The European Union expresses itself on the Public Administration with Communications and Directives especially in the area of transparency and integrity, an indispensable premise for any process of evaluation and prevention of corruption.
With the Lisbon Treaty (Article 15 TFEU and Chapter V of the Charter of Fundamental Rights) transparency is defined as “a means of democratic control over the work of the European administration, aimed at promoting good governance and the participation of civil society” .
Europe, in turn, needs a model for evaluating European PAs with standardized indicators: the Public Rating is a suitable tool and can also be adapted to the international context (European and global).
Are there evaluation models of the P.A. at European level?
The EIPA (European Institute of Public Administration), Maastricht, has been proposing its evaluation model for some time: the CAF (Common Assessment Framework). It is:
“The result of the cooperation between the Ministers responsible for public functions of the European Union, developed under the aegis of the IPSG (Innovative Public Services Group), a working group of national experts set up by the General Managers (DGs) of public functions ( …) The CAF consists of a self-assessment grid that is conceptually similar to the main models of TQM (Total Quality Management), to the EFQM (European Foundation for Quality Management) in particular, but is specifically designed for public sector organizations. “
Although little known at the level of the general public, the CAF is an excellent model now tested on over a thousand administrations, not only in Europe, which provides a self-assessment grid for the Administrations that want to improve their performance.
In other words, the CAF is a mainly internal diagnostic tool, whose adoption is left to the discretion of the individual PAs. Furthermore, the CAF assessors, while meeting the independence requirement, are based on data provided by the assessed PA and therefore not found with other sources.
The point of view of the Public Rating model is different: the evaluation of the public subject and the translation into a score is carried out regardless of the adhesion of the analyzed subject and is based on a plurality of sources.
Moreover, REP does not consist in a self-assessment, but in an evaluation carried out by an external and independent body: it is conceived as a tool not only for public administrations, but for those who come into contact with it, be citizens / users, supplier companies , the lending banks, the lending State.