kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

Europaudvalget 2025
KOM (2025) 0198
Offentligt

EUROPEAN

COMMISSION

Brussels, 12.5.2025

COM(2025) 198 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE

COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE

COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Mid-term evaluation of the Technical Support Instrument (2021-2027)

{SWD(2025) 117 final}

kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE

COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE

COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Mid-term evaluation of the Technical Support Instrument (2021-2027)

INTRODUCTION

Structural reforms

can be understood as measures with long-lasting effects on the structure

of the economy, the institutional and regulatory framework in which businesses and people

operate, public governance, or progress towards relevant policy objectives.

The Technical

Support Instrument (TSI) was set up by

Regulation (EU) 2021/240,

building on its

predecessor - the structural reform support programme (SRSP, 2017-2020) - and managed by

the Directorate-General for Structural Reform Support (DG REFORM)

. Since its creation in

2021, the TSI has provided tailor-made technical expertise to any Member State facing

challenges in designing and implementing its reform agenda in a wide range of policy areas.

The support is demand-driven and does not require co-financing from Member States.

This mid-term evaluation covers

all projects funded under the

2021, 2022 and 2023 TSI

cycles, in all 27 Member States.

This constitutes a total of 611 technical support projects,

corresponding to 886 national components of projects, for a total budget of EUR 359 million.

The mid-term evaluation analyses the

operational cycle of the

TSI annual

work

programmes, from the reception and assessment of Member States’ technical support requests

to the evaluation of closed technical support projects after implementation.

The results of this evaluation will

help identify potential ways to improve the

implementation of the TSI until end-2027 and will inform discussions and decision-making

on the future of technical support.

METHODOLOGY

This evaluation is informed by: (i) a supporting study

carried out by an independent

contractor over a period of 11 months starting on 21-December-2023; (ii) a series of four

internal workshops organised by DG REFORM; and (iii) monitoring data, including

information collected after the closure of TSI projects through the feedback mechanism

. In

Since 1 February 2025, DG REFORM was merged into the Reform and Investment Task Force (SG

REFORM).

PPMI and CSES (2025), Supporting study for the mid-term evaluation of the Technical Support Instrument

(2021-2027): final report. Publications Office:

https://op.europa.eu/publication/catalogue_number/HT-01-25-

000-EN-N.

DG REFORM has put in place in 2019 a two-step ‘feedback mechanism’ to monitor and assess individual TSI

projects after their implementation. First, after closure of each technical support project, ‘satisfaction

questionnaires’ are respectively sent to main stakeholders (Commission policy officers, beneficiary authorities,

and technical support providers) to gather feedback on the project’s design and implementation, the interaction

kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

line with EU better regulation guidelines, the mid-term evaluation is structured around the

five evaluation criteria:

relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, and EU added value.

The evaluation methods used include a

desk review

(of DG REFORM monitoring data, TSI

project documents, and other publicly available documents) and

stakeholder consultations.

Consultation activities included: (i) an

open public consultation;(ii)

three

surveys

targeting

TSI stakeholders (technical support providers, and coordinating and beneficiary

authorities),receiving 289 responses; (iii) three

focus group

discussions, gathering a total of

37 participants; and (iv) 114

interviews.

The evaluation also relies on several analyses,

including: (i) a

cost-benefit analysis;

(ii) seven

case studies,

covering 98 projects in various

policy areas (); and (iii) an analysis of TSI projects’

contribution to the United Nations

Sustainable Development Goals.

The evaluation process has encountered some

limitations,

particularly with respect to the

assessment of effectiveness. The

first

main limitation relates to the nature and design of the

TSI: the TSI Regulation does not include the actual adoption and implementation of reforms

in Member States among the general and specific objectives of the instrument, but it rather

focuses on ‘assisting national authorities in improving their capacity’. In addition, the TSI

Regulation does not impose specific reporting obligations on Member States concerning the

use of the support measures and the status of the reforms supported. A second limitation

relates to the current monitoring and evaluation system of TSI projects, which does not

capture in a systematic and objectively verifiable manner the achievements of TSI projects,

especially at outcome and impact level. Data collection tools used (such as surveys and

questionnaires) rely on self-reporting, which can introduce bias into the measurements. Third,

the TSI started in 2021, and around half of projects from the 2021-2023 cycles had been

closed by the time of this evaluation. The outcomes and the longer-term impacts of the

support may only be observable in the Member States after some years, and only if specific

reforms have actually been implemented, so it is possible that several results of projects have

not materialised yet.

