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:
- Organsational Approval
- Safety Promotion
Purpose: The aim of this survey was to seek feedback from National Aviation Authorities (NAAs) to the Preparatory, Visiting and Reporting phases of the EASA standardisation inspection process. The survey was originally drafted in 2015 with no changes in 2016 or 2017.
Stakeholders: The survey targeted Competent Authorities (CAs), which have received a standardisation inspection visit between 01 October 2016 and 30 September 2017.
Timeframe: 01/10/2016 – 30/09/2017.
Average Satisfaction Rate: The overall result of the survey is good achieving a total average satisfaction rating of 87%. The participation rate was 70%.
The chart below shows the average satisfaction broken down by phase of the EASA standardisation inspection process.
- 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.
- The comments received in this cycle are very constructive and show recognition of the efforts made by the Standardisation inspection teams to work in close cooperation with the NAAs to plan and prepare for the inspection, to communicate clearly and effectively throughout the Inspection, which serves as a means to add value and improve the organisation.
- It can also be concluded that the actions identified in the previous survey have been analysed and taken into consideration as necessary. Standardisation staff have been briefed on feedback received and this has resulted in an improvement in the feedback received.
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 2016, in order to evaluate the process and identify potential areas for improvement.
Stakeholders: The survey was sent to 342 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 2016.
Timeframe: 19/07/2017 – 11/09/2017.
Average Satisfaction Rate: The overall result of the survey is good achieving a satisfaction rate of 78%. The participation rate is 18%.
The chart below shows the average satisfaction broken down by question.
Stakeholder needs have been globally met as the overall results of the survey are good and consistent with the previous year’s achievements.
Stakeholders were confident with the protection of confidential and proprietary data by EASA. They were also confident with the fairness of the certification team throughout the process and expressed satisfaction with the communication throughout the project. Several stakeholders praised the professionalism and competence of the 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, the reporting of the status of progress throughout the project.
EASA staff’s effort in the certification support for validation (CSV) process was recognised. A number of comments and suggestions related to the validation of EASA approvals in the USA and Canada were received and will be exchanged with the bilateral partners.
FEEDBACK / ACTIONS
A number of actions have already been initiated to address the main areas of concern, namely:
- The roll-out of the SEPIAC platform has been initiated in July 2017 to share documents with applicants and to inform them of the latest status regarding their project.
- All comments received regarding the International Cooperation matters will be handled by the Certification Directorate focal point.
Purpose: To seek feedback from Design Organisations who have received or maintained their approvals during 2017 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 2017.
Timeframe: 03/01/2017 – 31/01/2018.
Average Satisfaction Rate: The overall result of the survey is very good achieving a total average satisfaction rating of 85%. The participation rate for Initial Surveillance is 57% (i.e. 12 responses from 21 issued), for surveillance is 55% (i.e. 66 responses from 119 issued) and for Alternative Procedures to Design Organisation Approval (AP DOA) is 60% (i.e. 6 responses from 10 issued).
The following graphs provide an overview of the average satisfaction broken down by scope, followed by a breakdown of the average satisfaction by phase.
DOA 1 – Initial Approval
DOA 2 - Surveillance
DOA 3 – Initial Approval Alternative Procedure
- 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.
FEEDBACK / ACTIONS
- DOA Team Leaders to continue to provide information and support to applicants to manage expectations and to raise awareness of the average times for the duration of the technical investigation phase.
- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) knowledge base to be updated to provide clarification on points raised in the feedback.
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.
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.
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.