Stakeholder feedback

The Agency is committed to create clear and open communication with its stakeholders, in particular with those having an impact on the Agency's mission, performance and objectives. We have a unique role by acting as an Authority of reference to ensure the highest level of compliance with safety rules and applicable compulsory regulation. Consequently, the Agency identifies the community of EU citizens who should benefit from the safest and the most environmentally friendly civil aviation system in the world as an important stakeholder. Other actors who also have a direct interest in our performance on a process level are:

  • The EU Member States;
  • The European Commission;
  • The industry;
  • The National Aviation Authorities;
  • The regulated persons;
  • Third country regulators;
  • International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

The Agency implements and continually improves a stakeholder related process to determine and review the needs of our stakeholders, to collect and analyse their feedback and to monitor their satisfaction. Feedback from stakeholders is part of the performance indicators to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the EASA Integrated Management System.

Stakeholder feedback surveys:
- Standardisation
- Certification
-
Organsational Approval
-
Safety Promotion


Standardisation

OVERVIEW
Purpose: The aim of this survey was to seek feedback from National Aviation Authorities (NAAs) to the Preparatory, Visiting, Reporting phases of the EASA standardisation inspection process. The survey was originally drafted in 2015. No changes were introduced to the questionnaire in 2016.
Stakeholders: The survey targeted Competent Authorities (CAs), which have received a Standardisation Inspection visit between September 2015 and September 2016.
Timeframe: 01/09/2015-30/09/2016.

RESULTS
Average Satisfaction Rate: The overall result of the survey is good achieving a total average satisfaction rating of 86%. The participation rate is 64%.

CONCLUSIONS

  • The response rate is good. It gives good statistical confidence to the data and input received.
  • The added value provided to NAAs by the Standardisation Inspections is highly appreciated by the respondents (84%);
  • The answers received show recognition of the efforts made by the Standardisation inspectionteams on proper communication;
  • The survey has now reached a high level of maturity. Stakeholders trust the survey exercise and use this channel to provide feedback on the inspections received delivering useful outcomes, which can be thoroughly considered by the Process Owner to improve the process;
  • The comments received in this cycle are very constructive and provide concrete ideas and proposals for improvement.

ACTIONS
Areas for improvement:

  • Clarity in the reporting of findings
  • Alignment of the different inspection programmes and schedules

Certification

OVERVIEW
Purpose: To obtain feedback from stakeholders who had received Type Certificates (TC), Supplemental Type Certificates (STC), Major Change Approvals (classified as standard and complex) or European Technical Standard Organisation Authorisation (ETSOA) in between 01/01/2015 – 31/12/2015, in order to evaluate the process and identify potential areas for improvement.
Stakeholders: The survey was sent to 399 stakeholders who had received Type Certificates (TC), Supplemental Type Certificates (STC), Major Change Approvals (classified as standard and complex) or European Technical Standard Organisation Authorisation (ETSOA) in 2015.
Timeframe: 01/06/2016 – 01/08/2016.

MAIN RESULTS
Average Satisfaction Rate: The overall result of the survey is good achieving a total average satisfaction rating of 75%.  The participation rate is 33%.
The chart below shows the average satisfaction broken down by question.


 

CONCLUSIONS
Stakeholder needs have been met as the overall results of the survey are good and consistent with previous year’s achievements. 
With regard to transparency stakeholders considered “the fairness of the certification team” to be good, as well as, communication throughout the project (clarity, ease to understand language used …).
Several stakeholders praised the professionalism and competence of EASA staff, providing support, advice and feedback throughout the certification process.
Some aspects of the performance of the certification process, although satisfactory, were identified as potential areas for improvement. In particular, “timeliness of the certification process”, reporting on “the status of progress throughout the project” and “Certification Support Validation (CSV) activity”. 

FEEDBACK / ACTIONS
Since 01/07/2016 EASA is actively monitoring projects in order to identify those projects where no progress is made and to take the necessary action to move forward with the project.
In the Multiannual Programme 2017-2020, EASA has committed itself to more transparency towards applicants.
With regard to the general level of responsiveness and variations in the levels of service, Certification Directorate is developing PCM rotation supplemental guidelines to be published in the Certification Handbook.
The Certification Support for Validation (CSV) process is under continuous monitoring by two departments interfacing in this process who are also ensuring that the activity is carried out in accordance with the applicable Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreements (BASA) & Working Arrangements (WA).
At the international level, EASA has established collaboration strategies with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), with the goal of implementing a risk based approach to the acceptance of certificating authority (CA) approval and findings of compliance by the validating authority (VA) within the scope of the existing European Union (EU)/United States (U.S.) Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA).  Similar developments will take place in 2017 with other bilateral partners, i.e., Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) and Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC).
 


