Values for Evidence

[Marco-ICTU-NL]

Criterion/evidence can be quite broad. For instance, in the example of applying for licensing/protected title, we see only one situation (a master's degree in medicine/a certificate is required). However, such a service is meant for a much broader spectrum of occupations, not just medicine. If we apply this model in the way shown in the example, it would be required to exhaustively list all possible degrees and certificates. I wonder if this is feasible. Wouldn't it be better to stick here to a plain-text description of 'the requirements' for the service as opposed to having CA's list every specific requirement individually?

The list used in the SDG TOOP project seems to have a more practical level

Evidence ID	Relevant evidence for cross-border exchange
E1	Copy of certificate of completion of secondary education
E2	Certificate of change of name, e.g. marriage/divorce certificate
E3	Certificate of Good Standing/ of absence of prohibition to work
E4	Vehicle registration certificate
E5	Certificate from country B specifying the amount of social benefits entitlement hitherto resulting from student status, and certifying that this entitlement is terminated.
E6	Certificate confirming that country B’s secondary education completion certificate entitles the applicant to entry in country B’s universities
E7	Certificate confirming the country and curriculum of the secondary education system attended by the applicant
E8	Certificate of full attendance of the last two classes of secondary education
E9	Authorisation to perform construction activities to provide electrical, water, gas and sewage services in country B, with any limitations indicated
E10	Extract of criminal record
E11	Authorisation to work as a tourist guide
E12	Tourist guide licence or badge
E13	Birth Certificate
E14	Tax declaration with amount of tax paid and tax recovered
E15	Social Security registration certificate
E16	Certificate of perception of subsistence minimum allowance or care allowance for individual or their household
E17	Certificate of perception of orphan allowance or military orphan allowance
E18	Copy of court decision ordering institutional care/educational measure/other urgent measure
E19	Court decision granting custody of the applicant to someone other than the applicant’s parent(s)
E20	Certificate of perception of scholarship in previous or current academic year
E21	Document proving that the applicant has three or more underage and unprovided-for siblings or two or more underage and unprovided-for siblings who study full-time at university
E22	Copy of F-gas certification of all employees who will work with F-gas
E23	Copy of Company F-gas certification
E24	(Copy of) identification document/means
E25	Certificate of absence of bankruptcy in the past 5 years
E26	Verification of Qualification in Architecture Form (sent directly by the university in country B)
E27	(Certified) copy of university diploma recognised in Member State of origin giving access to studies/work
E28	Original and/or copy of university diploma supplement
E29	Evidence of language proficiency, if applicable
E30	Certificate of Current Professional Status and/or Evidence of acquired professional experience
E31	Record of results of previous academic year
E32	Original and copy of European Diploma Supplement (if applicable)
E33	Attestation issued by country B that the qualification complies with Directive 2005/36/EC
E34	Accompanying Certificate (if applicable) as required under Directive 2005/36/EC
E35	Certificate of acquired rights according to Art. 23, 33 and 33a of Directive 2005/36/EC
E36	Copy of the vocational qualification with supplement
E37	Certificate of perception of scholarship in previous or current academic year

[barthelemyf]

Proposed resolution

Following the proposed resolution from #21 , we would differentiate between the information required for the end-users from the data required for providing the service in compliance with the OOP. The ongoing work between CCCEV, TOOP and other initiatives foresee several classes to give public administrations the possibility to deal with various cases of criterion/evidence conciliation. For now in the SDG extended model, we would propose to have the class “Evidence” with two free text properties for the name and description, a format property where we would recommend the use of a controlled vocabulary and finally a type property using a controlled vocabulary/classification such as the one you indicated from SDG TOOP. We think that this would give sufficient flexibility to the public administrations for providing an overview of the criteria and their types of evidence required for a certain service. They could decide the level of details of those descriptions and this would avoid requiring from each PA to list all possible certificates etc. which is not the purpose. This proposition is also aligned with the latest proposition from CCCEV. We would also propose the Criterion class with two free text properties for the name and description. This would give the public administrations the possibility to link evidence and criterion together.

This discussion will need to continue concerning the extended model of the SDG and the OOP model: how to match values between on the one hand criteria, their information requirements and constraints (so the specific value(s) expected to answer to a certain criterion through its information requirement(s) and according to its constraints) and on the other hand, evidence (so the specific value(s) provided together with the right level of trust as response to the criterion). For this part, we need further alignment with the CCCEV, TOOP and any other relevant model.

Rationale

The requirements from the SDGR are precise concerning certain information to be provided:

• Art. 10: “The Member States and the Commission shall, for the purposes of complying with Article 4, ensure that [...][users] have access to a sufficiently comprehensive, clear and user-friendly explanation of the following elements, where applicable, of the procedures referred to in point (b) of Article 2(2):
  • the type and format of evidence to be submitted
  • …”

Therefore, we would propose to require public administrations to provide the types of evidence and their formats for each public service. However, we would leave optional to link this information with a description of the criterion to be met with those pieces of evidence. In our understanding, having the Criterion class is important since it formalises why specific pieces of evidence are required. Alternatively, this could be discussed as part of the SDG extended model.