Docstoc

Compilation of QM-schemes and audits

Document Sample
Compilation of QM-schemes and audits Powered By Docstoc
					           Compilation of QM-schemes and audits
                             Deliverable no. D2.1 of the project ISEMOA
                             Date of finalisation of this document: March 2011


Project Coordinator:                              Author of this document:
Michaela Kargl                                    S. Bösch/P. Hyllenius Mattisson/L. Fredriksson
Austrian Mobility Research                        Trivector Traffic AB
kargl@fgm.at                                      Quality control of this document:
+43 316 810451 - 15                               Tom Rye, Edinburgh Napier University
Start date of the project:    18/05/2010          Project website:        http://www.isemoa.eu
End date of the project:      17/05/2013
Grant agreement no. IEE/09/862/SI2.558304 – ISEMOA, Improving seamless energy-efficient
mobility chains for all
Legal disclaimer:
The sole responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the authors. It does not
necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Union. Neither the EACI nor the European
Commission are responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained
therein.


ISEMOA is co-funded by the European Union under the IEE 2009 STEER programme.
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                                                      STEER




TABLE OF CONTENTS

1      About the project ISEMOA........................................................................................... 6
    1.1        The ISEMOA consortium:.................................................................................... 7
2      SUMMARY................................................................................................................... 8
3      INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 9
    3.1        Aim ...................................................................................................................... 9
    3.2        Method ................................................................................................................ 9
    3.3        Structure of the report ......................................................................................... 9
    3.4        Further clarifications .......................................................................................... 10
    3.5        Definitions of accessibility ................................................................................. 10
4      GENERAL FACTS ABOUT THE COLLECTED SCHEMES ...................................... 12
5      structure of the schemes............................................................................................ 16
    5.1        Process/Areas covered in the QM-schemes ..................................................... 16
       5.1.1      QM-schemes covering the working process.................................................. 16
       5.1.2      QM-schemes covering the working process as well as the actual situation.. 19
       5.1.3      Discussion on suitable structure for the ISEMOA QM-scheme ..................... 21
    5.2        Type of indicators covered in the QM-schemes ................................................ 21
       5.2.1      Suitable accessibility indicators for ISEMOA and where to find them ........... 22
6      Auditing - NEW .......................................................................................................... 23
    6.1        Assessment and audit procedure...................................................................... 23
       6.1.1      Audit procedure ............................................................................................. 23
       6.1.2      Audit methods (interviews/questionnaires etc) .............................................. 25
    6.2        Audit reporting ................................................................................................... 27
    6.3        Benchmarking ................................................................................................... 28
7      SUCCESS FACTORS AND BARRIERS ................................................................... 29
       7.1.1      Success factors ............................................................................................. 29
       7.1.2      Problems/barriers .......................................................................................... 30
8      Concluding remarks ................................................................................................... 31
APPENDIX 1: INSTRUCTION AND FACT SHEET .......................................................... 32
APPENDIX 2: GENERAL AUDIT STRUCTURES ............................................................ 35
    A2.1 ISO 9000 family..................................................................................................... 35
    A2.2 ISO 14 000 family.................................................................................................. 36
    A2.3 EMAS .................................................................................................................... 37
    A2.4 The EFQM Excellence model ............................................................................... 38


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                                                       Page 3
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                                               STEER




   A2.5 Guidelines ............................................................................................................. 40
      A2.5.1 Legislation No. 4 (micro and macro accessibility) .......................................... 40
      A2.5.2 Accessible city (micro and macro accessibility).............................................. 41
      A2.5.3 Guidelines for access auditing of the built environment (micro accessibility). 41
APPENDIX 3: AUDITS FOCUSING ON THE ACTUAL SITUATION AND THE WORKING
PROCESS......................................................................................................................... 43
   A3.1 General audits focusing on several categories ..................................................... 43
      A3.1.1 BYPAD ........................................................................................................... 43
      A3.1.2 European energy award ................................................................................. 44
      A3.1.3 Common assessment framework (CAF) ........................................................ 45
      A3.1.4 EN16001 ........................................................................................................ 46
      A3.1.5 British standard 8555 Acorn ........................................................................... 47
   A3.2 Audits focusing on several categories that are connected to accessibility............ 47
      A3.2.1 Mediate (micro and macro accessibility) ........................................................ 47
      A3.2.2 AMELIA (micro and macro accessibility) ........................................................ 48
      A3.2.3 Design manual for roads and bridges (micro and macro accessibility) .......... 48
      A3.2.4 Safety audit (micro accessibility) .................................................................... 48
      A3.2.5 Inclusive mobility (micro accessibility) ............................................................ 49
      A3.2.6 Universal accessibility (micro accessibility) .................................................... 49
      A3.2.7 Road safety audit (micro accessibility) ........................................................... 49
      A3.2.8 BREEAM (macro accessibility)....................................................................... 50
APPENDIX 4: AUDITS FOCUSING ON THE ACTUAL SITUATION................................ 51
   A4.1 General audits focusing on the actual situation .................................................... 51
      A4.1.1 AnySurfer........................................................................................................ 51
   A4.2 Audits focusing on the actual situation connected to accessibility ........................ 51
      A4.2.1 Quality of Life in Neighbourhoods(micro and macro accessibility) ................. 51
      A4.2.2 Pedestrian audit (micro and macro accessibility) ........................................... 52
      A4.2.3 Post-occupancy evaluation from a universal design perspective (micro and
      macro accessibility).................................................................................................... 52
      A4.2.4 Journey chain – Accessibility Checklist (micro accessibility).......................... 52
      A4.2.5 Berlin “barrier free” label (micro accessibility) ................................................ 53
      A4.2.6 TOEVLA (micro accessibility) ......................................................................... 54
      A4.2.7 EN13816 (micro accessibility) ........................................................................ 54
APPENDIX 5: AUDITS FOCUSING ON THE WORKING PROCESS .............................. 56
   A5.1General audits focusing on the working process ................................................... 56
      A5.1.1 MaxQ .............................................................................................................. 56


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                                                Page 4
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                                             STEER




     A5.1.2 PROSE ........................................................................................................... 57
     A5.1.3 Promax ........................................................................................................... 58
     A5.1.5 European work and family audit® .................................................................. 58
     A5.1.6 INK management model................................................................................. 60




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                                              Page 5
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                            STEER




1 ABOUT THE PROJECT ISEMOA


ISEMOA - Improving seamless energy-efficient mobility chains for all – started in May
2010 and is a 3-year project supported by the European Commission within the IEE-
programme.
ISEMOA aims to help local and regional authorities in Europe to increase energy-
efficiency in transport by improving the accessibility of door-to-door mobility-chains and
thus enabling all citizens and visitors (including people with reduced mobility (PRM)) to
adopt a less car-dependent lifestyle. Furthermore, improving the accessibility of public
spaces and public transport will increase the quality and attractiveness of public transport,
and contribute to increasing safety for pedestrians and cyclists.
In order to achieve this goal, ISEMOA is developing tailor-made quality-management-
schemes for the continuous improvement of the accessibility of the whole door-to-door
mobility-chain in European municipalities, cities, and regions (henceforth referred to as
ISEMOA-schemes). These ISEMOA-schemes will reflect a standardised quality
management process based on the successful BYPAD, MaxQ and MEDIATE-schemes.
At the core of the ISEMOA-schemes there will be a moderated audit process. The process
will help local and regional stakeholders, together with an external auditor, to assess the
state of accessibility of public space and public transport in their area and to develop
strategies and measures to continuously improve the quality of this.
The ISEMOA-schemes will apply a holistic approach by taking into account:
  -     the needs of all categories of PRM (i.e. people with disabilities, people with heavy /
        bulky luggage, people with small children, people with temporal impairments,
        people with non-average stature, older people,…)
  -     the whole door-to-door mobility-chain made up of sustainable transport modes,
        including walking, cycling, public transport, and multi-modal mobility
  -     all kinds of barriers (i.e. barriers related to physical conditions, organisational
        aspects, attitudes of people,…)
In order to develop these ISEMOA-schemes according to the needs of the stakeholders,
the project places much emphasis on the involvement of all relevant stakeholder-groups
(PRM, city-consultants, local / regional authorities,…) from the very start of the project.
The development of the ISEMOA-schemes will be an iterative process, as they will first be
implemented in 15 test-sites all over Europe, and then improved according to the
feedback of the test-sites’-stakeholders.

The implementation-process of the ISEMOA QM-schemes aims to raise awareness of the
issue of accessibility for PRM among local and regional decision-makers. Making clear the
link between accessibility and energy-efficiency in transport should encourage discussion
among all relevant local and regional stakeholders, and help to bring forward a local /
regional strategy for the improvement of accessibility.


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                   Page 6
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                          STEER




Consultants, agencies, and organisations working with municipalities, cities, or regions all
over Europe will be invited to attend the ISEMOA training-workshops for external auditors.
These training-workshops will take place in 15 European countries in order to enable
consultants, agencies, and city-advisors to use the ISEMOA QM-schemes in their daily
work with local and regional authorities.




1.1 The ISEMOA consortium:

Coordinator:

FGM-AMOR (AT)

Partners:
AGEAS (IT)                                     NP (CZ)
BSRAEM (BG)                                    SECAD (IE)
Ecuba (IT)                                     Sinergija (SI)
Edinburgh Napier University ENU (UK)           TAS (UK)
Energy Agency of Plovdiv EAP (BG)              Technische Universität Dresden TUD (DE)
ETT (ES)                                       Trivector (SE)
IEP (CZ)                                       UIRS (SI)
ITS (PL)                                       University of Zilina (SK)
Mobiel 21 (BE)                                 URTP (RO)

Subcontractor:
Mobiped (FR)

Advisory Committee:
Adolf Ratzka, Christa Erhart, Graham Lightfoot, Jarmila Johnova, Petra Lukesova,
Thomas Zwolinski




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                 Page 7
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                         STEER




2 SUMMARY


This project task aimed to carry out a comprehensive overview of the state-of-the-art
regarding policy audits and quality management schemes. In order to collect relevant
information about audit- and quality management schemes in a structured way, a model
factsheet was developed, which was then used by all 15 partners involved in this task.

More than 50 different schemes and audits were identified and analyzed. This work will be
very useful for the development of the ISEMOA accessibility scheme.

This report gives an overview of the material gathered and describes the content and
provenance of a selection of schemes and audits. Both general audits and schemes, and
audits/schemes that are directly connected to accessibility are described. Further, the
report gives a description of important quality management scheme models on which
many of the schemes and audits reviewed are based. In addition, general success factors
as well as typical problems and barriers related to audits and schemes are described,
based on the material gathered from the fact sheets.

It is concluded that there are working models that can form the basis of a workable quality
management scheme, relevant to the ISEMOA project. It is an important observation
stemming from this review that micro accessibility (individual accessibility concerning the
individual’s possibility) is relatively commonly audited. Macro accessibility (the
geographical meaning of accessibility), however, is rarely the focus of quality
management schemes and audits.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                 Page 8
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                           STEER




3 INTRODUCTION


3.1 Aim

Within this task a comprehensive overview and an analysis regarding the state-of-the-art
of policy audits and quality management schemes for municipalities, cities, and regions
was undertaken, including the success factors and features of these schemes. The aim of
the task was to provide information on existing audits and quality management schemes
that can then be used as input to the ISEMOA-scheme, either in relation to their structure
or to their content.
The compilation was carried out on both a national and an international basis.


3.2 Method

In order to collect relevant information on audit and quality management schemes in a
structured way, the task-leader first prepared a model fact-sheet-structure. The model fact
sheet, used by all partners involved in this task, is attached in Appendix 1 of this report.
For the compilation of the State-of-the-Art report, 15 out of 19 project partners contributed
information on national audit and quality management schemes established in their
countries. In addition to this information collected by the partners, the project leader
completed this work to cover international audits and quality management schemes. In
some cases, the task leader added further material that was not mentioned in the fact
sheets submitted.
To be able to provide an overview of the general facts, all the information gathered from
the project partners was then analyzed quantitatively. Further, all the information received
was compiled and analysed qualitatively in order to highlight where existing audits or
schemes (or parts of them) could be used as input for subsequent tasks in ISEMOA.
Additional internet research generally confirmed the relevance and accuracy of material
gathered already, but did not contribute much further material of interest. The
audits/schemes found on the internet tended not to fit with the purpose of ISEMOA, or
were of doubtful quality.


