Policy Group on Statistical Cooperation 17-18 October 2013, Skopje New methodology for Peer Reviews in Member States (Doc. PGSC/2013/07)

Introduction Peer reviews in MS, EFTA countries and Eurostat in 2006-08 Plan was to have a second round of PRs in five years Task Force set up in 2012 to elaborate the methodology 14 countries + ESGAB 2013 May ESSC endorsed the new methodology and instruments

MS Peer Reviews – Aims enhance the credibility of the European Statistical System strengthen the System’s capacity to produce European Statistics reassure stakeholders about the quality of European Statistics and the trustworthiness of the System assess progress made in adherence to the principles of the CoP assess progress made in the development of the ESS itself

Approach 32 PRs: all MSs and EFTA countries SK and IS as pilot countries Self-assessment questionnaires completed by NSIs and ONAs + supporting documentation In-country visit Review on implementation of the CoP, coordination of the NSS as well as ESS cooperation/ level of integration

Timetable of a peer review

Issues SAQ is a significant burden on NSIs Inclusion of ONAs Only significant producers Lighter questionnaire Involvement of NCBs As producers, NCBs adhere to the quality standards of the ESCB

Audit-like approach SAQ replies as well as all findings backed up and based on evidence PR visits focus on issues identified from the SAQ Reviewers propose recommendations – NSIs define improvement actions Reports are in the ownership of reviewers – NSIs can correct factual errors only Avoid comparison and ranking

Credibility and comparability The SAQ is developed based on the QAF Uniform application of the methodology enforced and monitored (workshops and guides for reviewers) Fewer reviewers than before All reviewers participate in several PRs

Governance and conduct ESSC involved through the TF Participate in initial and follow-up workshops Can be consulted on questions related to methodology Eurostat will Monitor progress of the process Participate in country visits as observer Organise and participate in initial and follow-up workshops Report to the PG and ESSC on progress

Questions for discussion What approach would be the most suitable for the enlargement countries – peer review instead of light peer review? How could this new methodology, especially the governance and audit-like approach, be used in the next round of PRs in enlargement countries? How and to what extent could other national authorities that produce official statistics be included in the peer review process? How can we differentiate between “core” producers and other producers? How could the national central banks be included? What adjustments would need to be made taking into account the fact that NCBs of enlargement countries are not part of the ESCB so they do not follow its QAF? How should we treat the question of inclusion of statistical domains into the PR? When would be an ideal period to conduct the new round of LPRs?