The mid-term evaluation includes

mitigation measures

to address, to the extent possible,

these limitations and ensure the reliability of findings. In particular, multiple data sources

were combined and cross-referenced, for example, by complementing the perceptions of

stakeholders with more objective data. In addition, a case study on the follow-up to SRSP

projects has been carried out to better analyse the use of technical support measures by

Member States and their sustainability in the medium-term.

It is important to acknowledge the aforementioned limitations. Firstly, because

acknowledging them better prepares the ground for the

ex post

evaluation, which will enable a

more accurate assessment of outcomes and impacts once the programme ends. Secondly,

recognising these limitations provides valuable insights that can guide future planning and

between the stakeholders, as well as on the scope for improvement and lessons learned. Second, 6, 12 or 18

months later, another ‘outcome questionnaire’ is sent to the beneficiary authorities only, to assess the extent to

which the expected project outcomes were achieved, with a score ranging between 1-10.

kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

decision-making. SG REFORM is currently working on several workstreams to improve

monitoring and evaluation of the TSI, moving towards a more results-oriented monitoring and

evaluation system that might improve the measurement of the medium- and long-term

impacts of the TSI.

The contractor carried out all tasks under the scrutiny of an interservice steering group and the

guidance of DG REFORM. The evidence collected is considered to be representative and

meaningful, making it possible to provide solid answers to the evaluation questions and draw

reliable conclusions and lessons learned.

MAIN FINDINGS

Since its creation in 2021, the TSI has provided technical support to Member States to

improve their capacity to design, develop and implement reforms, as well as to prepare,

amend, implement and revise recovery and resilience plans (RRPs) under the Recovery and

Resilience Facility (RRF).

While keeping the above-mentioned limitations in mind,

the implementation of the TSI was

found to be overall successful in terms of effectiveness, efficiency and coherence in 2021-

2023.

The programme was also found to be highly relevant in addressing the needs of

beneficiary authorities and Member States, which is mainly due to the design of the

instrument. The TSI also had EU added value compared to what could have been achieved by

Member States alone.

Effectiveness

Despite the limitations described above, findings from the evaluation show that between 2021

and 2023, the TSI made significant progress towards its

objectives,

as set out in the TSI

Regulation. Regarding its specific objectives, the TSI effectively assisted Member States in

improving their capacity to design and implement reforms. It also effectively supported the

preparation and implementation of national RRPs by contributing to more than 500 projects

directly or indirectly linked to specific RRP milestones.

In relation to

support to RRPs,

certain misalignments between the deadlines of the RRP

milestones and the delivery schedule of TSI support occurred during the early implementation

of the support in 2021. In some cases, TSI support was provided too early while in others it

arrived too late to be used, which was due to the very narrow window in terms of timing.

These shortcomings highlight the relevance of addressing technical support needs of Member

States from the outset of funding or policy initiatives, ensuring timelines and deadlines are

properly aligned.

A vast majority of TSI stakeholders expressed high satisfaction with the success and results of

technical support projects. TSI projects have delivered valuable

outputs,

especially

recommendations, workshops, training sessions and training material, analysis reports, action

plans and roadmaps, and guidelines. Outputs have been utilised to a substantial extent by

beneficiary authorities to achieve changes at individual, organisational and policy levels. This

contributed to progress in achieving expected

outcomes of the TSI.

kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

The TSI played a significant role in strengthening all types of administrative capacities,

especially internal administrative mechanisms for reforms across the EU.

However, these achievements are highly dependent on

national factors,

such as ownership of

reforms, availability of financial resources to follow up on recommendations, staff stability as

well as political and administrative continuity. The actual achievement of reform results

depends on wider efforts of Member States, considering that the cooperation and support

plans, in which their commitment to engage in the implementation of support measures is

expressed, are not legally binding documents. Nevertheless, there is good potential to multiply

these benefits and improve their sustainability, by fostering (in)formal connections for

existing and future collaborations and exploiting existing knowledge, through a more

systematic dissemination of project results, continued support from Commission officials and

exchange of knowledge among Member States.

Efficiency

Overall, the execution of the TSI and its associated administrative processes has been

largely

efficient.

Thanks to the design of the instrument, there are no reporting obligations for

Member States, and the

administrative burden

is very low compared to other EU

instruments, which is praised by all Member States. Beneficiary authorities considered the

administrative burden associated with the application and project implementation processes to

be reasonable and proportionate.