3.3 Structure of the report

After the introduction to the aims and method of the task, some general quantitative data
is displayed to summarise the nature of the schemes reviewed. This section gives the
reader a short overview on the gathered material (Chapter 4).
Thereafter follows an analysis of the schemes reviewed. The focus has been on schemes
being suitable and adaptable for the ISEMOA project, embracing the following themes:
    1. Structure of the schemes/models


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                  Page 9
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                            STEER




            o   Processes/areas covered
            o   Type of indicators covered
    2. Auditing
            o   Assessment and audit procedure
            o   Audit reporting


In the appendices most of the reviewed schemes/audits are presented. Firstly general and
much-used audit and QM schemes are described. Thereafter, the information gathered
that is particularly relevant to the ISEMOA project, either due to the structure or content of
the scheme, is described.
The fact sheets presenting all reviewed schemes and audits are available in the separate
document “QM-schemes and audits - All reviewed Fact Sheets”.


3.4 Further clarifications

In the appendix the subtitles of the sections are following the construction of the fact
sheet. However, not every single question asked in the fact sheet will be analysed. A
selection of the most important areas has been carried out.. In addition, it has to be
mentioned that the categorization of the gathered audits can, in some cases, be
questioned. The categorization is often relatively approximate and the following approach
is only one possible interpretation.
The report focuses on QM-schemes and audits.
QM schemes cover and assess the quality of processes and outputs and give guidance
on how to improve the quality.
An audit assesses the current situation (process and/or output). The guidelines for
auditing in the ISO19011 define an audit as “..a systematic, independent and documented
process for obtaining audit evidence and evaluating it objectively to determine the extent
to which the audit criteria are fulfilled”.
Many QM-schemes include some kind of audit, but most audits are not themselves QM
schemes.
In this report we have tried to make a distinction between QM-schemes and audits when it
is important for the understanding, but sometimes the terms “QM-schemes” and “audits”
are used synonymously to make the text more easy to read.


3.5 Definitions of accessibility

Accessibility: “Ease of access” or “How easy can people reach desired activities”.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                  Page 10
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                            STEER




In order to achieve sustainable mobility for all in a travel-chain perspective (without any
missing links along the route) both micro, meso and macro-level accessibility should be
handled.
    •   The macro-level concerns geographical accessibility and land-use patterns in
        terms of location, distance, density, diversity etc.
    •   The meso-level concerns availability of (sustainable) transport modes and service
        level in terms of routes and frequency, information, travel time/cost, safety/security
        concerns etc.
    •   The micro-level concerns the occurrence of various barriers (poor standard) on
        pavements and other pedestrian facilities, bus stops / stations, and vehicles.
        Physical barriers (e.g. high kerbs, uneven surfaces, slopes, snowy and icy
        conditions, poor contrasts, entrances without ramps and door-openers) are
        problematic for PRMs due to a mismatch between individual capacity and
        environmental demand.


In the fact sheets used for describing the QM-schemes and the policy audits, and in this
report, we only use two levels, macro and micro accessibility. During the work in ISEMOA
we have seen a need for adding an intermediate level, the meso-level. In the future work
in ISEMOA we will use all three levels.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                  Page 11
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                     STEER




4 GENERAL FACTS ABOUT THE COLLECTED SCHEMES


In total, information on 56 different audits and quality management schemes was
collected. Out of these 56 schemes, two thirds are national schemes and one third are
international schemes used in Europe or worldwide (see also Figure 4.1).




Figure 4.1: Geographical use of the audits/schemes reviewed



Nearly half of the gathered schemes can be used for free whilst the rest are charged.
Many of the schemes are relatively new; nearly half of the schemes have been developed
during the last five years (see also Figure 4.2).




Figure 4.2: Year of development of the audits/schemes reviewed




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                           Page 12
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                           STEER




Nearly all of the schemes reviewed are used voluntarily. Only three schemes have a clear
legal status and must by law be used. Meanwhile, three of the schemes that are used
voluntarily have a clear connection to the law without being legally required - that is, they
can be used to help comply with the law, but as the use of the actual scheme is not the
only way to comply with the law, then the law is not broken if the scheme is not used (see
also Figure 4.3).




Figure 4.3: Legal status of the audits/schemes reviewed
In approximately half of the schemes some form of training of auditors is included (see
also Figure 4.4).




Figure 4.4: Occurrence of auditor training



In nearly half of the schemes reviewed, a top down approach (decision makers and public
official approach) is used for the actual audit/scheme. The rest indicate that the scheme is
connected to both top-down (decision makers oriented) and bottom-up (user oriented)


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                 Page 13
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                             STEER




approaches. It is not surprising that a decision makers oriented approach is included in
some form in all schemes, due to the need to relate the its use to wider strategy.

The duration of the audits differs a great deal depending on its purpose and level of detail.
However, the material gathered indicates that most of the audits require an
implementation time of up to one year. Also, the working hours required of the audited
organization are difficult to estimate, as they depend very much on the audit’s
construction, and also on the audited organization’s access to the required data. It is not
unusual that an audit requires one to several working weeks from the organization
involved (see also Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.6).




Figure 4.5: Duration of the whole audit implementation process




Figure 4.6: Working hours required of the audited organisation to carry out the audit




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                    Page 14
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                             STEER




The main content of the schemes was classified into three categories:
   1. The working process
   2. The actual situation (described by indicators related to the topic of interest)
   3. The outcome (described by indicators and evidence of effects)

In the following sections, a selection of audits is described, based around the first two of
these categories, as no schemes focusing mainly on the outcome have been found.
The purpose of these sections is to give the ISEMOA project an overview of existing
schemes, from which it can take inspiration and guidance. Both the general structure of
other schemes, as well as the way that they address detailed content-related matters
related specifically to accessibility, are useful for the development of the ISEMOA audit
scheme(s).




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                    Page 15
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                         STEER




5 STRUCTURE OF THE SCHEMES


This chapter concentrates on analysing the structure of the reviewed schemes:
    •   Which processes/areas are covered?
    •   Which elements are parts of the schemes?
    •   Which type of indicators can serve as inspiration?
    •   Where to find actual accessibility indicators?
The focus is on highlighting examples that are suitable in an accessible transport context,
thus all schemes in the state-of-the-art review are not being presented here.




5.1 Process/Areas covered in the QM-schemes

A QM-scheme can cover one or more of the following areas:
    •   The working process/QM-approach (which is described by process-related
            indicators)
    •   The actual situation (which is described by “status”-related indicators)
As the objective of the ISEMOA-project is to develop a Quality management system we
will concentrate on systems dealing with the working process or a combination of working
process and actual situation.



5.1.1 QM-schemes covering the working process
In this group we obviously find the ISO 9000 family of standards, which represent
international consensus on good quality management practices. The same stands for the
ISO 14000 family of standards in the field of environmental management. Other
interesting and established schemes are the EFQM Excellence model and the CAF
(common assessment framework), the latter being based on the EFQM model. The EFQM
model/CAF is a QM instrument for the public sector, which is of special interest for the
ISEMOA scheme as the responsibility of accessibility issues mostly is in the hand of the
public sector.
As many of the developed QM-schemes in the transport field have been inspired by these
international standards and models, we will directly focus on the transport related QM-
schemes as we then cover the ISO-schemes and the EFQM Model (CAF) automatically.
Interesting transport QM-schemes found in the state-of-the-art review are:
    •   MaxQ (Mobility Management QM-scheme) and
    •   BYPAD (BicYcle Policy AuDit), both being highly inspired by the ISO standards
            and the EFQM model/CAF.


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                Page 16
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                       STEER




These schemes do not only measure the status of the working process but support a
progress and give the organisation tools for continuous improvements. This should be a
requirement when developing a new, modern QM-scheme, such as the ISEMOA-scheme.
MaxQ is quite new (2009), but has been used successfully by several cities in Sweden. As
presented in the state-of-the-art-review BYPAD has successfully been applied in practice
by over 100 towns, cities and regions, and up-dated, which makes it very interesting as
inspiration for the ISEMOA-scheme. Especially interesting is that BYPAD is covering
towns/cities as well as regions precisely as the ISEMOA-scheme is intended to do.
The structures of BYPAD and MaxQ are all similar as they have the same background.
MaxQ comprises of four components, each being concretised in a number of elements or
quality criteria (in total 12 elements). The same structure stands for the BYPAD-scheme,
but the number of components is three divided into in total nine elements.


MaxQ                                        BYPAD
    1. Policy                                   1. Planning
    2. Strategy                                 2. Actions
    3. Implementation                           3. Monitoring
    4. Monitoring & Evaluation
Table 5.1: Components in the MaxQ and BYPAD schemes




Figure 5.1: MaxQ model




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                             Page 17
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                        STEER




Figure 5.2:BYPAD „Spiral of development” for towns, cities and agglomerations



Another interesting feature in the BYPAD-scheme is the regional aspect; the BYPAD-
scheme is not only applicable for cities/towns, but also for regions. This can be very
useful, as the ISEMOA scheme should cover regions as well. The BYPAD-scheme for
regions follows the same overall structure as for towns/cities (i.e. division into three
components; planning, action, monitoring), but the elements are to some extent different
taking regional aspects into consideration.




Figure 5.3: BYPAD “Spiral of development” for regions



Both MaxQ and BYPAD, and also the QM-scheme from the MEDIATE project, contain a
”development ladder”. Whilst MEDIATE uses exactly the same levels of development as
BYPAD, they are slightly different in MaxQ. In these schemes the quality of the processes
in each of the elements are determined separately by assigning a quality level on a ladder
of development to each of them, see table below.


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                               Page 18
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                          STEER




MaxQ                                    BYPAD                             MEDIATE
 • 5: Total quality MM                  • 4: Integrated approach          • 4: Integrated approach

 • 4: Chain-oriented MM-approach        • 3: System-oriented approach     • 3: System-oriented approach
 • 3: System-oriented MM-approach       • 2: Isolated approach            • 2: Isolated approach

 • 2: Process-oriented MM-approach      •   1: Ad hoc-oriented approach   • 1: Ad hoc-oriented approach

 • 1: Activity-oriented MM-approach

 •   0: No evidence of MM-approach at
     all

Table 5.2 Levels of development in MaxQ, BYPAD and MEDIATE



The ladder of development shows, at a glance, the overall quality level of at least the
working processes in the organization, and to some extent also the level of the outcome.
The actual naming of the levels are of less importance as long as the naming follows an
understandable order (from low to high quality), and that the levels are well defined. In
MEDIATE a well structured definition of the levels are included which can be used as
inspiration in ISEMOA.
Another scheme based on the EFQM-scheme is the PROSE-scheme, which is not active
in the field of transport but in the fields of health & welfare and education & training in
Belgium. The scheme has 9 elements following the EFQM structure, and a path of
development being determined in the self assessment process just as in the MaxQ- and
BYPAD-schemes. The scheme is very sector-specific detailing the core processes. The
online diagnosis and self assessment tools collect a lot of information, thus offering
members benefits in terms of sector-specific information (e.g. what indicators are suitable
for measuring impact). PROSE has become not only a QM-scheme but also a sector
expertise network. This could be of interest for the ISEMOA-scheme.



5.1.2 QM-schemes covering the working process as well as the actual
      situation
There are not so many relevant QM-schemes actually covering both the organisations
working processes (described by process-related indicators) and the actual situation in
“real life” (described by status-related indicators). As the field of accessibility (especially
on a micro-level) is characterised by physical factors (such as low floor buses, curb stone
height), the ambition of the ISEMOA accessibility scheme should be to assess both areas.
BYPAD (see preceding chapter) partly covers the actual status, but uses the information
as supporting input when reviewing the working process more than using it for reviewing
the actual situation itself. In direct words: information on the actual situation doesn’t
directly influence the score in the review of the organisations bicycle work. Still, BYPAD
can serve as inspiration on how to cover the actual situation in the ISEMOA QM-scheme.


