The Department for Education records do not contain any personal data or identification numbers but rather aggregated data by certain demographic groups. Since these records do not include personally identifiable information, they are not subject to the GDPR's requirements for records of processing activities.
Before determining whether Frank's performance database is permissible, Anna needs to obtain more information about what students have been told and how the research will be used. This is crucial to ensure that the data processing aligns with the principles of transparency and purpose limitation under the GDPR. Anna must verify that the students have been informed about the use of their data and that the processing is in accordance with the purposes for which the data was originally collected, or to determine if the new purpose is compatible with the original purpose.
A risk analysis is generally required under the GDPR only when the processing is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons. If the processing Frank proposes does not negatively affect the rights of the data subjects, then a risk analysis may not be necessary. This aligns with the principle of data protection impact assessments (DPIA), which are mandatory when high-risk processing is involved.
The European Commission has the power to adopt findings that confirm the adequacy of the data protection level in a non-EU country. According to GDPR, the European Commission is responsible for determining whether a country outside the EU offers an adequate level of data protection by issuing adequacy decisions.
Both the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Council of Europe Convention 108 address the international transfers of personal data. The GDPR includes regulations governing the transfer of personal data to third countries or international organizations, and the Convention 108 also establishes requirements for transborder data flows.