1. European CAF Event Self-Assessment and Beyond Rome 17-18 November 2003
Main Points for discussion: introduction to parallel sessions
Patrick Staes - Belgium

2. Introduction Member of IPSG
Evaluation of CAF 1 started up during Belgian presidency
Strongly involved with J.-M. Dochot and Christian Engel in development of CAF 2002
Now 1 Year CAF 2002
500 CAF applications
EIPA study
Personal experiences in Belgium

3. Session 1. National strategies (1)
Political leadership concerning the CAF
Engagement of the EU Ministers: CAF as an instrument of building Europe
Political leadership in each MS
CAF and the national Modernisation strategies
Added value of an European model in an existing national environment: does CAF disturb or stimulate change?
Top down or bottom up strategy, pull or push, to force or to seduce
What’s the added value to make specific CAF models
National versus European CAF. ( e.g. a local – a Danish – a Flemish or a Walloon – a French or a German CAF etc.)
Specific sector CAFs (e.g. a police – a health care etc.)

4. Session 1. National strategies (2)
Role of the National resource centres :
non, one ore more than one
National Quality Conferences and or Awards :
the link between CAF and good practices
Added value of external evaluators
The development of national databases
The return on CAF- Investment
(e.g. Belgium: 120 applications – CAFnetworks-3QC -public debate among 5 ministers – collaboration between the administrative levels

5. Session 2. CAF: lessons learned (1)
How to guarantee the quality of the SA-process
Prevent self-deceiving and manipulation in composing the SAG and guarantee freedom of speech
Elementary knowledge of TQM necessary: CAF needs training
First step: define the basic elements: stakeholders, leadership, citizens/clients, partners etc.
Foresee access to relevant information to have good evidences
What’s the ideal size of the organisation to use CAF?
Why do we need the scoring ?
How to score: keep the scoring simple? Do we need a comma?
What does the figures really mean?
Checklist approach versus consensus approach
More than one SAG in an SA process.

6. Session 2. CAF: lessons learned (2)
How to result in effective actions plans?
Define on the forehand what output you expect from CAF
Need for the knowledge of quality tools
A specific Quality direction
The role of Internal and external Consultants
CAF and communication
CAF as a stimulant for internal and external communication
CAF needs a strong communication plan
Do we need a CAFplus or a CAF ?

7. Session 3. CAF and TQM strategie
The direct link between CAF and TQM
Training for CAF starts with an introduction on TQM
All the criteria need the appropriate measurement tools
Added value of external evaluators to buildup action plans
The impact of successive CAF applications
Does using the CAF several time leads to a TQM approach in the organisation?
What do we learn from successive CAF applications, how to keep the interest?

8. Session 4. CAF and other TQM-tools
CAF as a bridge to and between other TQM tools
Common language
Common holistic approach
CAF and the others
An integrated or separated use of CAF and BSC
From CAF to EFQM or from EFQM to CAF
CAF in countries were other TQM tools are dominant
CAF in the context of a large programme of modernisation or change

9. Some conclusions CAF is just a tool but of growing importance.
CAF allows people to participate in the development of their organisation: first step to sustainable improvement
Starting with CAF is always a risk but CAF gives a good return on investment
The CAF-structure must be respected at all time, the application allows a lot of creativity
CAF can be a good introduction to TQM
CAF helps to build Europe from inside and so must remain an European tool
If we want to adapt CAF: we need an agenda for/and a consensus