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                                 Page 19
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                           STEER




The Swedish handbook “Accessible City” deals both with the working process and the
actual situation. In Accessible City the following phases are included:
    1. Organisation, vision and goals
    2. Travel demand and primary routes
    3. Inventory of the accessibility/usability of the routes
    4. Analysis of measures and establishment of action programme
    5. Control of fulfilment of objectives and estimations of consequences on accessibility
    6. Compilation of the accessibility plan


All phases 1-6 cover the process while phase 3 covers the actual situation. The handbook
gives a good guidance on how to conduct an inventory of especially the micro level, and
for some aspects even the meso level.
Also the Swedish Traffic Safety Audit deals both with the working process and the actual
situation. This audit has been used successfully in Swedish municipalities over a couple of
years and is therefore very interesting when developing the ISEMOA-scheme. The audit
serves as a basis for developing a traffic safety plan. This could be interesting, as the
same model could be used for ISEMOA for eventually creating an accessibility plan. The
following table shows the main elements of the traffic safety audit. The two main
dimensions being assessed are the traffic safety “culture” and the traffic safety
“standard/status”. Within these dimensions there are seven elements. The elements are
relevant (indicators are present) for one or both of the dimensions. The indicators are
awarded scores (better performance/quality = higher score), and the different areas have
different maximum scores, which stands for the weighting between the different areas
(higher maximum score = higher weight/greater importance).
In the same manner as MaxQ and BYPAD, the Traffic Safety Audit contains a type of
ladder of development. In this case the traffic safety “culture” and the traffic safety
“standard/status” are awarded stars (max. 5 stars for each area).


                                       Traffic safety “culture”    Traffic safety “status”
1. Actual level of traffic safety                 -                        1 (3)
2. Organisation and steering                    4 (7)                         -
3. Planning                                     2 (3)                         -
4. Traffic planning, traffic safety             1 (4)                      6 (13)
measures
5.Maintenance of infrastructure                 2 (3)                      3 (5)
6. Vehicles, journeys etc                       2 (4)                      2 (4)
7. External cooperation                         2(4)                          -
Total points                                   13 (25)                    12 (25)
Total stars (max. 5)                              **                         **


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                 Page 20
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                          STEER




Table 5.3: Dimensions and elements in the Swedish Traffic Safety Audit. Example of points
(maximum points in brackets)




5.1.3 Discussion on suitable structure for the ISEMOA QM-scheme
Clearly the structure and content of the MaxQ and BYPAD systems can serve as
inspiration for the ISEMOA scheme. The schemes are in use and well-functioning and
comprise of the essential components that are needed despite area of use (cycling,
Mobility Management): vision, goals, programs, procedures for monitoring etc. The
components of the MaxQ-system can be re-used with adaptation to the accessibility field.
For example, as user needs are of special interest for people with reduced mobility the
issue of “user needs” possibly could form a component itself.
We should though take development of these schemes under consideration. There is no
clear evidence that MaxQ and BYPAD are being used as full-bodied quality management
systems, i.e. that the working processes in the cities/towns/regions are affected due to the
outcome of the audit and that there is a follow up of continuous improvements (repeated
audits). The ISEMOA scheme should try, if possible, to strengthen the importance of
implementing a full-bodied quality management system that ensures continuous
improvements.
Another important difference of the ISEMOA-scheme compared to the existing schemes is
that accessibility is a very wide concept. Accessibility is an issue in the overall land use
planning as well as on a very tangible level (“curb stone”-level). Therefore the ISEMOA-
scheme has to cover all levels; the macro, meso and micro levels of accessibility.
The ISEMOA-scheme must as well embrace walking and public transport above cycling
(By Pad) and Mobility Management (MaxQ), which will reflect in the number of indicators.
Due to the character of the accessibility field not only the working process but also the
actual situation must be covered. This is not the case in the MaxQ- and BYPAD schemes.
Therefore the ISEMOA-scheme should as well be inspired of the Swedish Traffic Safety
Audit, which embraces the actual situation as well. An integrated approach where the
actual situation is covered within the same components as the working process should be
the goal when developing the ISEMOA-scheme.
The Swedish Traffic Safety Audit and Accessible City can be used as inspiration on how
to measure and assess the actual situation.




5.2 Type of indicators covered in the QM-schemes

As a first distinction indicators can be divided into two categories (connected to the areas
working process and actual situation):
    •   Process-related indicators



Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                Page 21
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                         STEER




    •   “Status”-related indicators
As already discussed, the field of accessibility (especially on a micro-level) is
characterised by physical factors (such as low floor buses, curb stone height). The
ambition of the ISEMOA accessibility scheme should therefore be to assess not only the
organisations working processes (process-related indicators) but also the actual status of
the accessibility in the area (status-related indicators) and eventually the outcome of the
work.



5.2.1 Suitable accessibility indicators for ISEMOA and where to find
      them
The reviewed QM-schemes offer many suitable common indicators, which can be adapted
to the ISEMOA-scheme directly or slightly modified focusing on accessibility. In the list
below we have identified those schemes/audits being highly relevant to ISEMOA:
    •   E-tool
    •   Mediate
    •   BREEAM
    •   Customer Service excellence
    •   Journey Chain
    •   Berlin label
    •   Fussgängercheck
    •   Guidelines for Access auditing of the built environment
    •   Accessible city (Tillgänglig stad)
    •   Universal accessibility MS
In the further work we will examine these schemes/audits in detail and select relevant
indictors on a macro, meso and micro level.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                               Page 22
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                  STEER




6 AUDITING - NEW


Most of the studied examples in the state-of-the-art review have an audit in place. The
most developed and therefore interesting QM-schemes and audits are based on widely
used and acknowledged QM-schemes, such as the ISO 9000 family and ISO 14 000
family. The guidelines for auditing in the ISO19011 define an audit as “..a systematic,
independent and documented process for obtaining audit evidence and evaluating it
objectively to determine the extent to which the audit criteria are fulfilled”.
In the following chapters the audit procedures and the audit reporting of the studied QM-
schemes/audits are assessed. The focus is on which procedures are most interesting in
relation to ISEMOA.
A new European Award for Accessible Cities has been launched by the European
Commission, aiming to promote accessibility for people with disabilities in four areas: the
built environment and public spaces, transport and related infrastructures, information and
communication, including Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), and public
facilities and services taken from a website (May 2010)




6.1 Assessment and audit procedure

As we have identified the MaxQ, BYPAD and the Swedish Traffic Safety Audit as highly
relevant to ISEMOA we will focus on these schemes when describing the audit procedure.
Interesting features from other schemes will naturally supplement the review.



6.1.1 Audit procedure
In MaxQ the audit procedure is dependent on the ambitions of the city, the perceived
current status of the QMSMM, the level of political awareness about MM in the city and
the feasibility in financial terms. The table below describes the five different procedures in
MaxQ starting from the least ambitious and least effort requiring and ending up with a very
ambitious and more time and budget consuming one.
 Procedure                 Participants                       How?
 1.Self assessment         Mobility Coordinator or MM-team    25 questions

 2. Small internal audit   Mobility Coordinator and MM-team   Complete checklist
                                                              Meeting
 3. Internal audit         Mobility Coordinator and MM-team   Complete checklist
                           External partners/stakeholders     Meeting
                           Internal auditor as facilitor      Analysis

 4. External audit         Mobility Coordinator and MM-team   Analyis of evidence material
                           External partners/stakeholders     Complete checklist
                           External auditor as facilitor      Meetings
                                                              Analysis
 5. Certification and      Mobility Coordinator and MM-team   Analyis of evidence material
 benchmarking              External partners/stakeholders     Complete checklist
                           2 external auditors*               Additional interviews
                                                              Meetings
                                                              Analysis




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                         Page 23
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                                                        STEER




Table 6.1: Different audit procedures in MaxQ
*) External audits are conducted by external independent organizations. Such organizations, usually accredited, may provide certification of
conformity with the requirements of this document. Guidance on conducting audits is provided by EN ISO 19011. As the Qualification of
external auditors is a key factor concerning the audit outcome it is strongly suggested that when assessing the conformity of an organisation
to this document the external auditor(s) have a comprehensive background in mobility management and formal training as an auditor e.g.
according to EN ISO 19011.



The 5th level of audit results in a MM label. This label will remain valid for two years. But
this level is so far (according to our knowledge) not fully developed as no organization has
asked for it.
In BYPAD as well as in the traffic safety audit the audit has no division in different levels of
ambition, i.e. as organisation (town, city, region) you cannot choose how extensive the
audit should be, but the audit procedure is more or less the same. The audit structures for
MaxQ, BYPAD (cities) and traffic safety audit are shown in the table below. BYPAD has
slightly different audit procedures for towns (e.g. only one meeting) and regions (eg. three
meetings).


MaxQ                                            BYPAD                                           Traffic safety audit
1. Introduction meeting                         For cities                                      1. Kick-off meeting with politicians and
2. Compilation – questionnaire to               1.   Compilation of the evaluation                 officials
    MM-team and collection of                        group and collection of                    2. Compilation – questionnaire and
    documents                                        background information                        collection of documents
3. Consensus meeting                            2.   Processing background                      3. Interviews – officials and politicians
4. Interviews with other                             information                                4. Analysis and report
    partners/stakeholders                       3.   Questionnaire to evaluation group
                                                                                                5. Final traffic safety audit report
5. Analysis and preliminary report              4.   Individual self-evaluation
6. Final meeting                                5.   Compilation and evaluation of
7. Final report                                      questionnaires
                                                6.   Meeting 1: Consensus meeting
                                                     and site visit

                                                7.   Processing the assessment
                                                8.   Preparing the action plan meeting

                                                9.   Meeting 2: Preparation of the
                                                     action plan

                                                10. Final evaluation report (including
                                                     action plan) and certificate

Table 6.2: Audit structures in MaxQ, BYPAD and Traffic Safety Audit



For ISEMOA BYPADS is a more detailed audit procedure, with different procedures for
towns, cities and regions, as well as the included site visit, seems to be of high interest.
One of the issues to solve in the ISEMOA audit structure is if and how to conduct a site-
inspection-tour. The scope and the role of the site visits are slightly different in different
schemes. In BYPAD and the audit scheme Fussgängercheck (Austrian pedestrian audit,
not a full scale QM-scheme) a half a day site visit is made checking the


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                                                              Page 24
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                            STEER




cycling/pedestrian-network. In BYPAD the visit is aimed to get an overall picture of the
cycling network and it is part of the background information collection and preparation of
the auditor, but the site visit is not being graded explicitly. Also in many other schemes
and audits having a site visit, the visit is more of check of already gathered information. In
Accessible City detailed guidance on how to conduct an inventory of the micro level (and
for some aspects also the meso level) is included. This handbook also includes a cd with
further instructions and templates for reporting the results of the inventory, which can be
used as inspiration in ISEMOA.
The scope of ISEMOA is bigger and more complicated (all transport modes and
macro/meso/micro level) than for example BYPAD and Fussgängercheck. In the ISEMOA
case we need to decide if a site visit should be included and if yes, specify at what level
the site-inspection-tour should be; what levels (macro/meso/micro) should we focus on,
should there be any grading included, how to get an overall picture/feeling of the
accessibility standard in the area, etc.



6.1.2 Audit methods (interviews/questionnaires etc)
In comparison, the MaxQ method and the BYPAD method are slightly different. In MaxQ
those involved must answer direct questions, in BYPAD on the other hand, statements.
In the MaxQ procedures 2-5 (see table 6.1), a questionnaire and a rating system is used
in order to assess the quality of each of the elements. Overall this questionnaire is made
up of about 90 questions split up into the 12 elements. For each element between five to
eight questions need to be answered on a 5 point scale referring to the ladder of
development:
  -     “0” means that there is no evidence about this item at all; the city is not active in
        this particular field;
  -     “5” on the other end means that there is excellent evidence available in the city
        about this item; the city works in a systematic and innovative way and good results
        have been obtained compared to other organisations.
See below for the questions for element 1 as an example.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                  Page 25
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                         STEER




Figure 6.1: Questions for element 1 in MaxQ



The questionnaire and rating scheme are to be discussed among the MM-coordinator and
the MM-team. They are requested to fill in the questionnaire individually. All individual
answers are collected, compared and summarized. Within the first meetings in the
procedures 2-4, the group results are presented and differences in opinions are further
discussed upon. The aim is to come to a consensus rating between 0 and 5 for all 12
elements. For each of the 12 ratings, a basic justification for this consensus rating needs
to be provided as well as a proposal formulated on how to further improve quality on that
element. In the procedure 2, the audit stops here.
In the procedure 3-4, the assessments of the MM-team are taken as a baseline
assessment which is further cross checked through individual or group discussions with
stakeholders. This results in a refined rating of the 12 elements and adapted list of
improvement actions. The next step is to come to an overall consensus with the MM-
manager and his/her team on the overall quality assessment based on the extended
information and to select prioritised improvement actions from the proposed list. The last
step is to communicate results to all stakeholders involved.
In BYPAD a questionnaire is also the main instrument for an audit. The evaluation group
completes the questionnaire:
    •   As a Word-file (sent to the evaluation group members by email by the auditor)
    •   Online (homepage of internal BYPAD site) or
    •   Directly at the beginning of the first audit session


The questions have to be answered separately by each evaluator him-/herself. Each
question has several statements based on an interpretation of each level of development
(see development ladder) and the statement is answered with an “X” if the statement is
fulfilled. Depending on which of the development levels most of the “X” are on, each

Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                               Page 26
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                                            STEER




question is assessed on the development level scale (1-4), see an example of a question
in the table below. During the consensus meetings, the different answers to the
statements are discussed to seek a realistic grading of the different assessments and to
find the same level.