The high demand for TSI support ensured a good level of competition and the selection of

high-quality proposals, based on the internal scoring attributed to the selected requests under

the seven criteria assessed.

To improve efficiency, DG REFORM has implemented lessons learned from evaluations of

the SRSP, for example

by simplifying and streamlining programme management.

The

introduction of multi-country projects, representing about 10% of all TSI projects from 2021

to 2023, helped tackle common issues among Member States. Multi-country and flagship

projects appear to be more

cost-effective and time-efficient

than stand-alone projects and

those selected under general requests. However, the efficiency of multi-country projects may

potentially be affected by the increased complexity of such projects.

In 2021-2023, the programme was efficient in terms of

process duration

and

budget

execution

from commitments to payments, achieving a high budget utilisation rate. The

overall

cost of controls

by DG REFORM progressively decreased in 2021-2023 and

remained in line with the DG REFORM target and comparable with other EU programmes.

The total time between the application deadline and the start of technical support slightly but

continuously decreased over the evaluation period, amounting to 11 months on average.

Minimising the time gap between the application and the actual start of the project was

considered crucial for the success of individual projects and their effective contribution to

ongoing reforms, especially to respond to urgent needs. Further reflection may be considered

on the annual deadlines for the submission of general requests and the extent to which setting

different deadlines could improve the efficiency at the start of technical support.

kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

TSI projects are implemented through various

delivery methods.

Beneficiary authorities and

technical support providers were generally very positive about the clarity, transparency and

user-friendliness of the procedures for application and selection of requests for funding,

approval of deliverables, project monitoring and evaluation. Coordinating authorities were

less satisfied with the

monitoring of TSI projects,

especially with the tools and procedures

and the access to relevant information at national level. Beneficiary authorities considered the

support of DG REFORM policy officers as highly useful, from the start to the end of the

technical support.

Coherence

In terms of

internal coherence,

the evaluation found no major inconsistencies between the

TSI projects in individual Member States. However, there is limited evidence of collaborative

mechanisms between different TSI projects in the same Member State. The evaluation also

found significant differences in coordinating authorities’ involvement in programme

implementation across the EU. There is room for exploring synergies between TSI-funded

projects in the same Member State in the same policy area.

During the evaluation period, the TSI demonstrated

increased external coherence

compared

to its predecessor, the SRSP, with regional and national level interventions as well as other EU

interventions having similar objectives. The TSI operates in a complementary manner to other

EU instruments and programmes. The evaluation found the TSI’s purpose and its activities to

be complementary to those of the European Social Fund Plus, the European Regional

Development Fund and the RRF. The TSI is not only different in terms of budget

implementation methods, but also in its cross-cutting nature and broad scope of intervention

(not limited to a specific policy sector), the duration of support provided and the type of

capacities supported. Coherence could be further improved if Member States strategically

combined various EU instruments to support the whole reform cycle from design to

implementation. The greatest synergies appear to be developed with the RRF and TAIEX

. By

providing both general and specialised support, the TSI was able to address issues crucial for

the implementation of the RRPs, such as project management and governance. Evaluation

evidence highlighted the significance of TSI support in strengthening the operational

capabilities required to effectively execute RRF initiatives. However, the evaluation raised

concerns from some Member States on the need to have a more comprehensive view due to

the availability of multiple funding instruments within the EU policy framework.

The TSI is also consistent with the European Semester process, through the role it plays in

addressing country-specific recommendations (CSRs) issued as part of the European

Semester. Most coordinating and beneficiary authorities stated that TSI projects supported

reforms addressing CSRs to a high or a moderate extent. This was confirmed by the case

studies, which demonstrated that the TSI played a major role in implementing CSRs.

However, challenges remain regarding the systematic monitoring of how TSI projects

TAIEX

(Technical Assistance and Information Exchange) is an EU institution building tool, which mobilises

public sector expertise from EU Member States in a Team Europe spirit to support reform processes around the

world.

kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

specifically contribute to carrying out CSRs, due to the limited mandate of the TSI after

project implementation.

Finally, TSI projects are closely aligned with the Commission’s top priorities, such as the

digital and green transitions. The increasing number of TSI projects contributing to top

priorities may be linked with the introduction of flagship requests. The TSI has also gained

recognition as a valuable tool to support Member States in implementing EU legislation.