Organisational Approval

Purpose: To seek feedback from Design Organisations who have received or maintained their approvals during 2016 from the Design Organisation Approval (DOA) process or the Alternative Procedures to Design Organisation Approval (AP DOA).
Stakeholders: The survey was sent to organisations who had received approvals or alternative procedure between January and December 2016.
Timeframe: 05/01/2016 – 09/03/2017.

RESULTS
Average Satisfaction Rate: The overall result of the survey is very good achieving a total average satisfaction rating of 88%.  The participation rate for Initial Surveillance is 62%, for surveillance is 35% and for Alternative Procedures to Design Organisation Approval (AP DOA) is 36%.

CONCLUSIONS

  • The stakeholders needs have been met or exceeded.
  • The role of the EASA Team Leader, in particular with understanding the organisation and their requirements, was greatly appreciated.
  • Communication between EASA staff (DOA and Applications Management staff) and the organisation rated as very highly.
  • Satisfaction with the Technical phase is very good.
  • Audit performed by EASA DOA team during investigation process recognised as adding value.

FEEDBACK / ACTIONS
DOA Team Leaders to provide information and support to applicants to manage expectations and raise awareness of the average times for the duration of the technical investigation phase.
The EASA website revised to make it more user-friendly. More specifically:

  • more technical information is published and updated on a regular basis;
  • electronic application forms introduced with guidance for new applicants;
  • Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) knowledge base has been added.

Safety Promotion

OVERVIEW
Purpose: To evaluate the safety promotion products developed by the European Strategic Safety Initiative (ESSI) and EASA. ESSI consists of the European Commercial Aviation Safety Team (ECAST), the European Helicopter Safety Team (EHEST) and the European General Aviation Safety Team (EGAST).
Stakeholders: The survey was sent openly to all ECAST, EHEST and EGAST members. Members were encouraged to forward the link to the questionnaire within their community.
Timeframe: 26/10/2015-23/11/2015.

RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS
The overall results of the survey indicate that when stakeholders were aware of the safety promotion products the quality was considered good.
In a number of questions the majority of respondents chose the option "Not applicable, No opinion". It is very probable that the group targeted through this survey was not familiar with the safety promotion products developed by the European Strategic Safety Initiative (ESSI) and/or EASA. This indicates that more efforts need to be made to disseminate safety promotion material.
The number and type of comments raised shows a great interest in the safety promotion products developed by the European Strategic Safety Initiative (ESSI) as well as the Agency. There were several requests for the Agency to develop more safety promotion material.

FEEDBACK / ACTIONS
The Agency will work on a more standardised approach to developing safety promotion material and will discuss with its advisory bodies the safety promotion activities.
The results of the survey to be presented to the ESSI teams as well as the Network of Safety Promotion in order to improve dissemination of safety promotion material.


External Complaints

Complaints: in what circumstances?

The Code of Conduct for the staff of EASA enables members of the public to file a complaint to determine whether the Agency has been in breach of the principles of sound administration set out in the Code.

The complaint form should be used to lodge a formal complaint only about the practice of the Agency concerning administrative matters arising between it and members of the public. It shall not be used for formal appeals against Agency decisions or for general feedback, nor is it to be used for complaints under the EC Staff Regulations.

To whom should the complaint be sent?

The complaint should be addressed to the Quality Section. We will register the complaint, send the acknowledgement of receipt and pass it on to the competent Directorate/Department responsible for drafting the answer.

By e-mail: info [at] easa [dot] europa [dot] eu

Who will handle the complaint, how long will it take?

The competent Directorate/Department will investigate the substance of the complaint and answer the complainant in writing within two months.

How much time is allowed for asking for the complaint to be reviewed?

The complainant has one month to ask the Agency to review the complaint starting from the date when the answer to the complaint was sent. The Executive Director will answer the request for a second review within one month.

Are there any other ways of filing complaints?

A complaint can also be filed with the European Ombudsman in accordance with Article 195 of the Treaty establishing the European Community and the Statute of the European Ombudsman.

Back to top