       Module 2: Leadership and co-ordination
 M2    Question 1:     What impact do key individuals (both officials and politicians) have within the
                       decision-making process concerning cycling?



                 The impact of politicians and officials is random and limited, because the responsibilities for
         1       cycling policy are allocated to a very low administrative level.


                 Individuals (executive politicians and/or officials) do pioneering work by developing a cycling
         2       policy.


                 The legislative body is supporting cycling measures as long as no other interests are at stake.
                 E.g. bicycle parking places are provided as long as no car parking places need to be taken away

                 Cycling is still seen as of secondary importance.


                 The interests of cycling are always recognised when talking about mobility.
         3
                 Politicians in charge/ officials have succeeded in seeing cycling as a co-equal mode of transport
                 and weighted systematically against other modes of transport.


                 The interests of cycling are always recognised when talking about local policy in general.
         4
                 Politicians in charge/ officials dealing with cycling issues have succeeded in using cycling
                 policy as a public relations theme for characterising the city.


                 The key officials have proven themselves to have vision and be goal driven, skilful and well
                 prepared regarding cycling policy. Therefore, they are taken very seriously at the political level.




       Comment



       Possible actions for       -    …
       improvement
                                  -    …
                                  -    …




Figure 6.2 Questions for Module 2 in BYPAD



Trivector has experience of both MaxQ and BYPAD and we think that the rating scale in
MaxQ is easier to use, and in many ways gives a more nuanced picture, than the rating
scale in BYPAD. When using the rating scale in BYPAD quite often the participants
answer “X” for many of the development levels which makes the interpretation quite
difficult for the auditor. In MaxQ the participant is asked to do the actual rating on a 6-
graded scale which makes the interpretation a little bit easier, even if the following
discussion is very important to reach a consensus,




6.2 Audit reporting

In MaxQ, BYPAD, Prose the audit report has a pre-defined overall format. For example an
audit report in the MaxQ-scheme should:

Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                                                   Page 27
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                             STEER




  -       follow the overall structure along the 12 elements;
  -       contain a main description of the evidence for each element;
  -       list the overall rating of the elements based on consensus between the audit group
          members;
  -       provide a justification of each rating and the description of the improvement action
          proposed;
  -       include a further elaborated shortlist of improvement actions based on a prioritising
          exercise.
A BYPAD audit includes the same elements, but it also includes a final action plan with
concrete objectives and actions (more detailed than the shortlist in MaxQ). This could be
of interest for ISEMOA.
The Swedish traffic safety audit is presented in a quite extensive report following a pre-
defined structure. The following subjects are treated along the seven elements (see
chapter 5.1.2):
      •   Status description
      •   Analysis and conclusions
      •   Declaration of intent and improvement actions


In the further development of the scheme we need to decide on the detail level of the
reporting.


6.3 Benchmarking

Whilst many of the schemes and audits award a certificate to the organisations fulfilling
the required criteria, quite few award labels with a grading of the label. The latter is
included in for example:
      •   The European Energy Award has two labels; standard and gold
      •   PROSE has three levels of labels; B (Basic), A (Advanced) and + Plus)
      •   INK audit with different scores (350, 450, 600)


Very few of the reviewed QM schemes and audits include a real benchmarking system
with an open comparison between different organisations. Such benchmarking requires a
very transparent audit system to ensure that the same results will be obtained
independent the auditor.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                   Page 28
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                            STEER




7 SUCCESS FACTORS AND BARRIERS


It is important for the ISEMOA-project to be aware of other schemes’ and audits’ success
factors, problems and barriers, to help to avoid suffering similar pitfalls and/or reinventing
the wheel. The following two sections will describe success factors and problems/barriers
that were identified when the QM-schemes/audits were reviewed.

7.1.1 Success factors
A frequent mentioned success factor is that some kind of labelling is included in the QM
scheme or audit, so that the organisation can use this in promotion activities, e.g. on
publications and printed matter, and as an evidence of quality towards the own
organisation and other organisations. Another frequent success factor (or, if lacking, a
problem/barrier) mentioned in the fact sheet is a benchmarking that allows comparisons
between organizations that conducted the audit. Connected to benchmarking, but also
important as part of the actual auditing process, are new networks created when many
stakeholders work together for improving processes. Benchmarking allows organizations
to compare themselves to others. This learning process can lead to contacts and, by
extension, to important networks that may have a further positive influence on the
organization’s development.
The audit’s or scheme’s cost is an important factor influencing its success. Many
comments concerned that the price should not be too high. At the same time ISO is the
most expensive scheme and the most widely used which probably is connected to the
experienced benefit of being ISO certified. It is therefore important to clearly demonstrate
how the audit will add value to an organisation’s activities.
Also a strong relationship to law, or support from official organizations/authorities,
is important for a scheme’s success. Without such support, even a QM-scheme provided
for free will not be of sufficient interest to a potential user organisation.
Continuity or regularity is another success factor. Continuous improvements need to be
monitored and reinforced by follow-up visits/audits. These follow-ups can be required if
the results/certification have limited validity.
Of crucial importance is the simplicity of a QM-scheme. Despite the importance of
simplicity, a certain depth and broadness of the scheme is needed to be successful. The
right balance between simplicity and depth, e.g. as in BYPAD and MaxQ, is therefore of
importance. As with the cost, the audit must be worth the effort that is needed.
Schemes with a clear, well defined scope are furthermore are also more successful than
complex, broad-reaching audits. This is, of course connected to simplicity. If the right
balance between depth and simplicity is found (due to a well defined scope) the audit is
attractive for potential users.
Further mentioned success factors are:
    • Transparency

Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                  Page 29
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                            STEER




    • Schemes based on well-known “products” (e.g. ISO 9001)
    • Lower costs or better environment as a result of the audit/certification
    • Support from specialized external organizations such as national road/transport
       administrations/departments, well-know consultants promoting and using the
       schemes, and auditors..

7.1.2 Problems/barriers
In many cases, the problems of QM-schemes or audits are the opposite of the success
factors. In this respect, the following problems or barriers are typical:
    • No relationship to the law 
    • No benchmarking 
    • The cost or the need to be profitable 

A very important barrier or problem is the an audit’s low or unofficial status. If no official
organization directly supports the audit, there can be difficulties in marketing the scheme.
This problem is closely connected to the possibility that the scheme simply stops
operating due to problems with financial resources for updates and marketing. Also, the
audit’s user-friendliness can be a barrier or problem, if the scheme’s approach is too
wide. This problem leads to difficulties in finding interested target groups. The audit might
be interesting for many, but not as specialized as needed. Another difficulty is related to
the follow-up. If this is complicated (for example in relation to data gathering), the audit
will not be simple enough to establish as a tool for continuous improvement. A risk of
stigmatization of what is “good” and “bad” can be problematic; this issue has to be
approached openly.
Further, the motivation of the audited organization is of importance. Without the
commitment of all the stakeholders in the audit process, the implementation of the audit
can be difficult. A need for clear areas of responsibility if many stakeholders are
involved is another problem, connected to that of a lack of motivation.
Care is, additionally, needed to avoid too large possibilities of interpretation. That can
be the case if too large parts of the auditing process are left to the audited organization or
if the guidelines can be interpreted widely. On the whole it is seen as problematic if there
is no external auditor/external validation of the audit.
Further problems/barriers are:
    •   Voluntary follow-ups (single audits are also included here) 
    •   Audits that are too time-consuming 
    •   No consideration of external standards (for example for tendered goods/services) 




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                  Page 30
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                         STEER




8 CONCLUDING REMARKS


As this review shows, there are a huge number of schemes and audits that are used in
Europe. Many of these are using a clear and acknowledged structure as described in
section 5. Inspiration for the structure of the ISEMOA-scheme is therefore not lacking, but
an approach that matches ISEMOA’s purpose well must be found., The BYPAD and
MaxQ audits should be definitely be investigated in more detail. Also the results of the
MEDIATE project, especially their accessibility indicators, are of special interest for the
ISEMOA project.
Examples on how micro accessibility can be managed in audits are well represented in
Europe. People with reduced mobility are recognized more and more in the development
of the urban environment. However, how this accessible environment can be reached in
practice vary in many European municipalities and cities.
QM-schemes and audits on macro accessibility are only represented with a few examples
in this compilation which reflects that schemes on macro accessibility are not that
common in Europe. The ISEMOA approach, where macro and micro accessibility will be
connected, is therefore a much-needed initiative. First of all, quality management in the
development of geographical accessibility (macro accessibility) can particularly contribute
to urban planning and public transport quality. Secondly, the connection between macro
and micro accessibility might push the development of a more accessible environment for
PRM in particular. The door-to-door travel chain approach, where both micro and macro
accessibility are included, is an interesting field for quality management where very few
quality management approaches exist at present.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                               Page 31
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                      STEER




APPENDIX 1: INSTRUCTION AND FACT SHEET


Instructions
To be able to describe the state-of-the-art concerning policy audits and QM-schemes in Europe,
you as partner are kindly asked to describe which policy audits and QM-schemes (within and
outside the transport and mobility sector) you know of, and which of these are used in your country.
At the next page a fact sheet is found that should be used for the description. Please fill-in one fact
sheet per found/known policy audit or QM-scheme in your country. The checkboxes ( ) in the fact
sheet are not interactive. Please, replace the “ ” symbol with “x” for your answer. Some of the
questions are not possible to answer if the audit/scheme is not fully developed or fully developed
but not in use.
Some dates to keep in mind:
   - Until 8th of September: Please send us information on which policy audits and QM-
      schemes are used in your country.
   - Until 13th of September: We will send you updated information on which of the international
      audits/schemes you are asked to provide information about. (We will check for doublings
      and then come back to your named audits/schemes and ask for more detailed information.)
   - Until 1st of October: Please make sure that all fact sheets from you are uploaded at the
      website.

We are already aware of the following international audits/schemes and have done the indicated
distribution among partners:
     - BYPAD: FGM AMOR will provide the main “content-related” part of the description
     - MaxQ: Trivector and Mobile21 will provide the main “content-related” part of the description

Even if the main “content-related” part will be filled-in by one partner, the rest of the fact sheet will
be filled-in by each partner to see how the audits/schemes are used in the specific country.
If you have any questions, please contact one of us (task leaders for WP2.1):
pernilla.hyllenius@trivector.se or stephan.bosch@trivector.se


To be inspired by
In Sweden we are using the following audits and QM schemes:
International audits/schemes:
    ‐   BYPAD – Bicycle Policy Audit
    ‐   MaxQ – Quality Management schemes for Mobility Management
    ‐   ISO 9000, ISO 14000 and EMAS (which not need to be described by the partners)

National audits/schemes:
    ‐ Traffic safety audit

To give you an example on how the fact sheet can be filled-in, please refer to the already filled-in
fact-sheet for MaxQ (see the separate document).




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                            Page 32
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                                        STEER




Name of the audit or scheme

What organisation developed the audit/scheme (name and country):



National and/or international              Who runs the scheme and on what basis:
usage of the audit/scheme:

   National                                Who runs the scheme:
   International (Europe wide)             On what basis?
   International (worldwide)                  for free
                                              not for free
                                           If not for free: Does the fee (requested from the client) cover the cost of the
                                           audit/scheme?

Year of development:                       Status of the QM-scheme/audit:            Legal status of the scheme/audit:

                                              Under construction                       Has to be done by law
                                              Fully developed but not in use           Is used voluntarily
                                              Fully developed and in use

“Democratic” approach in the               Duration of the whole                     Requested working hours in total
implementation-process:                    implementation-process in                 for the audited organisation:
                                           months:

   Top-down (decision maker / public
official approach)
   Bottom-up (user approach)
   Both approaches included

Target group:



Description of the QM-scheme’s/audit’s purpose:



Contents:

What main area/areas are included in the actual scheme/audit?
  The working process
   The actual situation (described by indicators on the actual topic)
  The outcome (described by indicators and evidence on effects)
Please describe more detailed:

Levels of development:
Are there any level/levels of development (development ladder) used in the actual QM-scheme/audit?
   No levels of development
   Yes, there are development levels
If yes, please describe:

Main authorities/organisations involved in the                     Benchmarking:
auditing process:
                                                                   Is there any form of benchmarking included?
                                                                        No     Yes



Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                                              Page 33
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                                             STEER




                                                                   If yes, please describe:

Assessment and audit procedure:



Details on audit reporting:



Continuity:

Is the actual QM-scheme/audit a single (done once) or repeated audit (done in intervals)?