EU added value

The TSI exceeded what individual Member States could have accomplished independently. In

particular, the TSI offers

international - especially European - expertise

that is typically

unavailable at local, regional or national levels, addressing specific needs that Member States

would struggle to meet alone. By combining international and local expertise, the TSI proved

to be beneficial - with local experts offering context-specific insights and international

providers providing more strategic approach - and helped to increase the credibility and

acceptance of reforms.

The TSI provided EU added value by supporting the development and implementation of the

RRPs. The TSI produced

significant cross-country impacts,

and delivered high EU added

value by building communities of experts and sustained cooperation among Member States.

By offering the chance to create channels of communication with peers and professionals

across various Member States, the TSI facilitated the sharing of lessons learned and good

practices across Member States. Also, TSI projects have played a major role in implementing

EU policies and priorities and supporting the digital and green transitions. In this regard,

flagship projects

(encompassing both standalone and multi-country projects) add value by

supporting EU priorities, driving regulatory compliance, and promoting the application of EU

law. However, stakeholders noted that flagship projects risk diverging from the specific aim of

the TSI, which is to provide support tailored to the needs of specific Member States. There is

a strong consensus among stakeholders consulted on the TSI’s significant contribution to the

digital and green transitions. In particular, the TSI contributes more to the green transition

than its predecessor, the SRSP.

Multi-country projects

are seen as valuable because of their ability to tackle broader, cross-

border challenges while boosting collaboration and the sharing of good practices among

participating countries. However, concerns were raised about their complexity and the fact

that these projects may lead to lower ownership and political commitment by participating

countries, potentially undermining their success.

Relevance

Findings from the consultation suggest that the

TSI is a highly relevant instrument, well-

tailored to the needs of Member States and their beneficiary authorities,

with

improvements in areas identified in the

ex post

evaluation of SRSP. Evidence shows that there

is still a

need for technical support,

especially in developing and implementing procedures

and methodologies.

Most consulted beneficiary authorities and coordinating authorities agreed that the TSI was

suitable to provide technical support, and confirmed that TSI projects were able to address the

kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

main needs of their institutions, mainly thanks to the design of the instrument, and in a timely

manner. All stakeholders view the TSI’s

design and structure

as highly relevant for

strengthening the administrative and institutional capacity of Member States to design and

implement the reforms needed to tackle the challenges faced.

However, it is important to consider these positive findings in the context that TSI support is

provided at almost no cost to all Member States whose requests are accepted, regardless of

their capacity to organise their own technical support. Interviews highlighted some limitations

in the response to

urgent needs

through general calls of the annual cycle, considering the

necessary duration for projects to start after the need emerges. However, The TSI design

demonstrated high flexibility to address Member States’ unforeseen and emerging needs

through dedicated calls and special measures outlined in the TSI Regulation. Compared to the

ex post

evaluation of SRSP, and thanks to these modalities, most beneficiary authorities and

national coordinating authorities agreed that thanks to its design, the TSI was able to address

urgent and/or unforeseen needs of the country. The introduction of flagship requests for

support and of multi-country and multi-regional projects made it possible for the programme

to better address EU priorities and to improve the application and implementation of EU law.

MAIN LESSONS LEARNED

The evaluation highlighted several improvements in the TSI compared to its predecessor, the

SRSP, demonstrating a more active involvement of stakeholders and a greater cross-country

dimension. The main lessons learned from the TSI mid-term evaluation, based on its findings

and conclusions, are set out below:

Design of the TSI

•

The

demand-driven nature

of the TSI helps ensure Member State’s ownership of

projects and stakeholders’ commitment, which are crucial for the success of reforms,

although concrete achievements are highly dependent on

national factors.

Projects’

alignment with the European Semester framework and relevant EU priorities is ensured

during the selection process, through the selection criteria.

The current design of the TSI suffers from limitations in tracking specific outcomes in

Member States because its legal base does not directly refer to the achievement of

reforms, nor does it impose specific requirements on Member States to report on the status

of supported reforms. In the future, these observations should be taken into account and

ways should be explored to improve the focus on reforms. Additionally, specific reporting

obligations should be considered, while ensuring that the administrative burden remains

proportionate to the activities carried out under the instrument.

Technical support should maintain enough flexibility to cater to the needs of Member

States and adapt to shifting political priorities and situations. Public authorities might

encounter both internal and external changes - including policy changes, economic and

social challenges, and changing legal and regulatory landscapes - which necessitate

technical support and assistance to adjust to new objectives and strategies.

