follow up on the ongoing cases, as well as to introduce strong measures to prevent any future similar cases; calls on the agencies to carry out regular reporting, via the follow-up report, on progress in this area;

Removed119. Notes that a perceived conflict of interest can constitute a reputational risk to the agency and should be addressed even if it turns out to be unsubstantiated;

Removed120. Urges all Agencies to further strengthen conflict of interest prevention and management, including systematic declarations of interests by senior management, external experts, and management board members, published in a proactive and accessible manner;

Removed121. Underlines the importance of safeguarding the independence of EU agencies from undue industry influence to maintain public trust in their decision-making; expresses concern over regulatory shortcomings and potential conflicts of interest within certain agencies; highlights issues related to close ties to industry and reports of undue influence, particularly through revolving doors between public institutions and private companies; stresses the need for greater transparency, stronger oversight mechanisms and a firm commitment to prioritising public health and safety over financial interests;

Removed122. Notes that, for 2023, no major cases of conflict of interest were reported by the Court with the exception of Frontex and the EMCDDA;

Removed123. Considers that currently, most agencies have robust and comprehensive procedures in place to raise awareness and prevent conflicts of interest, giving the required assurance of the independence of their staff members to stakeholders and the public;

Removed124. Notes with satisfaction the strong collaboration with the Justice and Home Affairs Agencies, notably the conclusion of a new working arrangement with European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), the opening of 15 new cases where Eurojust supported the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) as well as the cooperation on 42 cases with the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) stresses that Eurojust and Europol launched a pilot project for the systematic and structural exchange of data for link detection purposes, which will be reviewed in the first half of 2024; welcomes the Eurojust-OLAF Action Plan 2022-2023 to fight crimes affecting the European Union’s financial interests;

RemovedInternal control

Removed125. Notes with concern the Court’s findings in the area of management and control systems affecting 9 agencies, namely EMA, Europol, EUSPA, Eurofound, EIT, Eurojust ACER, ENISA and EEA;

Removed126. Highlights that in the case of Europol and EIT, two out of three observations resulted in irregular payments in 2023;

Removed127. Recalls that the Court found in 2022 that Europol had irregularly reimbursed VAT through grants to public authorities by considering it eligible cost and that in 2023 reimbursement for this concept totalled EUR 279 900; welcomes Europol’s decision to no longer consider VAT as an eligible cost for new operational grants;

Removed128. Notes that in the case of EIT, one of the observations forms the basis for a qualified opinion on the legality and regularity of the payments underlying the accounts which has been described under heading ‘Overview of the audit results’ of this resolution;

Removed129. Is concerned that the Court’s second observation on the EIT refers to the agency’s move to a multi-annual grant agreement structure, but procedures and guidelines for ex post checks of grant payments have not been updated to account for the implications; welcomes that EIT is already in the process of updating its ex-post control mechanism to address these implications;

Removed130. Is aware that during the first quarter of 2023, EMA carried out a data migration but did not respect the deadlines for 48 veterinary inspections, resulting in significant invoice delays not reported in the register of exceptions and wrongly booked revenue; notes that this contravenes EMA’s financial regulation and reveals a weakness in its management and control systems; takes note of EMA’s aim to improve the process in the context of implementing the New Fee Regulation;

Removed131. Notes that Eurofound made a payment of EUR 38 600, linked to a contract for assessing the quality of survey data, without collecting some key supporting documents relating to the contractual deliverables;

Removed132. Notes that, in 2023, Eurojust observed an increase in non-standard transactions classified as exceptions or non-compliance events, with the number growing from 43 to 71 and the total amount concerned rising from EUR 294 000 to EUR 566 400 compared with 2022; acknowledges the Eurojust response to the observation attributing the majority of the total non-compliance events in 2023 to a single event for a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) grant; takes note that according to Agency, the increase is primarily due to insufficient human resources and internal process inefficiencies and welcomes that Eurojust has addressed the issue by revising the current procedure for registering and reporting non-compliance events in 2024;

Removed133. Notes that EUSPA’s executive director had confirmed an early start to monitoring activities before the signing of a grant agreement, resulting in activities carried out without a budgetary commitment; highlights that this was not reported in the exceptions register or annual activity report, which contravenes the Financial Regulation; notes that EUSPA argue that there was no need to register the early start of activities without a budgetary commitment in the Exceptions Register but they acknowledge that the case was not reported in the annual activity report as required;

Removed134. Takes note of ACER’s appointment of a new accounting officer, who was also the team leader of the budget, finance and procurement department, in violation of ACER’s financial regulation requiring a segregation of duties for authorising officers and accounting officers; is aware that as from 1 May 2024 a reorganisation took place and that the team leader of the Budget, Finance and Procurement team has been released from her team leadership duties;

