|
CERTIFICATION PROCEDURE, 2010 EXERCISE:
Draft list of admitted applicants and
draft list of pre-selected applicants
The certification procedure allows officials, members of the Assistants'
function group (AST), in grades 5 upwards, to be appointed to a job in
the Administrator's function group (AD) and become members of the AD
function group.
Following the call for applications for the 2010 exercise of the
certification procedure, issued by means of Administrative Notice
N°
60-2010, 636 signed applications were registered. The officials who
applied are invited to read what follows.
IMPORTANT WARNINGS TO APPLICANTS
- Candidates who contest their non-admission/non-pre-selection
have the possibility to launch an appeal. Following the analysis
of the appeals, the number of admitted candidates as well as the
draft rankings might be MODIFIED.
- The annexed lists are therefore PROVISIONAL and are
published subject to completion of the appeals' analysis
mentioned above.
|
- DRAFT LIST OF ADMITTED APPLICANTS
The draft list of 592 officials whose applications are considered as
admitted is given in annex 1.
The names of the officials in grades 5 upwards of the Assistants'
function group who, on the date of publication of the call for
applications, were appointed to a permanent post at the Commission
and were in active employment, on parental leave, on family leave or
seconded in the interests of the service and who applied for the
2010 certification exercise are on the draft list of admitted
applicants provided they meet each of the two following criteria:
- As at 16 January 2011, have acquired a minimum of 3 years
seniority in the AST career with no restriction and in grade
AST5 or above.
- Have the potential required to take on the functions of an
administrator positively assessed in at least 1 of the 2 lastest
annual evaluation reports established to cover the periods
between 2006 and 2009.
- THE DRAFT LIST OF PRE-SELECTED APPLICANTS
All admitted applicants were granted points and two rankings were
established as follows.
2.1. Points according to merit
- The result of the 6 last appraisal exercises – namely the
exercises covering the years 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 2008 and
2009 – was taken into account, excluding the appraisal reports
covering periods when the official was in the C or D career
path.
- All the merit marks obtained in the 4 appraisal exercises
covering the years 2004 to 2007 were taken into account,
applying a pro rata according to the period covered by any
partial report. Probation reports were not be taken into
account.
- Regarding the years 2008 and 2009, only the annual appraisal
reports were taken into account. These reports mention a
performance level.
On the basis of the above, 0 to 24 points according to merit
were awarded to admitted candidates as follows:
- An average of the 3 best merit marks obtained for the 4
appraisal exercises covering the years 2004 to 2007 was
calculated. If a candidate only had 2 merit marks for the 4
appraisal exercises, calculation of the average of these 2
marks. If a candidate only had 1 merit mark for the 4 appraisal
exercise, taking into account of this mark.
- A number of points was added according to the performance
levels mentioned in the annual appraisal reports covering the
years 2008 and 2009:
|
Points
allocated to the candidate
>
(and added to the
average of the 3 best merit marks 2004-2007) |
Performance
level
>
obtained for 2009 |
|
Level IA |
Level IB |
Level II |
Level III |
Level IV |
|
Performance
level
>
obtained for 2008 |
Level IA |
4,00 |
3,75 |
3,50 |
2,50 |
2,00 |
|
Level IB |
3,75 |
3,50 |
3,25 |
2,25 |
1,75 |
|
Level II |
3,50 |
3,25 |
3,00 |
2,00 |
1,50 |
|
Level III |
2,50 |
2,25 |
2,00 |
1,00 |
0,50 |
|
Level IV |
2,00 |
1,75 |
1,50 |
0,50 |
0,00 |
- If a candidate only had 1 of these 2 annual appraisal
reports, the number of points added is as follows:
Performance
level obtained in the 2008 or 2009 annual appraisal
report
(in the absence of 1 of the 2 annual reports)
|
Points
allocated to the candidate
(and added to the average of the 3 best merit
marks 2004-2007) |
| Level IA |
4,0 |
| Level IB |
3,5 |
| Level II |
3,0 |
| Level III
|
1,0 |
| Level IV |
0,0 |
- If a candidate did not have any of these 2 annual appraisal
reports, only the average of the 3 best merit marks covering the
years 2004 to 2007 was taken into account (with a maximum of 20
points instead of 24 points).
