Implementing decision 2013/776 - 2013/776/EU: Commission Implementing Decision of 18 December 2013 establishing the ‘Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency’ - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
Contents
official title
2013/776/EU: Commission Implementing Decision of 18 December 2013 establishing the ‘Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency’ and repealing Decision 2009/336/EC| Legal instrument | implementing decision |
|---|---|
| Number legal act | Implementing decision 2013/776 |
| CELEX number i | 32013D0776 |
| Document | 18-12-2013 |
|---|---|
| Publication in Official Journal | 19-12-2013; OJ L 343 p. 46-53 |
| Effect | 20-12-2013; Entry into force Date pub. +1 See Art 8 01-01-2014; Application See Art 8 |
| End of validity | 31-03-2021; Repealed by 32021D0173 |
19.12.2013 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 343/46 |
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION
of 18 December 2013
establishing the ‘Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency’ and repealing Decision 2009/336/EC
(2013/776/EU)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 of 19 December 2002 laying down the statute for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programmes (1), and in particular Article 3 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) |
Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 empowers the Commission to delegate powers to the executive agencies to implement all or part of a Union programme or project, on its behalf and under its responsibility, in accordance with that Regulation. |
(2) |
The purpose of entrusting the executive agencies with programme implementation tasks is to enable the Commission to focus on its core activities and functions which cannot be outsourced, without relinquishing control over, and ultimate responsibility for, activities managed by those executive agencies. |
(3) |
The delegation of tasks related to programme implementation to an executive agency requires a clear separation between the programming stages involving a large measure of discretion in making choices driven by policy considerations, this being carried out by the Commission, and programme implementation, which should be entrusted to the executive agency. |
(4) |
By Decision 2005/56/EC (2), the Commission created the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (hereinafter referred to as the Agency) and entrusted it with the management of Community actions in the field of education, audiovisual and culture. |
(5) |
The Commission amended the Agency’s mandate on several occasions, extending it to cover the management of new projects and programmes in the field of education, audiovisual, citizenship and youth and subsequently replaced Decision 2005/56/EC by Commission Decision 2009/336/EC (3). |
(6) |
In its Communication of 29 June 2011‘A budget for Europe 2020’ (4), the Commission proposed to use the option of more extensive recourse to existing executive agencies for the implementation of Union programmes in the next multiannual financial framework. |
(7) |
The Agency has demonstrated a high level technical and financial expertise in the management of Union programmes. Satisfaction surveys conducted as part of the first and second interim evaluations of EACEA (2009 and 2013) show that beneficiaries and other stakeholders believe that EACEA delivers a better quality of service as compared to previous arrangements (Technical Assistance Office). EACEA is able to attract and retain highly qualified personnel, which in turn provides staffing stability. The Agency continuously streamlines its internal operations to improve its efficiency and seeks to standardise approaches across programmes. It benefits from its status as a public body specifically created to manage programmes in the area of education, audiovisual and culture and this focus enhances the visibility of the EU programmes among stakeholders and the general public. The existence of a single entity managing a number of complementary programmes generates synergy effects in terms of visibility of EU action to the mutual benefit of all programmes. The ex-post control error rates are low for EACEA and well below the limit of 2 %. The second interim evaluation notes a steady improvement in EACEA’s technical and financial expertise which in turn is reflected in a general improvement in the Agency’s performance as observed in its KPIs. |
(8) |
In terms of the cost comparison with the ‘in-house option’, the cost-benefit analysis carried out in... |
More
This text has been adopted from EUR-Lex.
This dossier is compiled each night drawing from aforementioned sources through automated processes. We have invested a great deal in optimising the programming underlying these processes. However, we cannot guarantee the sources we draw our information from nor the resulting dossier are without fault.
This page is also available in a full version containing the summary of legislation, de geconsolideerde versie, the legal context, de Europese rechtsgrond, other dossiers related to the dossier at hand, the related cases of the European Court of Justice and finally consultations relevant to the dossier at hand.
The full version is available for registered users of the EU Monitor by ANP and PDC Informatie Architectuur.
The EU Monitor enables its users to keep track of the European process of lawmaking, focusing on the relevant dossiers. It automatically signals developments in your chosen topics of interest. Apologies to unregistered users, we can no longer add new users.This service will discontinue in the near future.