   Single audit                            Repeated audit

Please describe with more details:

Training of auditors:

Is there any form of trainings of auditors provided as a part of the audit/scheme concept?

   No

   Yes

If yes, please describe with more details:

Accessibility:

Is “accessibility” included in any form in the actual QM-scheme/audit?

   No

   Yes → If yes, in what form:

             Macro accessibility (i.e. geographical meaning: to be able to reach a certain destination by sustainable modes of
transport)

             Micro accessibility (i.e. individual meaning: to be able to use sustainable modes of transport without barriers

             Other form of accessibility

If yes, please describe briefly what measures and indicators that were used:

Success factors - Describe what makes the scheme/audit successful:



Problems/barriers - Describe what problems/barriers can be found in the actual scheme/audit:



Examples of organisations that have implemented the scheme/audit:



Where can more information about the actual QM-scheme/audit be found? Indicate internet sources
and/or documents:



Additional comments:



Information provided by (your name and organisation):                       Date:




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                                                  Page 34
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                   STEER




APPENDIX 2: GENERAL AUDIT STRUCTURES


Most of the studied QM-schemes and audits are based on widely used and acknowledged
QM-schemes, for example:
    •    ISO 9000 family
    •    ISO 14 000 family
    •    EMAS
    •    EFQM

These four models for QM-schemes/audits are of special importance also for the
ISEMOA-project and are therefore described separately in this section.
Further, some interesting guidelines are described in this section. These guidelines are
not full audits or QM schemes but they merit a description because they nonetheless
provide useful guidance for the development of the ISEMOA scheme(s).


A2.1 ISO 9000 family

(Source of the following text: International Organization for Standardization, www.iso.org)

The ISO 9000 family of standards represent an international consensus on good quality
management practices. It consists of standards and guidelines regarding quality
management systems and related supporting standards.
ISO 9001:2008 is the standard that provides a set of standardized requirements for quality
management systems, regardless of what the user organization does, its size, or whether
it is private or in the public sector. It is the only standard in the family against which
organizations can be certified – although certification is not a compulsory requirement of
the standard.
The other standards, in the ISO 9000 family, cover specific aspects such as fundamentals
and vocabulary, performance improvements, documentation, training, and financial and
economic aspects.
The requirements for a quality system have been standardized. But many organizations
like to think of themselves as unique. So how does ISO 9001:2008 allow for the diversity
of say, on one hand, a "Mr. and Mrs." enterprise, and on the other, to a multinational
manufacturing company with service components, or a public utility, or a government
administration?
The answer is that ISO 9001:2008 lays down what requirements your quality system must
meet, but does not dictate how they should be met in any particular organization. This
leaves a great scope and flexibility for implementation in different business sectors and
business cultures, as well as in different national cultures.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                          Page 35
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                   STEER




The standard requires the organization itself to audit its ISO 9001:2008-based quality
system. To verify that it is managing its processes effectively, or to put it another way, to
check that it is fully in control of its activities.
In addition, the organization may invite its clients to audit the quality system in order to
give them confidence that the organization is capable of delivering products or services
that will meet their requirements.
Lastly, the organization may engage the services of an independent quality system
certification body to obtain an ISO 9001:2008 certificate of conformity. This last option has
proved extremely popular in the market place because of the perceived credibility of an
independent assessment.
The organization may thus avoid multiple audits by its clients, or reduce the frequency or
duration of client audits. The certificate can also serve as a business reference between
the organization and potential clients, especially when supplier and client are new to each
other, or far removed geographically, as in an export context.
In addition to audit, there is a requirement for management review of the system to ensure
that it is suitable (for the organization and the objectives) and effective in operation. The
management review is the ideal forum to make decisions on how to improve in the future.


A2.2 ISO 14 000 family

(Source of the following text: International Organization for Standardization, www.iso.org)

The ISO 14000 family addresses various aspects of environmental management. The
very first two standards, ISO 14001:2004 and ISO 14004:2004 deal with environmental
management systems (EMS). ISO 14001:2004 provides the requirements for an EMS and
ISO 14004:2004 gives general EMS guidelines.
The other standards and guidelines in the family address specific environmental aspects,
including: labelling, performance evaluation, life cycle analysis, communication and
auditing.
ISO14001 requires an environmental policy to be in existence within the organisation, fully
supported by senior management, and outlining the policies of the company, not only to
the staff but also to the public. The policy needs to clarify compliance with environmental
legislation that may affect the organization, and stress a commitment to continuous
improvement. Emphasis has been placed on policy, as this provides the direction for the
remainder of the management system.
The environmental policy provides the initial foundation and direction for the management
system and will be more stringently reviewed than a similar ISO9000 policy. The
statement must be publicised in non-technical language so that it can be understood by
the majority of readers. It should relate to the sites within the organisation encompassed
by the Management System. It should provide an overview of the company’s activities on
the site and a description of those activities.



Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                          Page 36
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                             STEER




The preparatory review and definition of the organization's environmental effects is not
part of an ISO14001 assessment. However, examination of this data will provide an
external audit, with a wealth of information on the methods adopted by the company. The
preparatory review itself should be comprehensive in consideration of input processes and
output at the site. This review should be designed to identify all relevant environmental
aspects that may arise from existence on the site. These may relate to current operations,
to future or perhaps even unplanned activities. They will certainly relate to the activities
performed on site in the past (i.e. contamination of land).
The initial, or preparatory review, will also include a wide-ranging consideration of the
legislation which may affect the site, whether it is currently being complied with or if copies
of the legislation are available. Many of the environmental assessments already
undertaken have highlighted that companies are often unaware of ALL of the legislation
that affects them, and being unaware, are often not meeting the requirements of that
legislation.
The company will declare its primary environmental objectives that can have the most
environmental impact. In order to gain most benefit, these will become the primary areas
of consideration within the improvement process, and the company’s environmental
program. The program will be the plan for achieving specific goals, or targets along the
route; to a specific goal. The plan describes the means to reach those objectives such that
they are real and achievable. The EMS provides further detail on the environmental
program. The EMS establishes procedures, work instructions and controls to ensure that
implementation of the policy and achievement of the targets can become real.
Communication is a vital factor, enabling people in the organisation to be aware of their
responsibilities, aware of the objectives of the scheme, and able to contribute to its
success.
As with ISO 9001, the ISO 14001 requires a planned comprehensive periodic audit of the
EMS to ensure that it is effective in operation, meeting specified goals, and that the
system continues to perform in accordance with relevant regulations and standards. The
audits are designed to provide additional information in order to exercise effective
management of the system, providing information on practices which differ to the current
procedures or offers an opportunity for improvement.
As ISO 9001, also ISO 14001 requires a management review of the system to ensure that
it is suitable (for the organization and the objectives) and effective in operation.


A2.3 EMAS

(Source of the following text:
European Commission Environment, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/index_en.htm)

EMAS – Eco-Management and Audit Scheme is a voluntary environmental management
system (EMS), under which companies and other public organisations evaluate, manage
and continuously improve their environmental performance. EMAS has been operative


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                   Page 37
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                          STEER




since 1995. The latest revision (EMAS III) came into effect on 11 January 2010. Currently,
more than 4,400 organisations and approximately 7,600 sites are EMAS registered.
EMAS was originally restricted to companies in the industrial sectors. Since 2001 EMAS
has been open to all economic sectors including public and private services. EMAS was
strengthened by the integration of EN/ISO 14001 as the environmental management
system required by EMAS, by adopting an attractive EMAS logo to signal EMAS
registration to the outside world, and by considering more strongly indirect effects such as
those related to financial services or administrative and planning decisions.
The core elements of EMAS are performance, credibility and transparency. By carrying
out annual updates of environmental policy targets and actions to implement and evaluate
them, registered organisations continually improve their environmental performance and
provide evidence that they comply with all environmental legislation that is applicable to
them. Third-party verification from independent auditors significantly adds credibility to
registered organizations, by guaranteeing the value of both the actions taken and the
disclosed environmental information. Transparency is generated by the environmental
statement, which an organization is required to provide as part of EMAS registration.
To receive EMAS registration an organisation must comply with the following steps:
    1. Adopt an environmental policy containing commitment both to comply with all
       relevant environmental legislation and to achieve continuous improvements in
       environmental performance.
    2. Conduct an environmental review considering all environmental aspects of the
       organisation’s activities, products and services, methods to assess these, its legal
       and regulatory framework and existing environmental management practices and
       procedures.
    3. In the light of the results of the review, establish an effective environmental
       management system aimed at achieving the organisation’s environmental policy
       defined by the top management. The management system needs to set
       responsibilities, objectives, means, operational procedures, training needs,
       monitoring and communication systems.
    4. Carry out an environmental audit assessing in particular the management system
       in place and conformity with the organisation’s policy and programme as well as
       compliance with relevant environmental regulatory requirements.
    5. Provide a statement of its environmental performance which lays down the results
       achieved against the environmental objectives and the future steps to be
       undertaken in order to continuously improve the organisation’s environmental
       performance.
    6. The environmental review, EMS, audit procedure and the environmental statement
       must be approved by an accredited EMAS verifier, and the validated statement
       needs to be sent to the EMAS Competent Body for registration and made publicly
       available before an organisation can use the EMAS logo.


A2.4 The EFQM Excellence model

(Source of the following text: MAX project, www.max-success.eu)



Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                Page 38
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                          STEER




The EFQM Excellence Model is a non-prescriptive framework based on 9 criteria. Five of
these are 'Enablers' and four are 'Results'. The 'Enabler' criteria cover what an
organisation does. The 'Results' criteria cover what an organisation achieves. ‘Enablers’
cause ‘Results’ and 'Enablers' are improved using feedback from 'Results'.
The EFQM, recognizes that there are many approaches to achieving sustainable
excellence in all aspects of performance. It is based on the premise that excellent results,
with respect to the four result criteria Performance, Customers, People and Society, are
achieved through Leadership driving policy and strategy that is then delivered through
People, Partnerships and Resources, and Processes. These latter are the enabler criteria.
The EFQM model is graphically presented in Figure 8. The arrows emphasize the
dynamic nature of the model. They show how innovation and learning help to improve
enablers that in turn lead to improved results. On the left-hand side are the enablers, and
on the right hand side are the results.




Figure A2.1: The EFQM model


At the heart of the model lies the RADAR logic: Results, Approach, Deployment,
Assessment and Review (more or less similar to the Plan – Do – Check – Act or PDCA-
Cycle). Within this non-prescriptive framework, certain fundamental concepts underpin the
model. Behaviours, activities or initiatives based on these concepts are often referred to
as Total Quality Management (TQM). These fundamental concepts are: Results
orientation; Customer focus; Leadership and constancy of purpose; Management of
processes and facts; Partnership development; People development and involvement;
Continuous learning; innovation and improvement; and Corporate social responsibility.

There are different versions of the EFQM excellence model for large companies,
operational and business units, for the public and voluntary sectors and for small and
medium sized enterprises. EFQM can be used at different levels. These levels are
introduced to provide consistent European recognition to organisations at each step of


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                Page 39
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                             STEER




their journey to excellence. There can be a link to certification, but this does not always
need to be the case. The levels are as follows:

    •   The first level is “Committed to Excellence”. It is designed for organisations at the
        beginning of their journey to excellence. The emphasis is on helping organisations
        understand their current level of performance and to establish improvement
        priorities.

    •   The second level is “Recognised for Excellence”. This level is available to EFQM-
        members and non-members. It is based on the full EFQM-excellence model, and
        offers applicants the benefits of a structured approach to identify organisational
        strengths and areas for improvement, and recognises successful efforts to
        implement excellence and good practice.

    •   The third and highest level is “EFQM Excellence Award level”. It offers
        organisations that aspire to achieve European best or world-class levels the
        chance to compare themselves against the ‘best’.

