Outcome of survey on staff interest in Member States

“Based on your current knowledge of the official Member State offers, and the extent to which they fulfil your (and your family's) needs and expectations to settle in a new location, how likely are you to follow the Agency to the below candidate cities?”

• Staff loss calculated as percentage of respondents not indicating ‘likely’ or ‘very likely.

• Staff retention calculated as percentage of respondents indicating ‘likely’ or ‘very likely’ to move.

General assembly, 25 September 20174

Outcome of staff survey and possible impact on Agency’s activities

The staff retention figures have been combined with the figures for the business continuity categories for each of the 19 candidate host cities. The cut off lines for category 2 and 1 activities are shown in red.

General assembly, 25 September 20175

Survey results Candidate cities (alphabetical)Business continuity category Impact

Bonn (Germany) Brussels (Belgium)Dublin (Ireland)Lille (France)Porto (Portugal)

EMA should be able to continue essential scientific assessment activities but with delays; a significant number of public health activities have to be postponed or suspended to ring-fence resources, e.g. for safety monitoring.

5 candidate cities:• average of 54%• range between 51% and

60%

Group 250% to 64% staff retention: meets EMA requirements but raises concerns that EMA is operational on time.

Stockholm (Sweden) Interruptions to EMA’s essential assessment activities occur. All other activities have to be cut to reallocate resources.

1 candidate city:• average of 48%

Group 330% to 49% staff retention: only partially meets EMA requirements and, therefore, raises major concerns as regards EMA business continuity.

Amsterdam (The Netherlands)Barcelona (Spain)Copenhagen (Denmark)Milan (Italy)Vienna (Austria)

EMA is able to continue essential scientific assessment activities without interruptions. In addition, progress can be made on a significant number of public health initiatives, albeit at a slower pace, e.g. cooperation with health technology assessment bodies, international relations or transparency.

5 candidate cities: • average of 73%• range between 65% and

81%

Group 1Over 65% staff retention: meets EMA requirements and ensures that EMA is operational on time.

Athens (Greece)Bratislava (Slovakia)Bucharest (Romania)Helsinki (Finland)MaltaSofia (Bulgaria)Warsaw (Poland)Zagreb (Croatia)

EMA will be unable to operate, due to the unprecedented staff loss. There will be a public health crisis.

8 candidate cities:• average of 18%• range between 6% and

28%

Group 4Below 30% staff retention: does not meet EMA requirements and, therefore, does not ensure EMA business continuity.

Business continuity impact in staff retention scenarios

General assembly, 25 September 20176