•

kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

•

The TSI’s design has been generally effective in addressing the needs of Member States,

but the annual cycle might limit its ability to respond to urgent needs of Member States.

While the TSI effectively addressed some urgent needs through dedicated calls, these calls

require significant time and resource investment.

TSI project implementation

•

Evaluation findings highlight the importance of identifying the most appropriate project

type for technical support, considering Member States’ strengths, weaknesses, needs and

contexts.

Multi-country

and

flagship

projects (covering stand-alone and multi-country

projects) proved to be highly relevant in addressing EU priorities, fostering collaboration,

and sharing good practices across borders.

Stand-alone

projects appear to be more

appropriate and better tailored to address more specific needs, as they enable more

targeted reforms, ensuring more engagement by beneficiary authorities.

A variety of

delivery methods

were used across technical support projects, with high

satisfaction rates among stakeholders. Evidence demonstrates that private providers may

be more suitable to deliver technical tasks, while international organisations appear to be

better suited to contribute to broader strategic issues, and ensure a consistent response

across the EU to the same type of need in the case of multi-country projects. Using a

tailored mix of delivery methods – such as combining TAIEX with other methods –

proved to be an effective approach, particularly for complex or multi-country projects.

Nevertheless, further efforts are needed to ensure the effective use of TSI deliverables and

concrete follow-up by Member States.

The ad-hoc support of DG DIGIT providing expert advice has been assessed as beneficial

for the implementation of projects. This support has been exacerbated after the adoption

of the Interoperable Europe Act Regulation (EU) 2024/903. Remarkably, the “Statistical

Interoperability Node”

project was awarded the special

“ASEDIE 25 years”

prize due to

the value provided.

•

Facilitator role of the Commission

•

The evaluation found that the Commission has played a

significant role in the

implementation

of TSI projects. In particular, DG REFORM policy officers’ close

involvement was crucial in supporting project design (to facilitate implementation) and

addressing diverse challenges encountered during implementation. Their continuous

operational supervision was important too.

Stakeholders indicated that further support by Commission policy officers might be useful

after the completion of TSI projects to ensure the sustainable achievement of long-term

results.

In some cases, closer involvement of policy officers from

specific Directorates-General

of the Commission

was highlighted as beneficial for improving the implementation of

TSI projects, especially for TSI projects related to the implementation of EU law (in the

case of complex EU legislative requirements, such as the ‘do no significant harm’

principle).

•

kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

Results and sustainability of the technical support

•

Beneficiary authorities have used the outputs of TSI projects - such as recommendations,

findings from workshops, and analysis reports - to achieve

changes at individual,

organisational and policy level.

The

success of technical support

and the achievement of long-term sustainable

results

depend on Member States’ consistent and systematic follow-up of technical support

projects.

Continued ownership by national authorities proved to be a crucial factor to

ensure that they take follow-up action and that outputs delivered by technical support

projects are used. The evaluation found that this follow-up also depends on national

factors, such as ownership of reforms, availability of financial resources, staff stability,

and political and administrative continuity.

However, apart from filling in the satisfaction and outcome questionnaires, national

authorities have not yet formally committed to following up on technical support projects

(e.g. by adopting relevant reforms). Further reflection may be considered on how to

incentivise Member States to more consistently and systematically follow up on technical

support projects and report on this follow up. There is also a need to strengthen the

monitoring and evaluation of the technical support

to better track achievements,

objectively and depending on the type of measures (e.g. training and capacity building,

support for specific reforms, recommendations to national authorities, etc.), as well as to

use lessons learned to improve new projects.

•

Multi-annual dimension

•

The TSI currently lacks a medium- to long-term programming approach, which

would connect technical support to other programmes to improve their effectiveness

and create a coherent strategic vision for technical support in a given Member State.

However, this needs to be reconciled with the annual nature of the instrument, which is

enshrined in the TSI Regulation. A short-term strategic overview of the TSI’s

implementation is provided in cooperation and support plans, but these documents are not

legally binding. In 2021-2023, the alignment of technical support with the ongoing

reforms at national level was also ensured through national RRPs.

Some consideration may also be required on the definition of

flagship

projects. For

example, it might be advantageous to develop them with a medium-term perspective,

spanning multiple years or calls for technical support. A medium-term perspective on

flagship projects could bring more focus to specific challenges faced by Member States

and the EU as a whole and, at the same time, improve efficiency by reducing the

administrative burden linked to annual consultations with different Commission services

and Member States and the adjustment of corporate tools on an annual basis.