It has to be noted that certification through the EFQM is based on a voluntary agreement
and there is no legislative compliance. The certificate can follow both an internally and an
externally defined standard, depending on the level of excellence the organisation wants
to achieve. The EFQM model is a self-assessment scheme; if the organisation feels that it
makes good progress, then there is a possibility to apply for another, external recognition.


A2.5 Guidelines

A2.5.1 Legislation No. 4 (micro and macro accessibility)
The Bulgarian Legislation No. 4 on July 1, 2009 on constructing, implementation and
maintenance of buildings according to the requirements for accessible areas for the
population, including people with reduced mobility is not a QM-scheme. However, the
legislations construction and content can be of interest for ISEMOA. This legislation is
mostly connected to micro accessibility but has some elements connected to macro
accessibility.
The Legislation determines the technical and legislative requirements when sketching,
designing and maintaining the built environment (urban space, buildings and facilities).
The aim is to ensure a safe and accessible environment for the entire population,
including people with reduced mobility. It consists of technical, legislative and architectural
requirements that have to be fulfilled in order to be able to classify a certain area
“accessible”. The following requirements are part of the legislation:
    •   Requirements for the urban area and its elements
    •   Requirements for pedestrian space
    •   Requirements for crossroads
    •   Requirements for urban environment
    •   Requirements for accessible parking space
    •   Requirements for stations of the regular public transport
    •   Requirements for ornaments of the accessible environment

Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                   Page 40
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                            STEER




    •   Requirements for buildings, facilities and their elements
    •   Requirements for entrances and exits
    •   Requirements for rooms and public space – public and residential buildings and
        sanitary rooms
    •   Requirements for apartments for people with reduced mobility

The assessment procedures follow the fulfilled requirements stated above. Without
fulfilling the technical and legislative requirements, a building/construction/facility cannot
undergo development.

A2.5.2 Accessible city (micro and macro accessibility)
“Accessible City” (Tillgänglig stad) is a Swedish handbook providing advice on goals,
strategies and procedures for municipalities developing an accessibility plan for the
transport network. The handbook aims to establish a systematic approach in planning for
accessible cities, to gain the necessary support among actors involved, and to maximise
the benefits of resources invested.
In addition to the handbook, standards for accessibility are provided in a database
application and in a manual covering all aspects of accessibility (public spaces, public
transport, maintenance, municipal policy and planning documents, etc.). The procedure
comprises six phases:
    •   Phase 1: Organisation (vision and goals)
    •   Phase 2: Travel demand and primary routes including both public spaces and
        public transport.
    •   Phase 3: Inventory of the accessibility/usability of the routes
    •   Phase 4: Analysis of measures and establishment of an action programme
    •   Phase 5: Control of fulfilment of objectives and estimation of their consequences
        on accessibility
    •   Phase 6: Compilation of the accessibility plan

Accessibility is defined as the sum of:
    •   Environmental demand in terms of obstacles identified by the inventory (phase 3
        above) where standards (“environmental limits”) are collected from other Swedish
        documents on accessibility, e.g. Bygg ikapp (Building away), Gator för alla (Streets
        for everybody), VGU (Roads and street design), and municipal documents.
    •   Individual capacity where 8 categories of people with functional limitations are
        defined.

A2.5.3 Guidelines for access auditing of the built environment (micro
accessibility)
The Irish Guidelines for Access Auditing of the Built Environment have been
developed to provide best practice advice on how to carry out an access audit. The
guidelines have been developed in collaboration with the Office of Public Works and the
Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in Ireland. They include
background information on access auditing, steps to carry out an audit and the typical
structure of an audit report. The guidelines also offer advice for clients commissioning an

Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                  Page 41
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                           STEER




audit of the built environment and advice for the auditor. They should be of interest to all
involved in access auditing including building surveyors, architects, building designers,
facility managers, occupational therapists, building control officers, local access groups,
and all those who deal with the construction and use of buildings.
An access audit rates an existing building against given criteria for usability and
accessibility. It involves not only the issue of movements to and around the building, but
also the use by people with sensory or learning disabilities of the services, which the
building provides.
The audit process aims to get a true reflection of how the building works when the building
is fully operational. The auditor must visit the various areas on a number of occasions at
different times of the day. An audit may be a journey through the building in a logical
sequence. The auditor can observe how the building works in a number of ways including:

    •   observing how customers/staff use the building;
    •   analysis of the physical design of the premises;
    •   consultation with users;
    •   monitoring day to day running (toilet cubicles free from obstruction, does
        maintenance impede on accessibility, etc.).
The audit is, thus, focussing on micro accessibility and investigates the following main
features:
    •   External environment - Approach
    •   Vertical and Horizontal Circulation
    •   Facilities
    •   Interior Design
    •   Evacuation/Emergencies
The audit results in a description of the current situation with recommendations on how to
improve the current situation. Also a priority rating of actions is given.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                 Page 42
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                               STEER




APPENDIX 3: AUDITS FOCUSING ON THE ACTUAL SITUATION
  AND THE WORKING PROCESS


A3.1 General audits focusing on several categories

A3.1.1 BYPAD
BYPAD is a former EU-project. BYPAD stands for BicYcle Policy AuDit and is based on
the EFQM. It is an instrument enabling towns, cities, and regions to evaluate and improve
the quality of their local cycling policy. BYPAD analyses the strengths and weaknesses in
current policy and gives clear indications for future improvement. The BYPAD
questionnaire is based on proven, successful European best practice in cycling policy.
Measures and areas of action necessary to improve cycling policy can be derived directly
from the audit results. Repeating the audit regularly (once every two or three years) will
indicate progress in the municipality’s / region’s cycling policy. It is important to have a
clear view of all the quality links in cycling policy since, just like a chain, it is no stronger
than its weakest link. This is why BYPAD introduces the concept of Total Quality
Management to local cycling policy. Through BYPAD, cycling policy is seen as a dynamic
process where both organisational aspects and real measures in the field are screened
and improved.
BYPAD regards cycling policy as a dynamic process where different components must fit
together in order to get a well-balanced sustainable cycling policy. Because each step in
this policy process has its own characteristics, BYPAD distinguishes 9 modules, which
determine the quality of the cycling policy. For towns, and cities / agglomerations BYPAD
uses the same modules. The interrelationship between these modules is visualised by
placing them on a “spiral of development” (see figures below).




Figure A3.1: BYPAD „Spiral of development” for towns, cities and agglomerations



For regions BYPAD uses other modules based on the tasks that that are of relevance for
them.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                     Page 43
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                           STEER




Figure A3.2: BYPAD “Spiral of development” for regions



The 9 different modules form three main groups: the planning of the cycling policy, the
real actions in practice, and the evaluation of the planning and actions. In this way, it is
emphasised that BYPAD not only focuses on results, but also on how cycling policy is
embedded in the political and administrational structure and culture. For each of the
modules, a list of questions is given which determines the quality level of each module.
Each module is put on a ladder of development, which indicates the quality level of the
cycling policy. On the basis of this ladder of development, the town, city or region can set
further objectives and it is then possible to follow the evolution of the town’s, city’s or
region’s cycling policy.
BYPAD has already been applied in practice by over 100 towns, cities, and regions. This
started already during its development phase, and is (continuously) further improved
according to the experience of the auditors and the needs of the towns, cities, and
regions.
The possible similarities between BYPAD and the future ISEMOA schemes are very clear.
As ISEMOA, BYPAD distinguishes between different geographical entities, describes the
actual situation and is auditing the working process (with a clear focus on the working
process).

A3.1.2 European energy award
Another international scheme of interest is the European Energy Award ® (eea ®). The
eea® is an internationally acknowledged certification and quality management system for
cities and communities in Europe to improve energy efficiency at the local level. The
European Energy Award® supports communities that want to contribute to a sustainable
energy policy and urban development through the rational use of energy and an increased
use of renewable energies.
The eea® is a predefined method, proceeding the management cycle of ‘analysing →
planning → implementing → verifying and adjusting’. The European Energy Award®
works with qualified instruments for steering and controlling local energy policy in order to
review all energy related activities. It enables cities and communities to identify their



Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                 Page 44
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                         STEER




strengths, weaknesses and potential for improvement and above all, to implement energy
efficient measures.
The certification and quality management system consists of three main elements:
    •   Establishment of a total quality management system for energy related areas of
        local authorities.
    •   Certification and awards for energy related achievements and external audit of the
        achievements.
    •   Establishment of a network of cities and communities that promotes co-operation
        and communication.

The eea® certification process includes eight steps:
    •   State-of-the-art analysis
    •   Annual energy report and activity programme
    •   Implementation of projects
    •   Internal audit
    •   Certification
    •   Exchange of experiences
    •   Benchmark
    •   Awarding (If a community or city manages to receive at least 50 % of the possible
        points for achieved results, it will be given the ‘European Energy Award®’. For
        75% and more the city will be awarded the ‘European Energy Award®Gold’.)

A3.1.3 Common assessment framework (CAF)
CAF - Common Assessment Framework (and EPSA-award) is a common European
quality management instrument for the public sector (based on EFQM). CAF is a result of
the co-operation among the EU Ministers responsible for Public Administration. A pilot
version was presented in May 2000 and revised versions were launched in 2002 and
2006. A CAF Resource Centre (CAF RC) was created at the European Institute of Public
Administration (EIPA) in Maastricht following the decision of the Directors General in
charge of public service. It works in close cooperation with the network of CAF national
correspondents.
The CAF is an easy-to-use, free tool to assist public-sector organisations across Europe
in using quality management techniques to improve their performance. The CAF is a total
quality management (TQM) tool which is inspired by the major Total Quality Models in
general, and by the Excellence Model of the European Foundation for Quality
Management (EFQM) in particular. It is especially designed for public-sector
organisations, taking into account their characteristics.
The model is based on the premise that excellent results in organisational performance,
citizens/customers, people and society are achieved through leadership driving strategy
and planning, people, partnerships, resources and processes. It looks at the organisation
from different angles at the same time; a holistic approach to organisation performance
analysis.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                               Page 45
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                            STEER




The structure in the CAF model is described below:




Figure A3.3: The CAF model



The CAF has four main purposes:
   1. To introduce public administrations to the principles of TQM and gradually guide
      them, through the use and understanding of self-assessment, from the current
      “Plan-Do” sequence of activities to a full fledged “Plan-Do-Check-Act (PCDA)”
      cycle;
   2. To facilitate the self-assessment of a public organisation in order to arrive at a
      diagnosis and improvement actions;
   3. To act as a bridge across the various models used in quality management;
   4. To facilitate benchmarking and learning between public-sector organisations.

The involvement of staff is key to the implementation of CAF. It should be a joint project
for management and staff and very often CAF is the first occasion on which management
and staff meet to discuss the state of affairs of the organisation and options for the future,
in order to improve efficiency and effectiveness.
Over the past 10 years, nearly 2000 public sector organisations all over Europe have used
the model and the number of CAF users is still growing.
In 2009, the CAF External Feedback scheme was created to further support organisations
in using the CAF most effectively in their future quality management journey. This
procedure, carried out by peers and experts in TQM, aims at providing external feedback
on the introduction of total quality management through CAF, relating not only to the self-
assessment process, but also regarding the path organisations have chosen to attain
excellence in the long run.
This website provides information at European level.
Website: http://www.eipa.eu/caf

A3.1.4 EN16001
BS EN 16001: 2009 Energy Management Systems Standard provides the most robust
framework for optimizing energy efficiency in public and private sector organisations.


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                  Page 46
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                       STEER




The aim of the new standard BS EN 16001:2009 is to offer assistance to organisations
developing systems and processes for the improvement of energy efficiency. The new
standard defines the energy management requirements (EMS). The systematic approach
enables a company to continuously improve its energy performance. At the same time
legal requirements and other obligations for the company are considered. The standard
can be applied independently, or linked with other management systems. The structure
complies with BS EN ISO 14001.

A3.1.5 British standard 8555 Acorn
To provide a framework for an environmental management system, Acorn offers
accredited recognition for organisations evaluating and improving their environmental
performance through the phased implementation of an environmental management
system (EMS). Acorn focuses on environmental improvements that are linked to business
competitiveness.
The main areas Acorn includes are:
• Size, nature, frequency, likelihood and duration of the environmental impact;
• The sensitivity of the receiving environment and the extent to which the impact is
  reversible;
• The extent to which the impact (or the activity, product or service which causes it) is
  covered by environmental laws and regulations, or contractual requirements; and
• The importance of the impact to interested parties e.g. employees, neighbours,
  regulators.