Removed135. Notes that in September 2023, ENISA’s Executive Director allowed 15 interim staff to assume roles in the financial circuit without prior approval, contravening regulations; is aware that according to the agency reply, ENISA has been using interim agents and SNEs due to business needs and resource shortages and will seek to derogate from financial rules if the resource shortage persists;

Removed136. Notes furthermore that ENISA’s Accounting Officer was also appointed as the Internal Control Coordinator, contrary to regulations stipulating segregation of duties; takes note of ENISA’s acknowledgement of the observation, but considers the roles of Internal Control Coordinator and Accounting Officer not necessarily incompatible since the Authorising Officer had not delegated any powers to the Internal Control Coordinator; welcomes that ENISA will clarify the roles and responsibilities of the Internal Control Coordinator in its internal processes; calls for informing the European Parliament on the progress in question before 30 June 2025;

Removed137. Observes that EEA approved lump-sum grant payments without being able to show how the amount was calculated, posing a risk that it was not commensurate with the services provided; takes note that the EEA considers the written decision on the lump-sum payment to be fully compliant with the relevant clauses of the Financial Regulation; stresses that the Agency will ensure that lump sum amounts are properly determined and documented for cases where costs are declared by one-person company/self-employed partner in the ETCs (European Topic Centres) ;

Removed138. Takes note that EEA outsourced ex ante financial checks to an external contractor and that the Court found shortcomings in the control arrangements; notes that in response, the EEA acknowledged the Court’s observation and will update the procedures for ex-ante checks to ensure that this risk is addressed;

Removed139. Calls on the agencies to promptly and systematically implement the Court’s observations and take concrete corrective measures to address identified weaknesses in internal control framework; urges the establishment of stricter accountability measures, ensuring that any persistent deficiencies lead to targeted corrective actions and consequences for repeated non-compliance;

RemovedCybersecurity, ethics and transparency

Removed140. Draws attention to the need to take all necessary security measures to safeguard the online integrity of processed information, insists on increasing agencies’ resilience to cyberattacks or infiltration attempts particularly originating from Russia or any other third country; underlines that joint procurement in this field between agencies could result in reduced financial costs and improved results;

Removed141. Welcomes FRA’s cooperation with the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) on safeguarding privacy and data protection throughout the development and implementation of cybersecurity initiatives and with eu-LISA on guaranteeing that the design and use of IT systems adheres to fundamental rights standards;

Removed142. Notes that decentralised agencies of the European Union have established various mechanisms to address transparency and lobbying activities in their respective policy fields; underlines, however, that, according to the Court, agencies are not always successful in achieving the satisfactory levels of transparency and value for money in tenders with complex procurement rules and procedures ; notes with concern the remaining issues with transparency which in turn affect coherency, effectiveness and above all, accountability;

Removed143. Highlights the positive progress in implementing Fundamental Rights targets, including the ongoing execution of the Fundamental Rights Action Plan and the independent evaluation of the Agency’s compliance with the Fundamental Rights Framework, in line with the EBCG Regulation; welcomes the proactive follow-up by Frontex on complaints related to fundamental rights, with the majority being dismissed for non-admissibility; welcomes Frontex’s reinforced commitment to transparency and accountability;

Removed144. Emphasises that, for the sake of full clarity and transparency and in line with Court’s observation, agencies that collect own revenue should disclose that same information in an easy-to-understand way in their final annual accounts, consolidated annual activity reports and single programming documents, since these reports serve different purposes;

Removed145. Notes, furthermore, that in 2023 Frontex refused to grant public access to a report by its Fundamental Rights Officer concerning a Frontex operation in Albania (case 652/2023/VB), leading to an Ombudsman inquiry; the Ombudsman considered that Frontex should have given access to some parts of the report and welcomes that Frontex accepted the Ombudsman’s proposal for a solution;

Removed146. Regrets that the application of the Transparency Register to outside contacts is not mandatory for the decentralised agencies; notes, however, that according to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 May 2021 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on a mandatory transparency register, the agencies have the possibility to use the Transparency Register on a voluntary basis;

Removed147. Encourages all agencies to make use of this voluntary possibility and follow the example of eu-LISA and Frontex which are the only two agencies that are requiring third parties’ outside contacts to register in the Transparency Register;

Removed148. Highlights that the use of the Transparency Register is promoted and encouraged by the signatories of the Interinstitutional Agreement; recalls the strong call for all decentralised agencies to make full use of the register;