•

Thematic and policy dimension

•

Since 2023, initiatives such as the European Administrative Space (ComPAct) – including

the Public Administration Cooperation Exchange Programme (PACE) – have proposed

specific actions implemented through the TSI, to help public administrations meet the

needs of people and businesses across the EU. These initiatives have highlighted the

added value of the TSI in strengthening the administrative capacity of public

administrations at national, regional and local level, and ensuring all citizens have access

kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

to timely and high-quality public service provision. If successfully implemented, these

initiatives and projects could serve as

an inspiring example in terms of policy

integration, coherence and effectiveness in the provision of technical support across

policy areas.

•

The ComPAct initiative provides a good platform and ‘knowledge hub’ for the provision

of technical support in the field of governance and public administration, complementing

other EU instruments.

Over the years, technical support projects have generated a wealth of thematic policy

knowledge. In the evaluation period, DG REFORM played a more active role in

disseminating outputs and deliverables of technical support, which could be strengthened

to better use them in all

thematic fields.

The

EU Supervisory Digital Finance Academy

platform constitutes a good practice example of effective dissemination to foster the use of

materials and deliverables from other and closed projects, especially in the same policy

area.

Through the TSI, Member States have benefitted of tailored technical expertise to design

and implement digital reforms. It has supported projects that enhance digital governance,

modernise public administration, and improve public service delivery through the

adoption of digital technologies and foster cross-border interoperability.

•

Country dimension

•

The evaluation found that there is a need for

improved coordination and synergies

between TSI-funded projects in the same Member State.

Some consideration may also

be required on how to further improve the overview and follow-up of support provided,

developing a more holistic vision of country support. This might also help to strengthen

synergies and complementarities between different EU programmes and to better align

timelines and country-specific deadlines.

Over the evaluation period,

the role of DG REFORM country coordinators and

coordinating authorities

proved key to ensuring the country relevance of the technical

support measures delivered, identifying any issues emerging during the implementation

phase, and proposing adequate mitigation measures.

Evidence shows untapped potential for coordinating authorities to monitor the need for

and use of technical support deliverables at national level to achieve medium- and longer-

term results (e.g. adopt the relevant reforms) as well as to adopt a strategic approach

towards combining technical support with other EU programmes and instruments.

The evaluation found that the engagement of coordinating authorities might depend on

their position within the institutional framework, the size of the Member State’s public

administration, and the resources dedicated to this task. Strengthening the institutional

framework and introducing reporting obligations for Member States might increase the

effectiveness of the programme.

A more formalised and unified role for coordinating authorities has the potential to

strengthen ownership of reforms (through an improved prioritisation of requests) and

improve the monitoring of projects across Member States, while keeping some flexibility

in tailoring their role to the specific context of each Member State.

•

kom (2025) 0198 - Ingen titel

Cross-country dimension

•

The TSI has demonstrated significant

cross-country impacts,

with multi-country projects

tackling broader, cross-border challenges and strengthening collaboration and the sharing

of knowledge and good practices among participating countries.

The programme has built communities of experts and sustained cooperation among

Member States, delivering high EU added value.

The TSI has also been instrumental in increasing the credibility and acceptance of

reforms, boosting their legitimacy and visibility at national and EU levels.

The introduction of

multi-country and multi-region

requests has also brought significant

efficiency gains, by enabling the selection of multiple requests under a single contract or

agreement. However, these projects present a certain risk of diluting country-specific

needs, limiting the engagement of Member States progressing at different paces.

The introduction of

flagship requests

was considered a success as they enabled a better

alignment between national reforms and EU priorities, driving regulatory compliance, and

promoting the application of EU law. These projects could cater to more long-standing,

structural challenges across Member States and the EU at large.

•

Synergies with other EU programmes

•

The TSI has been effective in supporting the implementation of reforms, with a significant

number of reforms linked to specific RRP milestones. Incorporating technical support

from the outset of implementation of funds and other policy instruments, as it has

happened in specific cases for the RRF, could be advantageous, and could help ensure that

administrative capacity requirements are satisfied, and timelines are synchronised.

The TSI has been consistent

with other EU processes,

such as the European Semester,

and has contributed to the achievement of EU priorities, including the digital and green

transitions.

The TSI can improve the effectiveness of other programmes by building the

administrative and institutional capacity required for their successful implementation.

However, the evaluation showed that some Member States would prefer to have a more

comprehensive view given the availability of multiple funding instruments within the EU

policy framework.

•