2.2. Points according to the level of education
The admitted candidates were awarded 0 to 8 points according to
their level of education – as demonstrated by
qualifications/diplomas officially recognised by the Member
state or the third country in which they were issued – as
follows:
| Highest level of education of the candidate |
Points |
| a) |
Primary education |
0 |
| b) |
Secondary education (not giving access to higher education) |
| c) |
Secondary education (giving access to higher education) |
2 |
| d) |
Higher education (higher non-university degree or short
university cycle of a legal duration of at least 2 years) |
4 |
| e) |
University level education of a legal duration of at least 3
years |
6 |
| f) |
University level education of a legal duration of at least 4
years |
8 |
| g) |
University level education – third stage |
A candidate was granted points corresponding to the highest
education level he/she reached – and not corresponding to the
number of diplomas obtained (only one allocation of points, even
in case multiple diplomas).
2.3. Points according to the recent professional experience
acquired in the institutions in the 17 fields where the
Commission has identified needs
0 to 15 points were granted as follows to the admitted
candidates who acquired, over the last 10 years, a professional
experience within the institutions in at least one of the 17
areas of needs1:
A maximum of 8 years of professional experience acquired over
the last 10 years – that is between 1 January 2001 and 31
December 2010 – was taken into account as follows:
- 2 points were awarded for every full year of professional
experience acquired between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2010
– with a maximum allocation of 12 points for this period of 6
years of recent professional experience.
- 1,5 point was awarded for every full year of professional
experience acquired between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2004
– with a maximum allocation of 3 points for this period of 2
years of older professional experience.
- Career break(s) between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2010
could be compensated for by professional experience between 1
January 2001 and 31 December 2002. 1,5 point was awarded for
every full year – with a maximum allocation of 3 points for this
period of 2 years of older professional experience.
- Only 8 years of professional experience over the 10 last years
were taken into account for a maximum allocation of 15 points.
Candidates with a professional experience in the areas of need
over the 10 last years were not granted more than 15 points.
2.4. Two scores for each admitted candidate
Each candidate admitted to the 2010 certification exercise was
awarded two scores on the basis of the points defined above and
of the following weighting:
| SCORE 1
|
Combining the points granted for merit (with a weighting
of 60%) and the points granted for the recent professional
experience in the 17 areas of need (with a weighting of 40%) |
| SCORE 2
|
Combining the points granted for merit (with a weighting
of 60%) and the points granted for the level of education
demonstrated by an officially recognised qualification/diploma
(with a weighting of 40%) |
a) Points according to the professional experience 0 à 4
points* (a + b)
|
a) Points according
to the professional experience |
à0
à 4 points* |
(a + b)
à Score 1
0 à 10
points* |
|
|
Points* on a maximum
of 15 points |
Weighting of 40%:
(points obtained /
1,5) x 40% |
|
b) Points according
to merit |
à0
à 6 points* |
|
|
Points* on a maximum
of 24 points |
Weighting of 60%:
(points obtained /
2,4) x 60% |
|
|
Points* on a maximum
of 20 points (in case of absence of 2008 & 2009 annual appraisal
reports) |
Weighting of 60%:
(points obtained /
2,0) x 60% |
(c + b)
à
Score 2
0 à 10
points* |
|
c) Points according
to the level of education |
à0
à 4 points* |
| |
Points on a maximum
of 8 points |
Weighting of 40%:
(points obtained /
0,8) x 40% |
| (*) Number of points
rounded up to 2 decimal places. |
2.5. Two lists established
Two provisional ranking were established as follows:
| LIST 1 |
Ranking of the admitted candidates according to scores 1
(combining points granted for merit and points granted for
recent professional experience in the 17 areas of need) |
| LIST 2 |
Ranking of the admitted candidates according to scores 2
(combining the points granted for merit and points granted for
the level of education) |
2.6. Number and list of provisionally pre-selected candidates
In view of pre-selecting a minimum of 220 candidates – i.e.
twice the number of officials who shall be authorised to follow
the training programme as a result of the 2010 certification
exercise –, the 236 best-ranked admitted candidates are listed
on the draft list of pre-selected candidates. This unique list
is published in annex 2.
The provisionally pre-selected candidates are the highest-ranked
admitted candidates on the two lists as follows:
- the candidates with a ranking better or equal to the 171st
position on list 1 (including ex aequo – provisional threshold:
8,64 points); and
- the candidates with a ranking better or equal to the 102nd
position on list 2 (including ex aequo – provisional threshold:
8,58 points).
-
APPEAL
PROCEDURE
The applicants can check how their application was processed and
the results in terms of admission and ranking. The number of
points obtained and their ranking in the two lists are available
in their “certification” file in Sysper2.
The non-admitted candidates who consider they meet the admission
criteria and the candidates who contest the number of points
obtained and their ranking may lodge a substantiated appeal
before the Joint committee for the certification procedure
within 10 working days following the publication of this
Administrative Notice.