The audit consists of six phases:
• Commitment and establishing the base line
• Identifying and ensuring compliance with legal and other requirements
• Developing objectives, targets and programmes
• Implementation and operation of the EMS
• Checking, audit and review; and EMS acknowledgement




A3.2 Audits focusing on several categories that are connected to
    accessibility

A3.2.1 Mediate (micro and macro accessibility)
The EU-project MEDIATE (www.mediate-project.eu), which finished in 2010, is an
important resource for ISEMOA for indicators describing the accessibility of urban public
transport. The MEDIATE-project, like ISEMOA, takes into account both micro and macro
accessibility including the crucial importance of, as MEDIATE calls it, seamless travel
(door-to-door perspective or modal interoperability). MEDIATE is based on EFQM and
provides important input concerning accessibility indicators.

Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                              Page 47
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                           STEER




The overall objective of MEDIATE is to contribute to the development of urban transport
systems that provide better access for all citizens. The project objective was to establish a
common European methodology for measuring accessibility to transport. The project
report on indicators for urban public transport accessibility was the first key deliverable.
The other MEDIATE key deliverables are the self-assessment tool, the good practice
guide, and the final report.
Key elements have been the establishment of an End-User Platform (http://www.age-
platform.org/EN/IMG/pdf_EUP_composition.pdf) and the web portal on public transport
accessibility www.aptie.eu (www.accessiblepublictransportineurope.eu). More information
about the Mediate project can be found on the project’s website www.mediate-project.eu.

A3.2.2 AMELIA (micro and macro accessibility)
AMELIA (international, A Methodology To Enhance Life by Increasing Accessibility) aims
to help local planners to determine whether their transport, and related policies, help
increase social inclusion. By taking into account various mobility guidelines it can be seen
whether they allow more people to reach opportunities including shops, employment,
leisure facilities, and medical and welfare centres. A software tool (GIS-based) is being
developed to test the impact of transport policies on socially excluded groups. It can give
indicative costs of implementing accessibility improvements. A pilot version has been
used to calculate the cost per head of improvements to walking for elderly people in St
Albans, UK.

A3.2.3 Design manual for roads and bridges (micro and macro
accessibility)
The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Vol 5 Section 2 Non-Motorised User
Audits (Great Britain) is intended to ensure that the needs of non-motorised users (NMU)
are taken into account in the design of roads schemes. The audit/scheme puts particular
emphasis on the needs of PRM. The auditors of the audit are supposed to prepare a
context report that shows how NMUs travel in the area of the new road scheme, before it
is built. It then considers the design of the new road scheme and how it might have a
negative impact on NMUs, especially those who are also PRM. Where it does not impose
“unreasonable” expense on the scheme design it should lead to modifications of the
design to take into account the needs of these people. Reasonable modifications might
include ensuring that pedestrian facilities all meet minimum design widths; that seating
and rest points are built along pedestrian routes; that sufficient crossing points are
provided; and so on.

A3.2.4 Safety audit (micro accessibility)
The Czech Safety Audit is an audit for new traffic constructions (roads, roundabouts,
crossings, highways…) focusing on traffic safety regarding the most vulnerable persons -
PRM, cyclists, pedestrians. The audit should be implemented during the process of
planning, construction or reconstruction. It is an audit for project documentation. The


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                 Page 48
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                           STEER




purpose is to eliminate the accidents before they occur. The auditors evaluate the
potential risk from a user’s point of view.

A3.2.5 Inclusive mobility (micro accessibility)
The British Inclusive Mobility is more a design guidance than an auditing scheme.
Inclusive Mobility is based on the British Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) and helps,
thus, designer and organizations to ensure that they are in compliance with the law. As
design guidance, Inclusive Mobility gives designers detailed advice (e.g. pavement widths,
ramp gradient, layout of tactile paving, spacing and availability of seating) on how to make
the street and built environment more accessible to PRM. It does not require any user
feedback or monitoring on a finished scheme – so there is no in-built step in the process
whereby a newly-accessible built environment, built according to the standards in
Inclusive Mobility, is monitored to see whether more PRM are satisfied with it and using it
than before.

A3.2.6 Universal accessibility (micro accessibility)
This international quality management scheme or certification serves to enable the access
of any person to any environment regardless of age or disability. It also provides the same
access possibilities to a constructed area with the highest autonomy possible. It is
designed for organisations that would like to show their capacity to provide and maintain
accessible environments that comply with legal and normative requirements and to the
MGLC criteria (Moving, Grasping, Location and Communication) specified in this norm.
Based on the actual situation, the scheme helps to define policies, objectives and the
necessary elements and resources to guarantee the user the use and enjoyment of public
spaces, independent of age or disability. The organisation must establish, document
implement and maintain a universal accessibility management system and continuously
improve its effectiveness, according to the requirements of this norm.
The process for obtaining the global accessibility management system certification is
carried out by AENOR. AENOR is an independent entity, impartial and with wide expertise
in management systems audits, but also bringing along with it the experience and
knowledge of the Fundación ONCE, the Spanish blind charity. AENOR awards the
certification to those organisations that after being audited by a joint team, have been
shown to have complied with the requirements of the Norm UNE 170.001-2 "Global
Accessibility. Criteria to facilitate accessibility. Part II: Global Accessibility Management
System".

A3.2.7 Road safety audit (micro accessibility)
The Spanish Road Safety Audit “on the way to school” aims to review the road safety
conditions in a municipality in order to improve school surroundings. This is done by
implementing physical, education and participation measures, seeking the maximum
transferability possible     given    the   participation  of   all   the     interested
stakeholders/departments in the municipality. The audit may be of interest for ISEMOA

Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                 Page 49
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                                 STEER




because of the questionnaire given to all stakeholders involved. The questionnaire
introduces aspects such as: pedestrian crossings, intersections, non-slippery pavements,
priority measures, traffic signalling, visibility, security barriers, sidewalk situation, lighting,
routes signals, safe accesses, etc.

A3.2.8 BREEAM (macro accessibility)
BREEAM Communities (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment
Method, Great Britain) is an independent, third party assessment and certification
standard. The BREEAM methodology addresses key environmental, social and economic
sustainability objectives and planning policy requirements that have an impact on
proposed development projects within the built environment. Credits are awarded in eight
categories according to their performance against defined sustainability objectives and
planning policy requirements. The category “Transport“ includes macro accessibility. This
category addresses how people can get to the facilities and locations that they need;
giving people choices other than private cars and encouraging walking and cycling for
healthier lifestyles. The Transport category covers the following issues: Walkable
Neighbourhoods, Cycle Networks, Provision of Public Transport, Green Travel Plans,
Construction Transport.
The credits are added together to produce a single overall score on a scale of Pass,
Good, Very Good, Excellent and Outstanding. The operation of BREEAM Communities is
overseen by an independent Sustainability Board, representing a wide cross-section of
construction industry stakeholders.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                       Page 50
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                           STEER




APPENDIX 4: AUDITS FOCUSING ON THE ACTUAL SITUATION


A4.1 General audits focusing on the actual situation

A4.1.1 AnySurfer
Mainly for the information part of the door-to-door travel chain, the “AnySurfer” quality
label (Belgium) for accessible websites is of interest. This audit is neither connected to
macro nor micro accessibility, but can still be of importance for the whole travel chain. The
aim of the AnySurfer network is to improve the accessibility of websites. This means that
web visitors should be able to visit the website without a keyboard, mouse, screen,
speakers, with a slow internet access and/or combinations of these.
Websites can obtain an AnySurfer quality label if they satisfy the conditions mentioned in
the AnySurfer checklist. This checklist is based on the WCAG version 2.0 (web content
accessibility guidelines) from the World Wide Web consortium. In some countries WCAG
is mandatory for all websites. In for example Belgium, where the label comes from, it is
not. Therefore, the AnySurfer network tries to introduce it by offering a label for those
websites that meet the requirements in the checklist.


A4.2 Audits focusing on the actual situation connected to accessibility

For the development of the ISEMOA-schemes, the description of the actual situation is of
interest. The main input from other already established audits/schemes are indicators that
can describe micro and macro accessibility and can, thus, give inspiration for ISEMOA.

A4.2.1 Quality of             Life     in   Neighbourhoods(micro            and     macro
      accessibility)
Quality of Life in Neighbourhoods (Lebensqualität in Siedlungen) is a German audit
that aims to:
    •   provide a certificate for the proven quality of neighbourhoods
    •   consider a neighbourhood as one unit that should meet the basic needs of its
        inhabitants
    •   permit a comparative evaluation of neighbourhoods and areas (as an alternative to
        the more usual evaluation on the basis of negative criteria i.e. unemployment,
        welfare recipients, …)
    •   provide some indications as to how to improve quality in the neighbourhood.

One part of the audit also concerns infrastructure. In the relevant section of the audit,
“Target group specific infrastructure” and “PT-access” are audited among other quality
indicators.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                 Page 51
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                            STEER




A4.2.2 Pedestrian audit (micro and macro accessibility)
The Austrian Pedestrian Audit (Fussgängercheck) was originally developed in England
and in Scandinavian countries – The Austrian pedestrian association “walk-space.at -
Österreichischer Verein für FußgängerInnen” adopted the scheme for Austria based on
the Swiss “Augenschein Fussverkehr”-scheme and named it “Fußgängercheck”. The audit
aims to:
    •   provide the local authority with detailed information regarding the needs of
        pedestrians
    •   find and analyse “weak points” in the local pedestrian-routes-network
    •   provide suggestions regarding possible solutions to improve the “weak points”
    •   provide results that can be implemented quickly and easily
    •   create only minor financial and personnel effort

The audit is interesting both from a micro and a macro accessibility point of view.

A4.2.3 Post-occupancy evaluation from a universal design perspective
      (micro and macro accessibility)
The “Post-Occupancy Evaluation from a Universal Design Perspective” (for the built
environment) was established by the Centre for Excellence in Universal Design (CEUD,
Ireland). CEUD was established by the National Disability Authority (NDA) in January
2007 under the Disability Act 2005. The CEUD is part of the National Disability Authority
which is the lead state agency on disability issues, providing independent expert advice to
Government on policy and practice.
This evaluation describes a user-centred approach to informing built environment design.
The approach involves evaluating buildings which are currently in use, to learn how the
current users actually interact with and use the building (both from a functional and a user-
satisfaction perspective), and subsequently to inform future building design.
Universal Design is the design and composition of an environment so that it can be
accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible by all people, regardless
of their age, size or disability. This includes public places in the built environment such as
buildings, streets or spaces that the public have access to; products and services
provided in those places; and systems that are available including information and
communications technology (ICT).
The evaluation is applicable across a broad spectrum of features of the built and external
environment and is, thus, connected to both micro and macro accessibility.

A4.2.4 Journey chain – Accessibility Checklist (micro accessibility)
For micro accessibility, the “Journey Chain – Accessibility Checklist” (Transport
solutions for people with reduced mobility, Ireland)) must be named. This Audit checklist
includes the total journey chain of a public transport user. 'Journey Chain - Accessibility
Checklist' draws information from the transport user at each stage of the trip. e.g



Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                  Page 52
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                               STEER




accessing information regarding proposed trip; journey from start point to bus/tram
stop/train station; Bus/Tram/Railway stations; Interchange; to final destination.
Some aspects of the chain are outside the remit of the transport operator. If they are not
accessible, then the whole trip is not accessible and the value of the accessible section
has not been optimised. The model below gives an idea about the general ideology
behind the checklist and indicates the importance of accessible infrastructure (not just the
vehicles).




Figure A4.1: Model of the general ideology behind the accessibility checklist in Journey
Chain

A4.2.5 Berlin “barrier free” label (micro accessibility)
The German label Berlin “barrier free” (Signet Berlin barrierefrei) was developed and
                introduced in close cooperation with several institutions from the
                economic sector, trade, tourism, culture and science of Berlin. It is a
                label for the identification of accessible facilities (on a micro
                accessibility level) and for identifying the accessibility of the city’s
                transport system and raising awareness of the need for accessible
                services and buildings.
                     Signs, such as labels for the identification of accessible public
                     transport, can raise the awareness of the need for accessible services.
                     In addition to labelled services being positive examples, they stand out
                     from other services and there may also be resulting economic benefits.
                     The label signals a standard quality to people with disabilities. It is only
                      awarded when certain quality standards are met; these indicate not
Figure A4.2: The
“Berlin barreiere- only that people with diverse disabilities are welcome, but that the
frei” label        establishment provides benefits for all.
                      To receive the label the fulfilment of certain quality standards is
required; these are set out in a criteria catalogue.
City of Berlin (regional representative for people with disabilities) used to be in charge of
the audit, but control has now passed to two other organisations, Albatros              e.V.   and


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                     Page 53
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                             STEER




Mobidat. The label is currently in the process of being redesigned. New criteria and
processes    have     been      introduced.    More information  is   available   on
www.berlin.de/lb/behi/barrierefrei/index.html.