Removed149. Notes that eu-LISA focused on cybersecurity and combating threats in the cyber domain, in particular making necessary preparations for obligations stemming from the new Union regulations on information security and cybersecurity; highlights that eu-LISA operates and maintains a security monitoring platform, cybersecurity incident plan, response playbooks and 24/7 stand-by duty arrangements to ensure timely identification of and response to cyber threats; welcomes the role of eu-LISA in supporting inter-agency cybersecurity exercises in cooperation with the JHA Agencies Network (JHAAN) ; underlines the importance of decentralised agencies having the full capability to defend themselves against cyberattacks; encourages closer cooperation between eu-LISA and the other agencies to build a more resilient, collective response against cybercrime; stresses, in this regard, the importance of strengthening cybersecurity measures across all agencies, in light of the increasing risks of cyber threats and data breaches; calls for additional investments in secure IT infrastructure and cybersecurity training for the agency’s personnel; urges agencies to submit an annual cybersecurity risk assessment report to the Parliament and the Court;

Removed150. Urges Frontex to ensure, without further delay, the full implementation of all the recommendations from European audit and scrutiny bodies, particularly OLAF and those from the European Parliament’s Frontex Scrutiny Working Group, the European Ombudsman, the Court and the Frontex Working Group on Fundamental Rights and Legal Operational Aspects of Operations (WG FRaLO);

Removed151. Notes that all agencies have a whistle-blower policy in place; calls on all the agencies to ensure they have specific, safe and effective reporting channels in place in line with the relevant requirements of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council on whistleblowing;

Removed152. Advocates for the systematic inclusion of AI-specific risk assessments in internal audits of agencies, ensuring compliance with the Union’s ethical guidelines and cybersecurity standards; calls for an expended mandate of ENISA to include specific oversight of risks related to the use of artificial intelligence within EU agencies;

RemovedSustainability, environmental impact and social inclusion

Removed153. Notes that overall, 11 of the 33 EU agencies (33 %) have already implemented the EU Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS); takes positive note of the proactive steps being undertaken by several agencies in their pursuit of obtaining EMAS certification in the near future ; notes that some of the agencies with a larger budget have not communicated their plans to implement EMAS in the short term; takes note that EASA is currently assessing instruments for systematic and continuous environmental performance improvements, including EMAS and will provide an update to the discharge authority later this year;

Removed154. Recalls that the 2022 discharge (horizontal) report pointed to 14 agencies still not having the corporate sustainability plans in place; notes that for the 2023 financial year Court’s report did not provide updated figures on the issue; reiterates the importance of all agencies having the corporate sustainability plans in place; urges agencies to report to the Commission about the energy performance of their buildings;

Removed155. Encourages the Court to update on a regular basis the figures on the corporate sustainable plans situation in the agencies;

Removed156. Notes that in the financial year 2023 the agencies demonstrated a growing commitment to environmental and sustainability goals; notes that the European Environment Agency (EEA) played a pivotal role in monitoring and reporting on climate change and environmental performance across the Union; notes that agencies such as CINEA and EEA spearheaded the implementation of sustainability-related programs, contributing to EU-wide initiatives aimed at reducing carbon footprint and promoting renewable energy;

Removed157. Notes with concern that, despite the general trend of progress, some agencies faced difficulties integrating sustainability into their corporate strategies due to procedural inefficiencies and insufficient resource allocation; stresses therefore the need for a more cohesive and actionable framework to ensure long-term sustainability in agency operations;

RemovedFollow up of previous years’ observations raised by the Court

Removed158. Notes that ‘observations’ in the agencies’ specific annual reports are in fact ‘not timed recommendations’ by the Court; notes that the Court annually follows-up on those observations by assessing their status as ‘open’ or ‘closed’;

Removed159. Notes that out of a total of 116 observations made by the Court corresponding to previous years of the agencies that are part of this resolution, a total of 58 have been closed during 2023, with a total of 53 still open and five partially closed; observes that the number of ongoing observations varies among the agencies, with some having no open observations, as is the case for BEREC Office, EBA, ECHA, EEA,EMSA, ENISA, EU-OSHA, EUSPA and Eurofound, while the highest number of open observations is for eu-LISA, Frontex and ELA with eight, seven and five observations respectively; requests these agencies to take proactive measures to resolve these open issues;

Removed160. Takes note that six out of the 53 open observations refer to a high level of carryovers (ACER, ELA, EFCA, eu-LISA, FRA, Frontex); is concerned that in the case of Frontex, this observation remains open since 2018;

Removed161. Notes that ERA has an open observation since 2018 regarding the collection of fees and charges for certification tasks, which began in 2019; notes that according to the regulation the specific needs of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) should be considered and ERA is expected to implement effective controls to verify whether applicants qualify as SMEs; calls on the agency to report back to the discharge authority on the current status of this issue and to provide reasons for its continued open status;

Removed162. Notes that EASA has accumulated more than EUR 50 million surplus from industry-financed activities over the years, for which there is no provision in its founding regulation; asks the Commission to propose a solution at legislative level to address this issue;

Removed163. Notes that ACER had been using interim workers performing long-term tasks to make up for a lack of directly employed staff members since 2019; calls on the Commission to provide additional statutorily staff posts;

Removed164. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the agencies subject to this discharge procedure, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).