This appeal has to be lodged via their « certification » file in
Sysper2, by clicking on the “Launch an appeal” button. The
appeal has to be substantiated: a free-text area of unlimited
size will be available; documents supporting the appeal have to
be enclosed (via the “Annexes” tab).
If, for some reason, an official is prevented from accessing
Sysper2, he/she may lodge an appeal by sending a substantiated
note to:
European Commission
Unit HR.B.4 « Certification procedure – Appeals »
MO 34 5/26 B-1049 Brussels
The note must be sent within 10 working days, as evidenced by
the postmark.
-
CHECKS
DONE BY
DG HR
DG HR has checked – against the documents contained in the
personal files – the level of education and principal language
declared by the best-ranked candidates. In case of
non-conformity, DG HR has modified the certification application
form accordingly and has added a comment. In case the candidates
disagree with the modification, they have the possibility to
launch a substantiated appeal (see point 3).
Concerning the level of education, on the basis of a proposal
made by the Joint committee for the certification procedure, the
appointing authority has decided to grant the same number of
points (8) to the candidates with a university level education
of at least 4 years and to those with a third stage. Therefore,
even if it has been noticed that a candidate erroneously
declared a third stage level of education instead of a
university level of education of at least 4 years, the
application was not corrected. This absence of correction will
have no incidence on the number of points granted. Also, no
conclusion for the following certification exercises or for any
future event in relation to their career can be drawn by the
candidates in this situation.
-
NEXT STAGES IN THE PROCEDURE
After examination of the appeals by the Joint committee, the
appointing authority shall publish the final list of admitted
candidates and the final list of pre-selected candidates.
The DG of the pre-selected candidates (according to the
assignment on the date of signature of their application) shall
provide a motivated opinion and a ranking on the basis of a
comparative analysis of the pre-selected applications assigned
in the same DG. This analysis by the DGs and services shall be
based on the needs of the services and in particular on the 3
criteria defined by the general implementation provisions (GIPs)
adopted on 20 November 2007 (see Administrative Notice N°
54-2007):
- responsibilities and duties currently performed by the
pre-selected applicants as mentioned in their job description or
other relevant documents, and how these responsibilities and
duties are carried out by the applicants;
- versatility of the pre-selected candidates on the basis of the
various functions performed and responsibilities held within the
European Institutions;
- relevant training courses followed as mentioned in their
training passport; ability to work in Community languages as
required by the service; ability to follow a training programme
in French or English (given that the candidates are not allowed
to follow the training in their principal language).
Common evaluation grids and guidelines for allocating the points
and establishing the ranking, were established by the appointing
authority after consulting the Joint committee for the
certification procedure. They are available for consultation by
the candidates on the My Intacomm website dedicated to the
certification procedure
(http://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/hr_admin/en/certification/Pages/exercice_2010.aspx
).
On the basis of the order of priority established by the DGs, DG
HR shall establish a ranking and publish the draft list of the
110 best-ranked pre-selected candidates. The pre-selected
candidates will then have the possibility to lodge a
substantiated appeal before the Joint committee for the
certification procedure.
-
THE COMPULSORY "CERTIFICATION" TRAINING PROGRAMME
The training programme will start on 2nd May 2011. An
information video on the Certification programme can be
consulted on the EAS website at the link indicated below.
Courses and examinations are organised in English and French. A
sufficient level of linguistic knowledge is essential and no
official will be allowed to follow the programme in his/her
principal language.
The training programme is run in Brussels and in Luxembourg.
Depending on the breakdown of Brussels and Luxembourg-based
candidates, the EAS reserves the right to allocate candidates
who have a different place of work to follow the training in
either Brussels or Luxembourg.
You will find more information on the calendar and on the
content of the training on the EAS web site, updated in due
time.
http://www.cc.cec/home/dgserv/eas/training/certification/index_en.html
-
CONTACT DETAILS
If you have any queries, you can contact HR.B.4
Tel.: 93640 & 93936
E-mail:
HR PROCEDURE DE CERTIFICATION
Website on the Certification procedure:
http://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/hr_admin/en/certification/Pages/index.aspx
_________
Footnotes
(1) The Commission has
identified particular needs in the following 17 fields: Planning,
quality management and evaluation; Policies; Legal; Inter-institutional
relations; External relations; Information, communication and
publications; Budget, finance and contracts; Programmes, projects,
actions and funds; Compliance and infringement handling; Statistics;
Control and inspection; Audit; Analysis and advice; Scientific research;
Human resources management; Linguistics; Information technology. |