A4.2.6 TOEVLA (micro accessibility)
TOEVLA (Toegankelijk Vlaanderen, accessible Flanders) aims to collect a consistent
level of information about accessible buildings and accommodation and to make this
available to all kinds of people with reduced mobility. Any organisation that wants its
buildings to be added to the list of those that are accessible can apply for an accessibility
study. An expert from one of the four Provincial Accessibility Centres visits the site and
measures its accessibility based on a set of predefined norms and criteria. This
information is then stored in a public database. The organisation receives a report of the
accessibility assessment with some additional advice and recommendations on how to
further improve it.
The audit is mainly relevant to micro accessibility, but also to other forms of accessibility
of less importance for ISEMOA.                  Further   information    can   be   found   on
www.toevla.be/frameset.aspx.

A4.2.7 EN13816 (micro accessibility)
The European standard EN13816 – Quality of service in the public passenger
transport sector has some relevance to ISEMOA due to its focus on customers. The DIN
EN 13816 standard is guidance for local public transport companies and carriers to
encourage the quality philosophy in transport as well as to draw the attention to the needs
and expectations of the customer. The standard is a proof of the quality capability of
transport companies in the public passenger transport. The standard contains the
definition of objectives and measuring of quality of public passenger transport services
and includes suggestions for the selection of measurement methods. The main objective
of the standard is:
    •   to promote the quality philosophy for public transports,
    •   to focus on the needs and expectations of customers,
    •   to direct the attention of public authorities to these issues,
    •   to clarify allocation of responsibilities,
    •   to enable comparison of the quality of different service providers,
    •   to contribute to continuous quality improvement.


The benefits of quality management according to EN 13816:
    •   data and facts on service quality initiate cause analysis and permanent
        improvements
    •   less costs through avoidance of failures (e.g. higher punctuality, less double work,
        higher reliability etc.)
    •   increase in income through higher customer satisfaction


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                   Page 54
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                       STEER




    •   competitive advantages in tendering processes
    •   transparent quality criteria and reliable quality level
    •   better image as a „brand name“




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                              Page 55
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                         STEER




APPENDIX 5: AUDITS FOCUSING ON THE WORKING PROCESS


A5.1General audits focusing on the working process

A5.1.1 MaxQ
MaxQ, Quality Management Scheme for Mobility Management (QMSMM) is a product
of a former EU-project and builds, as many other schemes, on EN ISO 9001 and the
EFQM Excellence model. MaxQ consists of a code of practice for defining, implementing
and continually improving quality in mobility management in small and medium sized
cities. It can be used as the basis for a self-assessment based on an internal auditing
procedure or as the basis for certification/audit by a competent third party (external
auditor).
A MaxQ audit results in an analysis of the MM work, an identification of strengths and
weaknesses and proposed improvements to improve the MM work.
MaxQ comprises four logic components, each
being concretised in a number of elements or
quality criteria (in total in 12 elements, see
model in Figure A5.1):
    •   Component 1: Mobility Management
        Policy
    •   Component 2: Strategy
    •   Component 3: Implementation
    •   Component 4: Monitoring and evaluation



The 12 elements are key features for cities and    Figure A5.1: MaxQ model
organisations in order to start-up mobility
management and to continually improve their performance in MM. Information and
discussion about the 12 elements provide input for an objective evaluation of the current
MM-policy and the way and direction future improvements can be made.
The audit is based on a questionnaire and meetings. Depending on the chosen depth of
the auditing process, analysis of both the input material and the results as well as
additional interviews can also be added.
In order to examine and assess the current practice in each of the 12 elements, the quality
management ladder of development is used as a rating mechanism to indicate the city or
organisation’s current stage of development. Six different development phases are
distinguished:
    •   Development phase 5: Total quality MM
    •   Development phase 4: Chain oriented MM-approach
    •   Development phase 3: System oriented MM-approach


Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                               Page 56
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                             STEER




    •   Development phase 2: Process oriented MM-approach
    •   Development phase 1: Activity oriented MM-approach
    •   Development phase 0: No evidence of MM-approach at all

A5.1.2 PROSE
The Belgian PROSE network is a network of practitioners and experts in the two main
sectors in which PROSE is active: health and welfare, and education and training (the
network has more than 500 member organisations). The PROSE scheme is based on the
EFQM’s nine criteria: leadership, strategy, human resources, means, core processes (= 5
enabler criteria), client satisfaction, employee satisfaction, societal results, organisation
performance (4 output criteria). The area “core processes” is completed using very sector
specific items.
A path of development is used to assess the overall level of QM going from step 1 (quality
is the result of personal effort and is variable) to step 5 (external orientation and excellent
performance).
The Prose-method wants to involve all relevant stakeholders in QM. It uses a generic
framework and a systematic approach (using a self diagnosis instrument based on a set
of online self assessment tools, etc.). PROSE focuses on all relevant core processes
related to the health and education sector in an organisation.
PROSE instruments are:
    •   A PROSE-manual explaining the scheme’s philosophy
    •   A quick scan in order to quickly detect main strengths and weaknesses
    •   Questionnaires and working forms for diagnosis, planning and reporting
    •   Helping tools s;a. excel programs for additional analysis, templates for reporting,
        presentations and user tips
    •   Online diagnoses to organise and automatically process surveys

An organisation that adopts the PROSE method can apply for a label B(asic), A(dvanced)
and + (plus). In order to obtain a label, an external audit is conducted by a PROSE expert.
For a label B, the organisation applying PROSE needs to satisfy 12 criteria that refer
mainly to the quality of the self-assessment done in the organisation. For a label A, 6
additional criteria need to be satisfied (referring to the quality and follow up of
improvement plan). For a +-label, another six extra criteria need to be satisfied, referring
to the overall integration of PROSE into the organisation. A- and B labels are valid for 3
years; the plus-label remains valid for 5 years.
Although EFQM (the basis for PROSE) specifies areas of interest, enablers (input) and
outputs, its main focus is on the quality and improvement of the working process in these
fields. For example: has the organisation established objectives, has it set up criteria and
indicators, is it measuring performance and is the performance positive. Indirectly
however, PROSE experts give advice to organisations about what indicators should be
used to measure specific output and impact. As PROSE is a national system focusing on




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                   Page 57
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                            STEER




only two sectors of activities, the advice about the use of output criteria and indicators can
be, and is, made much more concrete and sector-specific than in EFQM more generally.

A5.1.3 Promax
The “Promax” team audit from Bulgaria is a tool for collecting, analyzing, and interpreting
information to facilitate team effort and responsibilities. The system is a unique Bulgarian
research product. The “Promax” team audit system follows the natural and logical pace for
creating a team and developing a team. With the help of “Promax”, managers and
participants in the team receive information about the team processes and potentially
troublesome issues, as well as a clear solution to those problems.
A critical aspect for the success of the team audit is the initial raw data gathered for each
employee (and respectively for the team as whole). The surveys employed by the
“Promax” System to conduct the audit are as follows:
    •   Survey “Team type”
    •   Survey “Team efficiency”
    •   Survey “Self-evaluation”
    •   Survey “Teammate evaluation”
    •   Survey “Responsibilities’ requirements”

Due to the ISEMOA-projects approach focusing on both macro and micro accessibility,
many different stakeholders are involved in the accessibility process. Team work and
good communication is therefore needed and the Promax audit might be a resource in this
context.

A5.1.5 European work and family audit®
(Text source: „Directive on the implementation of the „european work & family audit ®“,
http://bmwa.cms.apa.at/cms/content/attachments/6/3/4/CH0554/CMS1172750176514/rl-e.pdf)

The European Work and Family Audit® guides companies through an internal process
of defining and implementing goals and measures related to a family-oriented employment
policy. First of all, the company determines the status of its current measures to promote
work life balance, and then systematically works out its development potential with the aid
of a catalogue of different measures.
Trained auditors or consultants are part of the process, making targeted suggestions for
the development of employment policy in the company, and for the implementation of
concrete measures. A process is initiated to firmly establish and then maintain corporate
consciousness of family issues on a long-term basis.
A European Work and Family Audit® can take place either in the company as a whole or
only in individual areas. Large companies with different business segments or a
decentralised organisation may require several audits.
The Austrian “Beruf & Familie gemeinnützige GmbH”, acts as the European Coordinating
Body, holds the trademark rights that are protected throughout Europe, and is responsible
for the uniform implementation of European work & family audits®. The European Work

Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                  Page 58
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                            STEER




and Family Audit® is coordinated centrally, but the implementation is done nationally in
the countries: The instrument European Work and Family Audit® is provided free of
charge to interested national bodies (e.g. ministry for social affairs, etc.), who want to
implement it in their countries. Such national audit- and certification-schemes, which are
based on the European Work and Family Audit®, are currently implemented for example
in Austria, Italy, and Slovenia.
An example of such a national certification-scheme, which is based on the European
Work and Family Audit®, is the Family-Friendly Enterprise Certificate of Slovenia:
The Family-Friendly Enterprise Certificate (Slovenia) is a consulting-audit process
developed as a tool for effective human resources management within enterprises and
organizations. The “Family-Friendly Enterprise” Certificate represents a significant novelty
in the Slovenian business environment. Sociological research, conducted by the Faculty
of Social Sciences (University of Ljubljana), within the scope of the project demonstrated
that Slovenian managers do not regard the balancing of work and family (“work life
balance”) as an issue to be discussed at work. Rather, it is treated as something that the
employees need to manage by themselves and one that ought not to be raised at work
with their supervisors.
The Certificate represents one way for an enterprise or organisation to
show that it is acting in a socially-responsible way. For its successful
development and growth, an organisation’s employee satisfaction and
loyalty is of key importance, and this is also a crucial objective of the
“Family-Friendly Enterprise” Certificate.

The goal of the “Family-Friendly Enterprise” Certificate introduction is:   Figure A5.2: The
    •   to make businesses aware of the negative business impact of         certificate’s sign
        discriminating (potential) parents at work as well as in the labour
        market,
    •   to provide businesses with tools for implementation of HR policies for a better work
        life balance,
    •   to publicly recognize those businesses with a positive attitude to work life balance.

By means of an internal process the company can set out and achieve the selected
objectives and measures. With the help of an external auditor the organisation can
develop a plan to improve work life balance for its staff. If this plan is accepted, the
organisation obtains a Basic Certificate "Family-Friendly Enterprise”. After three years a
further assessment decides whether the planned measures have been implemented and
the goals attained. If all objectives are achieved, the company receives a Full Certificate
"Family-Friendly Enterprise".




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                                  Page 59
Intelligent Energy – Europe                                                         STEER




A5.1.6 INK management model
The INK management model (Netherlands) is developed by the Dutch Ministry of
Economic affairs and INK - Instituut Nederlandse Kwaliteit (Institute for Dutch Quality (a
Dutch foundation).
The INK-model is an EFQM-based QM-model applying 10 areas of interest/attention:
    •   5 enabler or organisation related areas (leadership, management of human
        resources, strategy and policy, management of finance, management of processes
        and
    •   4 output or results related areas (staff, customers and partners, society, finance
        and management) and a
    •   10th area called “Improvement and Innovation”.

An INK-audit is used in order to obtain an improvement label, Distinction label or Prize-
label. An auditing team of at least three auditors is assigned by the INK-organisation. An
organization should score at least 350, 450 or 600 points on its INK-self-assessment in
order to apply for the respective labels. The motivation for applying to one of these three
labels is to be acknowledged for adopting QM in the organisation and as an incentive for
further improvement.
The INK-model includes a self-assessment procedure within the organisation. This self-
assessment in the INK-model is based on an individual preparation (with questionnaires)
done by the auditing team reflecting the organization, followed by a group discussion
where consensus is sought.
A short time feedback procedure is called “INK-contest”: it concentrates on the core
issues. The main idea is to have a discussion about the organisation’s own current
approach to quality management with two external discussants around 6 themes: risks,
improvement and innovation, external orientation, ambitions, results and important
processes, and necessity for change.




Compilation of QM-schemes and audits                                               Page 60

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:40
posted:6/25/2011
language:English
pages:60